On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 8:18 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> in order to bootstrap successfully the patch I needed these additional
> changes. Please double check at your end, run the testsuite, and if
> everything goes well, please commit (again ;) the whole thing.
Fully tested:
cd gcc-bulid
rm -r *
Hi,
On 07/31/2013 05:43 AM, Tim Shen wrote:
I found some other wired problems in that patch after committing.
Probably need more time to work on it, so now I revert it :(
in order to bootstrap successfully the patch I needed these additional
changes. Please double check at your end, run the tes
I found some other wired problems in that patch after committing.
Probably need more time to work on it, so now I revert it :(
--
Tim Shen
On 07/31/2013 01:26 AM, Tim Shen wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Please post the complete patch you intend to commit. Part of the GCC policy
is also that all the patches must be posted complete, exactly as would be
committed upon approval.
Here it is.
Ok, thanks.
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Please post the complete patch you intend to commit. Part of the GCC policy
> is also that all the patches must be posted complete, exactly as would be
> committed upon approval.
Here it is.
--
Tim Shen
bfs.patch
Description: Binary dat
Hi,
On 07/31/2013 01:11 AM, Tim Shen wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:03 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Did you actually bootstrap & test the patch? Because you didn't last time,
right?
I compiled it and run the 28_regex testsuite, nothing wrong happened
because there're all single-file testcases i
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:03 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Did you actually bootstrap & test the patch? Because you didn't last time,
> right?
I compiled it and run the 28_regex testsuite, nothing wrong happened
because there're all single-file testcases in it;
but I ignored the duplicated definitio
Hi,
On 07/31/2013 12:44 AM, Tim Shen wrote:
I see. So I include in different files and then compile them
together, it broke. I've make every non-templated function in this
commit inline. Now it compiles. Sorry again for this commit.
Did you actually bootstrap & test the patch? Because you didn
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Tim Shen wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 6:10 AM, Paolo Carlini
> wrote:
>> I reverted the commit and tested that mainline is fine again.
>
> Sorry for the accident!
>
>> Just to clarify how we normally handle these issues in v3: *temporarily*, to
>> avoid the
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 6:10 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> I reverted the commit and tested that mainline is fine again.
Sorry for the accident!
> Just to clarify how we normally handle these issues in v3: *temporarily*, to
> avoid the linkage issues which broke the bootstrap today, all the
> non
Hi again,
I reverted the commit and tested that mainline is fine again.
Just to clarify how we normally handle these issues in v3: *temporarily*, to
avoid the linkage issues which broke the bootstrap today, all the non-template
functions must be inline, even if large. In the past normally we
.. no, too many changes, please simply revert the commit ASAP and next
time please test more carefully before posting.
Thanks,
Paolo.
On 07/30/2013 02:07 PM, Tim Shen wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Ah, excellent. As usual, let's wait a day or so for further comments and
then please commit the whole thing.
Commited.
The bootstrap is currently broken due to this commit. I'm quickly moving
inline
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Ah, excellent. As usual, let's wait a day or so for further comments and
> then please commit the whole thing.
Commited.
--
Tim Shen
On 07/29/2013 10:37 AM, Tim Shen wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Minor nit: it's not clear to me why in the previous patch you added the
includes of and .
I use them in regex_grep_matcher.h and regex_grep_matcher.tcc; Is
include/std/regex the right place where I i
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Minor nit: it's not clear to me why in the previous patch you added the
> includes of and .
I use them in regex_grep_matcher.h and regex_grep_matcher.tcc; Is
include/std/regex the right place where I include them?
--
Tim Shen
Hi,
On 07/29/2013 02:06 AM, Tim Shen wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:08 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Oh well, thanks. But then I expect specific testcases to come with it, for
the various values of the parameter, both the default and the other other
values. Otherwise, the idea isn't really immedi
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:08 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Oh well, thanks. But then I expect specific testcases to come with it, for
> the various values of the parameter, both the default and the other other
> values. Otherwise, the idea isn't really immediately useful. See what I
> mean?
So I mod
On 07/28/2013 05:50 PM, Tim Shen wrote:
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
I see. I was wondering if in this development stage it would be convenient
to have somewhere a parameter allowing to switch by hand such internal
details, useful for testing purposes too. Eventually ma
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> I see. I was wondering if in this development stage it would be convenient
> to have somewhere a parameter allowing to switch by hand such internal
> details, useful for testing purposes too. Eventually may or may not go away.
Here it is :)
Hi,
On 07/28/2013 12:18 PM, Tim Shen wrote:
They are already added by
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2013-07/msg00643.html (though I found
the changelog entry used old file names, I'll fix it later). This time
it's the BFS approach that can correctly handle the problem instead of
the DFS one.
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Refactor, refactoring, etc, no 'r'.
Thanks :)
> If the grouping problem is now fixed, would it make sense to add
> corresponding testcases?
They are already added by
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2013-07/msg00643.html (though I found
the c
Hi,
On 07/28/2013 06:13 AM, Tim Shen wrote:
Refractor the whole Thompson matcher using the queue-based(BFS)
Bellman-Ford algorithm. Fix the grouping problem.
Refactor, refactoring, etc, no 'r'.
If the grouping problem is now fixed, would it make sense to add
corresponding testcases?
Paolo.
Refractor the whole Thompson matcher using the queue-based(BFS)
Bellman-Ford algorithm. Fix the grouping problem.
The original implementation uses a stack, which possibly runs slower
when deduplicating; and cannot handle gourping correctly.
The patch may not be very clear, so here's the whole fil
24 matches
Mail list logo
