From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com>
To: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>,
Sandra Loosemore <sandra@codesourcery.com>,
Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [wwwdocs] Update C++ conformance status
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 16:40:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1510061236580.10259@linux-irjp.site> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151006110647.GQ12094@redhat.com>
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> People are being scared off by the experimental status on
> https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html
>
> e.g. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2015-10/msg00025.html
>
> This makes it clear C++11 in 5.1 is no longer experimental.
Nice!
> We also have a "Standard Conformance" section for G++ in
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/ which says "Two milestones in standard
> conformance are GCC 3.0 (including a major overhaul of the standard
> library) and the 3.4.0 version (with its new C++ parser)." I've
> added some more recent milestones, although maybe std::lib conformance
> doesn't need to be mentioned in this context?
How about removing those references to GCC 3.x in bugs/index.html?
That page is supposed to provide instructions on bugs and bug reporting,
and I don't think we've got all that many users still interesting in those
versions, do we? (And it makes this documentation more concise.)
If you agree, I'll be happy to make this change. Just let me know.
Gerald
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-06 16:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-06 11:06 Jonathan Wakely
2015-10-06 16:40 ` Gerald Pfeifer [this message]
2015-11-21 13:59 ` Jonathan Wakely
2015-11-21 16:27 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2015-11-26 16:04 ` Jonathan Wakely
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LSU.2.11.1510061236580.10259@linux-irjp.site \
--to=gerald@pfeifer.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jason@redhat.com \
--cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=jwakely@redhat.com \
--cc=sandra@codesourcery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).