http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16896
--- Comment #12 from Paolo Carlini 2011-01-28
09:41:37 UTC ---
Ok, if you have to do something different for 36104, makes sense. Otherwise, if
you ask my opinion, being a temporary fix anyway, I would not be worried by
that bit of code duplicatio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16896
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
--- Comment #10 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-02-07 18:37
---
Fixed.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Stat
--- Comment #9 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-07 18:37 ---
Subject: Bug 16896
Author: paolo
Date: Sun Feb 7 18:36:48 2010
New Revision: 156578
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156578
Log:
2010-02-07 Paolo Carlini
PR libstdc++/16896
*
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16896
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2004-12-30 15:16
---
*** Bug 19209 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
