Dodji Seketeli writes:
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-52.C
> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-52.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 000..0f87fd4
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-52.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++11
domi...@lps.ens.fr (Dominique Dhumieres) a écrit:
> The following tests are failing (with -m32):
>
> FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-36.C (test for warnings, line 9)
> FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-36.C (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-37.C (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: g++.
Hans-Peter Nilsson writes:
> This caused a build failure, see PR54860.
I am on it.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
--
Dodji
Hello Dominique,
domi...@lps.ens.fr (Dominique Dhumieres) writes:
> The following tests are failing (with -m32):
>
> FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-36.C (test for warnings, line 9)
> FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-36.C (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-37.C (test for excess err
Dodji,
The following tests are failing (with -m32):
FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-36.C (test for warnings, line 9)
FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-36.C (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-37.C (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-8.C (test for warnings, line 5)
FA
> From: Dodji Seketeli
> Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 14:12:04 +0200
> Jason Merrill writes:
>
> > OK.
>
> Thanks. Committed to trunk at revision r192199.
This caused a build failure, see PR54860.
brgds, H-P
Jason Merrill writes:
> OK.
Thanks. Committed to trunk at revision r192199.
--
Dodji
OK.
Jason
On 09/20/2012 02:59 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
+ if ((flags & ATTR_FLAG_CXX11)
+ && !(flags & ATTR_FLAG_TYPE_IN_PLACE
+ && (TREE_CODE (*node) == RECORD_TYPE
+ || TREE_CODE (*node) == UNION_TYPE)))
+ {
+ /* unused is being used as a c++11 att
On 09/18/2012 09:51 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
+ VEC_safe_push (scoped_attributes, heap, attributes_table, sa);
+ result = &VEC_last (scoped_attributes, attributes_table);
Here you can set result from the return value of VEC_safe_push.
+ if ((flags & ATTR_FLAG_CXX11)
+ &
On 09/17/2012 11:35 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
>And I wonder if we want to offer this as an optional warning for GNU
attribute syntax.
What option would be used to control this optional feature? Would
you accept this a separate patch?
Let's not worry about this for now.
+ found_a
On 08/15/2012 03:43 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
Or we could just require people to put the attribute in the right
place (or one of the right places) if they want it to apply to the
decl. That is, either at the beginning of the declaration statement
or after the declarator-id.
Just to make sure I
On 08/10/2012 04:04 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
In cp_parser_decl_specifier_seq, I first tried to apply the c++11
attribute to the (already constructed) type it follows, like what you
suggest. But then I am getting the warning:
warning: ignoring attributes applied to 'A' after definition
iss
On 07/26/2012 11:19 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
+// Example taken from dcl.attr.grammar:
+
+int p[10];
+void f()
+{
+int x = 42, y[5];
+/* Here, the '[[gnu::' should have introduced an attribute, ont a
+ lambda invocation an array subscripting expression. */
+int(p[[gnu::x] { ret
On 07/26/2012 11:19 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
+ struct scoped_attributes *ns = set_attributes_namespace (attrs,
+ attrs_len,
+ name_space);
+ if (ns == NULL)
+return NULL;
+
+
On 07/26/2012 08:19 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
> + attributes_table->scoped = XRESIZEVEC (struct scoped_attributes,
> + attributes_table->scoped,
> + attributes_table->len + 1);
A good clue that you want VEC's in
Do you handle how, in certain syntactic locations, a C++11 attribute binds
differently to a GNU attribute? (I haven't studied the patch, so feel
free to point me to testcases it adds that verify such differences, if
applicable.)
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
17 matches
Mail list logo
