From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26162 invoked by alias); 10 Jul 2002 21:47:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 26143 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2002 21:47:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain) (66.60.148.227) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Jul 2002 21:47:35 -0000 Received: from warlock.codesourcery.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6ALjvV01898; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 14:45:57 -0700 Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 17:02:00 -0000 From: Mark Mitchell To: Gabriel Dos Reis , Richard Smith cc: "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: Block scope using declarations of operators Message-ID: <34150000.1026337557@warlock.codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00477.txt.bz2 > Yes, I think 3.2 should be the right place. After 3.1.1 release, we > might raise the issue again for 3.1.x, but it is Mark's call. This is not appropriate for the 3.1 branch, but it's fine for 3.2 if we think it's the right patch. Martin did a lot of that work; Martin, are you out there anywhere still? -- Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com