On Thu, 2016-03-03 at 17:36 -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Jesper Broge Jørgensen
> <jesperbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 18/02/16 13:22, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > >
> > > On 01/19/2016 12:47 PM, Jesper Broge Jørgensen wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Here is the reformatted patch:
> > >
> > >
> > > This will probably have to wait until stage1.
> > >
> > > > + const int code = GET_CODE (op2);
> > > > + if (code != IOR)
> > > > + {
> > > > + if (code == EQ_ATTR)
> > >
> > >
> > > All the formatting still looks completely mangled. This was
> > > probably done
> > > by your mailer. Please try attaching the diff as text/plain.
> > >
> > >
> > > Bernd
> > >
> > Hi i send the patch back as an attatchment as requested about two
> > weeks ago
> > (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg01256.html) but i
> > have not
> > received any response.
> >
> > If it has to wait for stage 1 are there anything else i can do for
> > the patch
> > untill then?
>
> I still suggest to try making write_test_expr() avoid emitting
> redundant parentheses for chains of || or &&, which would fix the
> original issue all the same. Previously you claimed that such a
> change would not be simpler than your current patch, but I gave it a
> quick try and ended up with a much smaller patch:
>
> gcc/genattrtab.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Patrick, did you forget to attach the patch? I see the diffstat, but
no patch.
