On 12/08/2017 04:30 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 11:32:54AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
Jakub Jelinek writes:
On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 10:43:58AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
The line numbers are completely misleading, unfortunately. Hadn't
SUBTARGET_ATTRIBUTE_TABLE been used
On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 11:32:54AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Jakub Jelinek writes:
>
> > On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 10:43:58AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
> >> The line numbers are completely misleading, unfortunately. Hadn't
> >> SUBTARGET_ATTRIBUTE_TABLE been used at the end of the (very short)
>
Jakub Jelinek writes:
> On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 10:43:58AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> The line numbers are completely misleading, unfortunately. Hadn't
>> SUBTARGET_ATTRIBUTE_TABLE been used at the end of the (very short)
>> sparc_attribute_table, I wouldn't have seen what was wrong.
>>
>> Th
On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 10:43:58AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
> The line numbers are completely misleading, unfortunately. Hadn't
> SUBTARGET_ATTRIBUTE_TABLE been used at the end of the (very short)
> sparc_attribute_table, I wouldn't have seen what was wrong.
>
> The following patch fixes the pro
Hi Martin,
> Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-08/msg01034.html
>
> The attached C++ only patch is rebased on the top of trunk.
>
> The remaining patches in the series (C FE and the back ends)
> have been approved.
your patch broke Solaris bootstrap:
/vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/c
OK.
On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-08/msg01034.html
>
> The attached C++ only patch is rebased on the top of trunk.
>
> The remaining patches in the series (C FE and the back ends)
> have been approved.
>
> Martin
>
>
> On 08/23
Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-08/msg01034.html
The attached C++ only patch is rebased on the top of trunk.
The remaining patches in the series (C FE and the back ends)
have been approved.
Martin
On 08/23/2017 08:36 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 08/22/2017 09:51 PM, Jason Merrill
On 08/22/2017 09:51 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
The C and C++ front ends already have a diagnose_mismatched_attributes
function, which seems like the natural place to add more conflict checking.
There are a few major problems with handling attribute conflicts
in diagnose_mismatched_attributes.
Th
The C and C++ front ends already have a diagnose_mismatched_attributes
function, which seems like the natural place to add more conflict checking.
Jason
To make review easier I broke out the C++ changes for the attributes
work into a patch of their own. I also found the API I had asked
about, to look up a declaration based on one that's about to be
added/merged.
This patch depends on the foundation bits posted here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc
10 matches
Mail list logo
