http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
--- Comment #12 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-02-16 19:46:02 UTC ---
> Fine with me (I won't make any of these changes myself though).
I'll probably give it a whirl, but only after 4.7 has branched. For
4.8, there might be conside
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou 2012-02-15
08:13:20 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Feb 15 08:13:09 2012
New Revision: 184255
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184255
Log:
PR target/51921
PR target/52205
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
--- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou 2012-02-15
08:13:29 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Feb 15 08:13:22 2012
New Revision: 184256
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184256
Log:
PR target/51921
PR target/52205
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
AssignedTo|ebotcazou at gcc d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou 2012-02-14
22:04:35 UTC ---
> I'm currently doing so, and preliminary results look good. I've got a
> couple of comments on the patch as-is which I find harder than necessary
> to read/understand:
>
> * It uses
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-02-14 18:39:32 UTC ---
> --- Comment #6 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-02-12
> 19:52:02 UTC ---
> The patch fixes the test case and also passes some relevant Go tests.
>
> Rainer, if OK, I'
