On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 6:24 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
[…]
>> > Note that as per
>> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg01365.html
>> > we'll use "pass_manager" rather than "pipeline", so this would look
>> > like:
>> > pass_manager &get_passes () { gcc_assert (passes_); return *passe
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 11:30:01PM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> [ Adding Benjamin, Diego, Lawrence ]
>
> General remarks first:
> When we designed the coding standards for GCC, an overriding
> philosophy was that we did not want to be prescriptive. Rather, we
> explicitly wanted to encou
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 4:30 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
>> I'm voting for references. References can be seen as yet another
>> software structuring tool that instantly communicate some properties
>> such as you mentioned above. In addition to that it's also a hint of
>> ownership, i.e. if I get a
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 4:11 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Moreover, I think we should be extra careful here because GCC is
> transitioning from C and many developers are used to expect C
> semantics, we will be mixing new C++ code with C code a lot in the
> future and even though we hope to reduce
[ Adding Benjamin, Diego, Lawrence ]
General remarks first:
When we designed the coding standards for GCC, an overriding
philosophy was that we did not want to be prescriptive. Rather, we
explicitly wanted to encourage common sense and trust the judgment
of maintainers to make sound and appropria
On Tue, 2013-07-30 at 11:30 +0200, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 09:02:53PM +0200, Oleg Endo wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-07-29 at 14:20 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The same here and at a few other places. It may be just me not being
> > > > used to references
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 09:02:53PM +0200, Oleg Endo wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-07-29 at 14:20 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> > >
> > > The same here and at a few other places. It may be just me not being
> > > used to references... nevertheless, if someone really wants to use
> > > them like this,
Hi,
thanks for the email I was supposed to write.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 02:20:02PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 15:08 +0200, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I don't know why it's me again but again I do have a few comments.
>
> Thanks for looking over the patch.
>
On Mon, 2013-07-29 at 14:20 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> >
> > The same here and at a few other places. It may be just me not being
> > used to references... nevertheless, if someone really wants to use
> > them like this, at least make them const and you will save a night of
> > frantic debuggi
On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 15:08 +0200, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't know why it's me again but again I do have a few comments.
Thanks for looking over the patch.
> One global remark first: If we are going to start using the gcc
> namespace (I understand it you need for isolation of symbols
Hi,
I don't know why it's me again but again I do have a few comments.
One global remark first: If we are going to start using the gcc
namespace (I understand it you need for isolation of symbols once you
use gcc as library, right?), I'm wondering whether mixing "using
namespace gcc" and explicit
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 08:27:43PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-07-24 at 19:10 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> > > Could you please add a description of what this does?
> >
> > Sorry. You did, but in a previous message th
On Wed, 2013-07-24 at 19:10 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> > Could you please add a description of what this does?
>
> Sorry. You did, but in a previous message that I had managed to miss.
> Maybe include a reference to it in future posting
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Could you please add a description of what this does?
Sorry. You did, but in a previous message that I had managed to miss.
Maybe include a reference to it in future postings?
Diego.
Could you please add a description of what this does?
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:09 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> gcc/
> * Makefile.in (PIPELINE_H): New.
> (lto-cgraph.o): Depend on CONTEXT_H and PIPELINE_H.
> (passes.o): Likewise.
> (statistics.o): Likewise.
>
gcc/
* Makefile.in (PIPELINE_H): New.
(lto-cgraph.o): Depend on CONTEXT_H and PIPELINE_H.
(passes.o): Likewise.
(statistics.o): Likewise.
(cgraphunit.o): Likewise.
(context.o): Depend on PIPELINE_H.
* pipeline.h: New.
* cgraphunit.c
16 matches
Mail list logo
