Re: PL/I for GCC version 0.0.15 released

2007-09-30 Thread Rafael Espindola
> PL/I for GCC is released under the terms of the > GNU Public License; version 2. The GCC at trunk uses GPL version 3 or newer ... -- Rafael Avila de Espindola Google Ireland Ltd. Gordon House Barrow Street Dublin 4 Ireland Registered in Dublin, Ireland Registration Number: 368047

Re: PL/I for GCC version 0.0.15 released

2007-09-30 Thread henrik . sorensen
On Sunday 30 September 2007 11.21:38 Rafael Espindola wrote: > > PL/I for GCC is released under the terms of the > > GNU Public License; version 2. > > The GCC at trunk uses GPL version 3 or newer ... I use the snapshot from 20070810 and there the COPYING file is still GPL version two. anyway I w

Automatic cast off "union tree" in gdb

2007-09-30 Thread k e
Hi, When stepping through gcc with gdb: is there a way to be able to make gdb automatically cast a "union tree" to the correct struct depending on the union tree's type? A "p " will print out all unions. I'd not want to do a cast all the time. -- Konrad

Re: Automatic cast off "union tree" in gdb

2007-09-30 Thread Tom Tromey
> "Konrad" == k e <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Konrad> Hi, When stepping through gcc with gdb: is there a way Konrad> to be able to make gdb automatically cast a "union tree" to the Konrad> correct struct depending on the union tree's type? Not that I know of. Konrad> A "p " Konrad> will

Re: [RFC,wwwdocs] Ditch MetaHTML and use our own Perl preprocessor

2007-09-30 Thread Janne Blomqvist
On 9/29/07, FX Coudert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Comments are highly welcome, both on the idea itself, and on the Perl > script (my Perl is a bit rusty since I haven't used it for years). I think that if indeed metahtml is in such a bad shape as you describe, moving away from it asap is the rig

Re: GCC 4.2.2 RC2 Available

2007-09-30 Thread Mark Mitchell
Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: > [ I posted this before but I think you missed it. Otherwise let me > know. I don't want to be annoying. ] You're not being annoying. In general, if you send me a message explicitly (i.e., I'm in the To: or Cc: field), and you don't get a reply, the right assumption i

Re: Inconsistent error/pedwarn: ISO C++

2007-09-30 Thread Mark Mitchell
Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: > On 20/09/2007, Doug Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> We can't seem to decide whether ISO C++ really forbids comparisons >> between pointers and integers or not. The first two are for == and !=, >> the second two are for <, >, <=, >=. Why the inconsistency? >> >> typ