"H.J. Lu" writes:
> I checked in this as an obvious fix.
Thanks. I wonder why I didn't see that.
Ian
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 9:46 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 7:30 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> binutils PR 13030 reports a demangler crash on the symbol
>> _ZSt10_ConstructI10CellBorderIS0_EEvPT_DpOT0_
>>
>> As far as I can tell, this symbol is invalid. The final T0_ refers to
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 7:30 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> binutils PR 13030 reports a demangler crash on the symbol
> _ZSt10_ConstructI10CellBorderIS0_EEvPT_DpOT0_
>
> As far as I can tell, this symbol is invalid. The final T0_ refers to
> template argument 1, but this zero-based index has no
"H.J. Lu" writes:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 7:30 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> binutils PR 13030 reports a demangler crash on the symbol
>> _ZSt10_ConstructI10CellBorderIS0_EEvPT_DpOT0_
>>
>> As far as I can tell, this symbol is invalid. The final T0_ refers to
>> template argument 1, but t
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 7:30 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> binutils PR 13030 reports a demangler crash on the symbol
> _ZSt10_ConstructI10CellBorderIS0_EEvPT_DpOT0_
>
> As far as I can tell, this symbol is invalid. The final T0_ refers to
> template argument 1, but this zero-based index has no
binutils PR 13030 reports a demangler crash on the symbol
_ZSt10_ConstructI10CellBorderIS0_EEvPT_DpOT0_
As far as I can tell, this symbol is invalid. The final T0_ refers to
template argument 1, but this zero-based index has no referent since the
template only has one parameter. This of cour