8 Dec
2012
8 Dec
'12
1:10 a.m.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Daniel James <dnljms@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7 December 2012 16:58, Tim Blechmann <tim@klingt.org> wrote:
regarding gcc, we would *only* have expected failures, as the required version (4.8) is neither released nor tested ...
As far as I'm concerned, failures on unreleased compilers aren't an issue. It's nice to support them, but often not worth the effort.
I think the point is that 4.8 is the only supported version, as < 4.8 doesn't have native atomics. -- Olaf