[llvm-commits] [llvm-gcc] Is it OK to backport this patch?

[Chris Lattner]

On Jul 10, 2009, at 1:56 AM, Rafael Espindola wrote:

> I would like to  add the attached patch to llvm-gcc. It is a backport
> of part of http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2007-10/msg00118.html. All
> the files touched by the patch were still copyrighted under the GPL2
> at the time the patch was committed to gcc trunk.

Was the tree still GPL2?  What is the distinction between all files  
still copyright and the tree being GPL2?  Was this because libstdc++  
changed license well after the rest of GCC?  If so, it's ok.  If there  
is something else going on, lets talk about it first.

-Chris


>
> The part of the patch that I have ported allows the use of classes
> with private copy constructors in parts of the STL. For example, with
> the patch llvm-gcc now compiles
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
>      #include <set>
>
>      class A {
>      public:
>        A();
>        private:
>        A(const A&);
>      };
>      void B()
>      {
>        std::set<void *, A> foo;
>      }
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> OK to commit the patch?
>
> Cheers,
> -- 
> Rafael Avila de Espindola
>
> Google | Gordon House | Barrow Street | Dublin 4 | Ireland
> Registered in Dublin, Ireland | Registration Number: 368047
> <gcc-129013.patch>_______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits