OK.
Jason
On 10/12/2011 07:56 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/12/2011 09:18 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
newattrs
= build_tree_list (get_identifier ("alloc_size"),
build_tree_list (NULL_TREE, integer_one_node));
+extvisattr = build_tree_list (get_identifier
("externally_visibl
On 10/12/2011 09:18 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
newattrs
= build_tree_list (get_identifier ("alloc_size"),
build_tree_list (NULL_TREE, integer_one_node));
+extvisattr = build_tree_list (get_identifier ("externally_visible"),
+
... or like this, maybe better.
Paolo.
/
Index: decl.c
===
--- decl.c (revision 179842)
+++ decl.c (working copy)
@@ -3654,7 +3654,7 @@ cxx_init_decl_processing (void)
current_lang_name = lang_name_c
Hi,
+delattrs
+ = build_tree_list (get_identifier ("externally_visible"),
+ build_tree_list (NULL_TREE, integer_one_node));
Why integer_one_node?
To be honest? No idea, I copied what pre-existed for operator new. Shall I
test (NULL_TREE, NULL_TREE)??
build_tree_list (get_i
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 02:18 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
>>
>> On 10/12/2011 07:26 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>>>
>>> + delattrs
>>> + = build_tree_list (get_identifier ("externally_visible"),
>>> + build_tree_list (NULL_TREE, integer_o
On 10/12/2011 02:18 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/12/2011 07:26 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
+delattrs
+ = build_tree_list (get_identifier ("externally_visible"),
+ build_tree_list (NULL_TREE, integer_one_node));
Why integer_one_node?
To be honest? No idea, I copied what pre-
On 10/12/2011 07:26 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
+delattrs
+ = build_tree_list (get_identifier ("externally_visible"),
+build_tree_list (NULL_TREE, integer_one_node));
Why integer_one_node?
Jason
Hi,
thus, per the discussion in the audit trail, I'm proceeding with
decorating with __attribute__((externally_visible)) both the 8 new and
delete in , and the 4 pre-declared by the C++ front-end. The below
is what I regression tested successfully, together with the library
bits, on x86_64-li
