Hi,
In gcc/cp/mangle.c (write_unscoped_name) we have:
/* If not, it should be either in the global namespace, or directly
in a local function scope. */
gcc_assert (context == global_namespace
|| context != NULL
|| TREE_CODE (context) == FU
Alexander Ivchenko writes:
> BTW: First the check was "|| context == NULL", then it was removed by
> r149964 and then came back as "|| context != NULL" by r153768.
Looks like r153734 got it wrong first. It was supposed to revert
r149964, but failed. Then r153742 reverted the revertion, and whe
2013/7/29 Andreas Schwab :
> Alexander Ivchenko writes:
>
>> BTW: First the check was "|| context == NULL", then it was removed by
>> r149964 and then came back as "|| context != NULL" by r153768.
>
> Looks like r153734 got it wrong first. It was supposed to revert
> r149964, but failed. Then r1
> As a consensual first step toward addressing this issue, I suggest the
> following patch to the doc. I hope it is clear enough, but suggestions are
> obviously welcome. (I haven't even compiled the docs with it, as I'm on my
> laptop with little battery.)
Given that I received no feedback, I'
The Accelerator BOF at the GNU Tools Cauldron was worthwhile. Several
people presented their current work or announced upcoming projects in
the accelerator space. There was significant interest from the Cauldron
attendees; we had about 40 People in the room on the first day, and
about 20 in the f
On 07/29/2013 02:06 PM, FX wrote:
> +build of a native compiler on @samp{x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu}, beware of
> +either:
> +
> +@itemize @bullet
> +@item having 32-bit libc developer package properly installed (the exact
> +name of the package depends on your distro); otherwise, you may encounter a
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 6:22 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> There should be a better diagnostic.
If you remember, the start of this thread was:
> Why is it that configure worked but stubs-32.h was not found?
That is the correct thing to do. The reply, basically, was:
It's too hard.
OK, fine,
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to suggest that new implementation files have
> the '.cc' extension, unless they are meant to be processed
> with a C compiler. (I am not proposing wholesale renaming.)
Agreed.
Diego.
On 07/29/2013 02:55 PM, Bruce Korb wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 6:22 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
>> There should be a better diagnostic.
>
> If you remember, the start of this thread was:
>
>> Why is it that configure worked but stubs-32.h was not found?
>
> That is the correct thing to do.
On 07/29/2013 07:14 AM, Alexander Ivchenko wrote:
2013/7/29 Andreas Schwab :
Looks like r153734 got it wrong first. It was supposed to revert
r149964, but failed. Then r153742 reverted the revertion, and when
r153768 reintroduced it it was apparently modeled after r153734 instead
of the stat
I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has
accepted the Altera Nios II port for inclusion in GCC and appointed
Chung-Lin Tang and Sandra Loosemore as port maintainers. The initial patch
needs approval from a GCC GWP maintainer before it may be committed.
Please j
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 08:42:16AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to suggest that new implementation files have
> the '.cc' extension, unless they are meant to be processed
> with a C compiler. (I am not proposing wholesale renaming.)
Oh, I suppose this applies to ubsan, e
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 08:42:16AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to suggest that new implementation files have
>> the '.cc' extension, unless they are meant to be processed
>> with a C compiler. (I am not proposin
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 08:42:16AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to suggest that new implementation files have
> the '.cc' extension, unless they are meant to be processed
> with a C compiler. (I am not proposing wholesale renaming.)
>
I do not care very much but I disag
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 07/29/2013 02:55 PM, Bruce Korb wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 6:22 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>
>>> There should be a better diagnostic.
>>
>> If you remember, the start of this thread was:
>>
>>> Why is it that configure worked but stub
Sorry about the blank message; I accidentally hit the wrong button.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> It was "This is possible, but it's tricky, and it's really important
> to get it right. We don't want a half-arsed patch."
We've all seen cases where a quick patch is rejec
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:50 PM, David Starner wrote:
> Sorry about the blank message; I accidentally hit the wrong button.
>
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> It was "This is possible, but it's tricky, and it's really important
>> to get it right. We don't want a half-ar
17 matches
Mail list logo
