From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7177 invoked by alias); 14 Mar 2003 21:46:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 7047 invoked by uid 71); 14 Mar 2003 21:46:00 -0000 Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 21:46:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030314214600.7044.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Jason Merrill Subject: Re: middle-end/8306: [3.2/3.3 regression] ICE for bitfield7_y.C in C++ compatibility tests Reply-To: Jason Merrill X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00894.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR middle-end/8306; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Jason Merrill To: Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, janis187@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: middle-end/8306: [3.2/3.3 regression] ICE for bitfield7_y.C in C++ compatibility tests Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 16:28:42 -0500 On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 17:12:09 +0000, wrote: > Correction, the "minimal example" no-longer fails, but the full testsuite > entry does still fail. Does that still represent a regression? Mark said that previous compilers would have just rejected such code. Jason