From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28864 invoked by alias); 25 Jun 2010 14:18:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 28708 invoked by alias); 25 Jun 2010 14:18:12 -0000 Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 14:18:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100625141812.28707.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug libstdc++/44663] missed GXX_EXPERIMENTAL guards in ? In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "pinskia at gmail dot com" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-06/txt/msg02468.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #4 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2010-06-25 14:18 ------- Subject: Re: New: missed GXX_EXPERIMENTAL guards in ? On Jun 25, 2010, at 3:49 AM, "pluto at agmk dot net" wrote: > hi, > > the latest llvm/clang++ reports an error during parsing > included from : Both of these are c++0x only headers and really are only supported when compiling in c++0x mode. > > In file included from t00.cpp:1: > In file included from /usr/include/c++/4.5.0/tr1/functional:39: > /usr/include/c++/4.5.0/tr1/tuple:68:30: error: variadic templates > are only > allowed in C++0x > template > > afaics there's no #ifdef __GXX_EXPERIMENTAL... guards but... > > http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/bk01pt01ch01.html#manual.intro.status.standard.200x > > (...) > In this implementation -std=gnu++0x or -std=c++0x flags must be used > to enable language and library features. The pre-defined symbol > __GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__ is used to check for the presence of > the required flag. > (...) > > > -- > Summary: missed GXX_EXPERIMENTAL guards in ? > Product: gcc > Version: 4.5.1 > Status: UNCONFIRMED > Severity: normal > Priority: P3 > Component: libstdc++ > AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org > ReportedBy: pluto at agmk dot net > GCC host triplet: x86_64-gnu-linux > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44663 > -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44663