🚀 go-pugleaf

With gcc version 2.2.2 on Irix 4.0.1 the following code:

---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---
template <class T, int num>
class foo_c
{
public:
  T elem[num];
};

foo_c<float,3> foo;
---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---

when compiled with debuggin information enabled, produces the
following error messages:

---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---
gcc -c -g foo.cc
mips-tfile, /usr/tmp/cca13804.s:12 compiler error, badly formed #.def (internal line # = 2917)
line:		#.def	foo_c<float ,3>;	.scl	10;	.type	0x8;	.size	12;	.endef

mips-tfile, /usr/tmp/cca13804.s:14 compiler error, badly formed #.def (internal line # = 2983)
line:		#.def	.eos;	.val	12;	.scl	102;	.tag	foo_c<float ,3>;	.size	12;	.endef

mips-tfile, /usr/tmp/cca13804.s:15 compiler error, badly formed #.def (internal line # = 2917)
line:		#.def	foo_c<float ,3>;	.scl	13;	.tag	foo_c<float ,3>;	.size	12;	.type	0x8;	.endef

mips-tfile, /usr/tmp/cca13804.s:16 compiler error, badly formed #.def (internal line # = 2983)
line:		#.def	foo;	.val	foo;	.scl	2;	.tag	foo_c<float ,3>;	.size	12;	.type	0x8;	.endef

---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---

The assembly produced by the compiler is:

---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---
	.file	1 "foo.cc"

 # GNU C++ 2.2.2 [AL 1.1, MM 19] Silicon Graphics Mips compiled by GNU C

 # Cc1 defaults:

 # Cc1 arguments (-G value = 8, Cpu = default, ISA = 1):
 # -quiet -dumpbase -g -o

gcc2_compiled.:
	.text
	#.def	foo_c<float ,3>;	.scl	10;	.type	0x8;	.size	12;	.endef
	#.def	elem;	.val	0;	.scl	8;	.dim	3;	.size	12;	.type	0x36;	.endef
	#.def	.eos;	.val	12;	.scl	102;	.tag	foo_c<float ,3>;	.size	12;	.endef
	#.def	foo_c<float ,3>;	.scl	13;	.tag	foo_c<float ,3>;	.size	12;	.type	0x8;	.endef
	#.def	foo;	.val	foo;	.scl	2;	.tag	foo_c<float ,3>;	.size	12;	.type	0x8;	.endef

	.comm	foo,16
---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---clip---

By the way, if I don't see my reports in the newsgroup, should I
mail them again or is this an indication that the problem is already
fixed?