On 02/13/2015 07:54 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 01/15/2015 06:47 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Hello.
I've just finished successfully chromium LTO build and there's list of mainly
-Wodr warnings.
I think some of them are false positives?
What of those you consider to be false?
I wonder if we can pri
> On 02/16/2015 07:27 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >Jason, I wonder if there is more informative way to print destructor during
> >LTO than as __comp_dtor?
>
> You could print the mangled name, and possibly run it through
> __cxa_demangle if it starts with _Z.
>
> >Laos for named types,
> >perhaps p
On 02/16/2015 07:27 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Jason, I wonder if there is more informative way to print destructor during LTO
than as __comp_dtor?
You could print the mangled name, and possibly run it through
__cxa_demangle if it starts with _Z.
Laos for named types,
perhaps printing just typ
Hi,
the warning about types of fields seems misplaced:
> ../../third_party/WebKit/public/platform/WebCryptoAlgorithmParams.h:295:0:
> warning: type ???struct WebCryptoEcKeyImportParams??? violates one definition
> rule [-Wodr]
> class WebCryptoEcKeyImportParams : public WebCryptoAlgorithmParams
On 01/15/2015 06:47 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> I've just finished successfully chromium LTO build and there's list of
>> mainly -Wodr warnings.
>> I think some of them are false positives?
>
> What of those you consider to be false?
> I wonder if we can print just type name so we avoi
> Hello.
>
> I've just finished successfully chromium LTO build and there's list of mainly
> -Wodr warnings.
> I think some of them are false positives?
What of those you consider to be false?
I wonder if we can print just type name so we avoid using the wrong "struct" in
place of class...
>
>
On 09/12/2014 07:40 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Hi,
I went through excercise of running LTO bootstrap with ODR verification on.
There are some typename clashes
I guess we want to fix. I wonder what approach is preferred, do we want to
introduce anonymous
namespaces for those?
Honza
../../gcc/tli
On 12 September 2014 06:40, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> I went through excercise of running LTO bootstrap with ODR verification on.
> There are some typename clashes
> I guess we want to fix. I wonder what approach is preferred, do we want to
> introduce anonymous
> namespaces for those?
> /usr/
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 10:16:12AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I went through excercise of running LTO bootstrap with ODR verification on.
> > There are some typename clashes
> > I guess we want to fix. I wonder what approach is
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> I went through excercise of running LTO bootstrap with ODR verification on.
> There are some typename clashes
> I guess we want to fix. I wonder what approach is preferred, do we want to
> introduce anonymous
> namespaces for those?
10 matches
Mail list logo