http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
--- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
Alexander Klimov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #22086|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill 2010-10-20
14:13:44 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Oct 20 14:13:38 2010
New Revision: 165726
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=165726
Log:
PR c++/46056
* parser.c (cp_convert_range_f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
--- Comment #7 from Rodrigo Rivas
2010-10-20 10:06:39 UTC ---
I've just sent a patch to gcc-patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-10/msg01699.html
In the testcase I added a lot of other destructor checks, just to be sure.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
--- Comment #6 from Rodrigo Rivas
2010-10-20 08:56:30 UTC ---
Ok, thank you for the report...
It looks like the range-for temporary completely ignore destructors.
Also, if the range is a temporary it gets destructed quite early, instead of
being
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rodrigorivascosta at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2010-10-19
20:35:01 UTC ---
Many thanks Alexander.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
Alexander Klimov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[C++0x] range-based for |[C++0x] range-based for