On 11/26/2015 09:53 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
Is the patch still candidate to be merged in current stage3, or should I
leave it to the next stage1?
What about the first patch or the patch, where I just applied
replacement of whitespaces?
As I said previously, the one to just replace whitespace is
On 11/20/2015 12:15 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 11/20/2015 03:14 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
BTW, I'm with whoever said absolutely no way to the idea of making automatic
changes like this as part of a commit hook.
I think the whitespace change can go in if it hasn't already, but I think the
other
On 11/20/2015 03:14 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> BTW, I'm with whoever said absolutely no way to the idea of making automatic
> changes like this as part of a commit hook.
>
> I think the whitespace change can go in if it hasn't already, but I think the
> other one still has enough problems that I
BTW, I'm with whoever said absolutely no way to the idea of making
automatic changes like this as part of a commit hook.
I think the whitespace change can go in if it hasn't already, but I
think the other one still has enough problems that I'll say - leave it
for the next stage 1.
@@ -178,8
On 11/19/2015 06:58 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 11/19/2015 11:16 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
You are right, however as the original coding style was really broken,
it was much easier
to use the tool and clean-up fall-out.
Waiting for thoughts related to v2.
Better, but still some oddities. I hope
On 11/19/2015 02:58 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/19/2015 11:16 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> You are right, however as the original coding style was really broken,
>> it was much easier
>> to use the tool and clean-up fall-out.
>>
>> Waiting for thoughts related to v2.
>
> Better, but still some
On 11/19/2015 11:16 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
You are right, however as the original coding style was really broken,
it was much easier
to use the tool and clean-up fall-out.
Waiting for thoughts related to v2.
Better, but still some oddities. I hope you won't get mad at me if I
suggest doing t
On 11/19/2015 01:50 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
I don't think all the reformattings here are things we want to do globally
for most source files. E.g.
@@ -75,18 +74,17 @@ get_mask_first_set_bit (unsigned mask)
static bool
has_undefined_value_p (tree t)
{
- return (ssa_undefined_value_p (t)
On 11/19/2015 01:50 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
I don't think all the reformattings here are things we want to do globally
for most source files.
While I do appreciate the sentiment behind the patch, I agree with all
of Joseph's points. Especially the clearly incorrect changes should be
reverted
I don't think all the reformattings here are things we want to do globally
for most source files. E.g.
> @@ -75,18 +74,17 @@ get_mask_first_set_bit (unsigned mask)
> static bool
> has_undefined_value_p (tree t)
> {
> - return (ssa_undefined_value_p (t)
> - || (possibly_undefined_nam
On 11/18/2015 07:23 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 11/13/2015 08:19 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/13/2015 09:58 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 11/13/2015 05:32 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/13/2015 05:50 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
Hello.
Patch survives regbootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu.
Ready for trunk?
Thanks
On 11/13/2015 08:19 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/13/2015 09:58 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 11/13/2015 05:32 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> On 11/13/2015 05:50 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
Hello.
Patch survives regbootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu.
Ready for trunk?
Thanks,
Martin
On 11/13/2015 09:58 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 11/13/2015 05:32 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/13/2015 05:50 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
Hello.
Patch survives regbootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu.
Ready for trunk?
Thanks,
Martin
0001-Fix-memory-leaks-in-tree-ssa-uninit.c.patch
From 54851503251dee7a8
On 11/13/2015 05:32 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/13/2015 05:50 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> Patch survives regbootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu.
>> Ready for trunk?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Martin
>>
>>
>> 0001-Fix-memory-leaks-in-tree-ssa-uninit.c.patch
>>
>>
>> From 54851503251dee7a8bd074485db2627
On 11/13/2015 05:50 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
Hello.
Patch survives regbootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu.
Ready for trunk?
Thanks,
Martin
0001-Fix-memory-leaks-in-tree-ssa-uninit.c.patch
From 54851503251dee7a8bd074485db262715e628728 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: marxin
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 12
Hello.
Patch survives regbootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu.
Ready for trunk?
Thanks,
Martin
>From 54851503251dee7a8bd074485db262715e628728 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: marxin
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 12:23:22 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Fix memory leaks in tree-ssa-uninit.c
gcc/ChangeLog:
2015-11-13 M
16 matches
Mail list logo