From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-170980-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 29905 invoked by alias); 30 Oct 2011 14:04:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 29892 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Oct 2011 14:04:52 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-wy0-f175.google.com (HELO mail-wy0-f175.google.com) (74.125.82.175)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 14:04:34 +0000
Received: by wyh5 with SMTP id 5so474331wyh.20        for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 07:04:32 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.229.14 with SMTP id g14mr3258440weq.6.1319983472733; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 07:04:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.90.19 with HTTP; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 07:04:32 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1110301411500.3250@gerinyyl.fvgr>
References: <BLU162-W198148B0149AEE08F2A31D960D0@phx.gbl>	<CAH6eHdRyQvh2eibPy+W8DELJu0_8ndqJbJYZ9Zd1KVGs=vpe2A@mail.gmail.com>	<CAH6eHdQ2eXmCZ5P7t189OiWiFCzWbtRRM3DtCc9RrpnuNBZ-Yw@mail.gmail.com>	<20110921182543.GA31859@synopsys.com>	<alpine.LNX.2.00.1110301411500.3250@gerinyyl.fvgr>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 19:20:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAH6eHdTFS3i-K=B6YnVsBcaxLHS7C12jXnzRXJc0JCM44+UOgQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: C++11 no longer experimental
From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>
To: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com>
Cc: Joe Buck <Joe.Buck@synopsys.com>, Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>, 	Nathan Ridge <zeratul976@hotmail.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-10/txt/msg00538.txt.bz2

On 30 October 2011 13:14, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2011, Joe Buck wrote:
>> No, the page now claims something that is incorrect. =A0The C++0x draft
>> is no longer evolving. =A0C++11 is an official standard now.
>
> How about the patch below? =A0It tries to reflect the release of
> C++11. =A0There definitely will be more adjustments, but this is
> a first step addressing the issue Joe raised (and a bit more).

I've changed my local tree to update all the references to C++0x in
the libstdc++ docs (except references to the -std=3Dc++0x option) which
I'll check in when I get a chance.