[Bug c++/17805] too liberal operator lookup

2012-10-15 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17805 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC|paol

[Bug c++/17805] too liberal operator lookup

2012-10-15 Thread paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17805 --- Comment #11 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-15 19:15:51 UTC --- Author: paolo Date: Mon Oct 15 19:15:48 2012 New Revision: 192471 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192471 Log: /cp 2012-10-15 Alexandre O

[Bug c++/17805] too liberal operator lookup

2012-01-21 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17805 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/17805] too liberal operator lookup

2012-01-21 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17805 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2005-12-30 07:12:30 |2012-01-21 0:00 --- Comment #9 from Andre

[Bug c++/17805] too liberal operator lookup

2005-09-29 Thread rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29 16:31 --- Subject: Re: too liberal operator lookup On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 02:28:03PM -, mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > Also, please code this using a loop: > > for (i = 0; i < 2; ++i) { > if (i ==

[Bug c++/17805] too liberal operator lookup

2005-09-29 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-29 14:28 --- The patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00453.html is basically OK. However, please make the folloing changes before check-in: + && (same_type_p (TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (TREE_TY

[Bug c++/17805] too liberal operator lookup

2005-04-16 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-17 06:37 --- (In reply to comment #5) > Subject: Re: too liberal operator lookup > > Why are you pinging bugzilla, and not the list, wherein a c++ > maintainer might see it? Actually he pinged both. -- http://gcc.g

[Bug c++/17805] too liberal operator lookup

2005-04-16 Thread rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-17 06:31 --- Subject: Re: too liberal operator lookup Why are you pinging bugzilla, and not the list, wherein a c++ maintainer might see it? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17805

[Bug c++/17805] too liberal operator lookup

2005-04-16 Thread aoliva at redhat dot com
--- Additional Comments From aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-17 04:00 --- Subject: Re: [PR c++/17805] limit operator overload candidates for enum operands On Apr 2, 2005, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mar 18, 2005, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>

[Bug c++/17805] too liberal operator lookup

2005-02-11 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-11 15:20 --- Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00453.html -- What|Removed |Added