On 05/28/2012 01:32 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
apparently we have serious troubles with and -std=c++11 and
-fno-trapping-math because LTGT_EXPR is unhandled in
potential_constant_expression_1. Thus, unless we have sound reasons to *no
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Hi,
>
> apparently we have serious troubles with and -std=c++11 and
> -fno-trapping-math because LTGT_EXPR is unhandled in
> potential_constant_expression_1. Thus, unless we have sound reasons to *not*
> handle it together with all the other
Hi,
apparently we have serious troubles with and -std=c++11 and
-fno-trapping-math because LTGT_EXPR is unhandled in
potential_constant_expression_1. Thus, unless we have sound reasons to
*not* handle it together with all the other *_EXPR, I think the below
could safely go in mainline and 4_