Iain Sandoe wrote:
Iain Sandoe wrote:
Jason Merrill wrote:
I notice this patch includes
+ var_nest_node () = default;
which will break GCC 10 bootstrap with a C++98 compiler; we only
switched to C++11 for GCC 11.
Hmm, the patch was already backported…
… I will fix this.
I missed the
Iain Sandoe wrote:
> Jason Merrill wrote:
>
>> I notice this patch includes
>>
>> + var_nest_node () = default;
>>
>> which will break GCC 10 bootstrap with a C++98 compiler; we only
>> switched to C++11 for GCC 11.
>
> Hmm, the patch was already backported…
> … I will fix this.
>
> I miss
Jason Merrill wrote:
I notice this patch includes
+ var_nest_node () = default;
which will break GCC 10 bootstrap with a C++98 compiler; we only
switched to C++11 for GCC 11.
Hmm, the patch was already backported…
… I will fix this.
I missed the warning during testing.
Iain
I notice this patch includes
+ var_nest_node () = default;
which will break GCC 10 bootstrap with a C++98 compiler; we only
switched to C++11 for GCC 11.
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 8:57 AM Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>
> On 7/17/20 3:37 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 7:39 PM Nat
On 7/17/20 3:37 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 7:39 PM Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 7/16/20 11:56 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
Hello folks,
It's unfortunate the original plan of handling lifetime issues in a
gimple pass didn't work out.
OK for master?
OK for 10.x?
IMHO too big
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 7:39 PM Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>
> On 7/16/20 11:56 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> > Hello folks,
>
> It's unfortunate the original plan of handling lifetime issues in a
> gimple pass didn't work out.
>
> > OK for master?
> >
> > OK for 10.x?
IMHO too big of a change for 10.2 but
Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 7/16/20 11:56 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
It's unfortunate the original plan of handling lifetime issues in a
gimple pass didn't work out.
I’ve revisited this (on balance every couple of months, I suppose when it
gets tricky doing
something in the FE). However, it s
On 7/16/20 11:56 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
Hello folks,
It's unfortunate the original plan of handling lifetime issues in a
gimple pass didn't work out.
OK for master?
OK for 10.x?
ok, some nits
+struct interesting
+{
not a very good name. As it's not in an anonumous namespace, it has
Hello folks,
This is a patch correcting a thinko on my part which turns out to have
quite serious consequences for coroutines.
Sorry it took longer to clean up than I expected.
1/ I am sad that this is (too) late for 10.2 ..
.. my advice to distros would be to apply the patch to 10.2… I will c
