* [Bug libstdc++/11729] no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator
2003-07-30 17:56 [Bug c++/11729] New: no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator relf at os2 dot ru
@ 2003-07-30 19:13 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-01-02 5:05 ` [Bug libstdc++/11729] [DR179] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-07-30 19:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11729
paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Component|c++ |libstdc++
Resolution| |INVALID
------- Additional Comments From paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-07-30 19:13 -------
Know behaviour, issue DR280 ("Comparison of reverse_iterator to const
reverse_iterator") of the ISO Standard, which, however, at variance with the
corresponding DR179 about iterators, is still in the 'Open' status: we can't do
anything about it 'til the official resolution.
Thanks for your report, Paolo.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/11729] [DR179] no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator
2003-07-30 17:56 [Bug c++/11729] New: no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator relf at os2 dot ru
2003-07-30 19:13 ` [Bug libstdc++/11729] " paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-01-02 5:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-01-06 10:12 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-01-02 5:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-01-02 05:05 -------
Paolo did DR179, ever get resolved, if not can you reopen the bug and suspend it while the DR is
open.
Thanks,
Andrew
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
Summary|no operator!= for |[DR179] no operator!= for
|const_reverse_iterator |const_reverse_iterator
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11729
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/11729] [DR179] no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator
2003-07-30 17:56 [Bug c++/11729] New: no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator relf at os2 dot ru
2003-07-30 19:13 ` [Bug libstdc++/11729] " paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-01-02 5:05 ` [Bug libstdc++/11729] [DR179] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-01-06 10:12 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-01-09 10:43 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-01-06 10:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-01-06 10:12 -------
*** Bug 13581 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |papadopo at shfj dot cea dot
| |fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11729
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/11729] [DR179] no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator
2003-07-30 17:56 [Bug c++/11729] New: no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator relf at os2 dot ru
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2004-01-06 10:12 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-01-09 10:43 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-05 7:28 ` relf at os2 dot ru
` (6 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-01-09 10:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-01-09 10:43 -------
*** Bug 13627 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |wanderer at rsu dot ru
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11729
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/11729] [DR179] no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator
2003-07-30 17:56 [Bug c++/11729] New: no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator relf at os2 dot ru
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2004-01-09 10:43 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-03-05 7:28 ` relf at os2 dot ru
2004-03-05 7:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: relf at os2 dot ru @ 2004-03-05 7:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From relf at os2 dot ru 2004-03-05 07:28 -------
I think that INVALID resolution is not suitable. In particular, it hides the
bugreport from default searching.
Reopen to mark it SUSPENDED...
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11729
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/11729] [DR179] no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator
2003-07-30 17:56 [Bug c++/11729] New: no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator relf at os2 dot ru
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2004-03-05 7:28 ` relf at os2 dot ru
@ 2004-03-05 7:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-05 7:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-03-05 7:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-05 07:31 -------
Confirming it to ...
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed| |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2004-03-05 07:31:43
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11729
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/11729] [DR179] no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator
2003-07-30 17:56 [Bug c++/11729] New: no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator relf at os2 dot ru
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2004-03-05 7:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-03-05 7:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-05 7:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-03-05 7:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-05 07:32 -------
Suspend it.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |SUSPENDED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11729
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/11729] [DR179] no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator
2003-07-30 17:56 [Bug c++/11729] New: no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator relf at os2 dot ru
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2004-03-05 7:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-03-05 7:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-22 6:57 ` [Bug libstdc++/11729] [DR280] " kenta at mit dot edu
` (2 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-03-05 7:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|3.4.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11729
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/11729] [DR280] no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator
2003-07-30 17:56 [Bug c++/11729] New: no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator relf at os2 dot ru
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2004-03-05 7:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-03-22 6:57 ` kenta at mit dot edu
2004-03-22 8:08 ` kenta at mit dot edu
2005-01-21 11:34 ` pcarlini at suse dot de
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: kenta at mit dot edu @ 2004-03-22 6:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From kenta at mit dot edu 2004-03-22 06:56 -------
DR279 is a "Closed Issue" now, according to
http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#279
DR280 is still active, but "implementation experience" is sought:
http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#280
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11729
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/11729] [DR280] no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator
2003-07-30 17:56 [Bug c++/11729] New: no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator relf at os2 dot ru
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2004-03-22 6:57 ` [Bug libstdc++/11729] [DR280] " kenta at mit dot edu
@ 2004-03-22 8:08 ` kenta at mit dot edu
2005-01-21 11:34 ` pcarlini at suse dot de
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: kenta at mit dot edu @ 2004-03-22 8:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From kenta at mit dot edu 2004-03-22 08:08 -------
Oops, DR279 is irrelevant. I had read 279 instead of 179.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11729
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/11729] [DR280] no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator
2003-07-30 17:56 [Bug c++/11729] New: no operator!= for const_reverse_iterator relf at os2 dot ru
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2004-03-22 8:08 ` kenta at mit dot edu
@ 2005-01-21 11:34 ` pcarlini at suse dot de
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: pcarlini at suse dot de @ 2005-01-21 11:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-21 11:34 -------
*** Bug 19562 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |kunert at physik dot tu-
| |dresden dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11729
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread