On 5/19/20 9:34 AM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 02:13:02PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
struct X { };
struct Y { int : 0; };
struct Z { int : 0; Y y; };
struct U : public X { X q; };
struct A { double a; };
struct B : public X { double a; };
struct C : public Y { double a; };
s
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 02:13:02PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> struct X { };
> struct Y { int : 0; };
> struct Z { int : 0; Y y; };
> struct U : public X { X q; };
> struct A { double a; };
> struct B : public X { double a; };
> struct C : public Y { double a; };
> struct D : public Z { double a
On 28.04.20 17:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 04:23:24PM +0200, Andreas Krebbel via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
>> Given that this is something which hasn't been covered by the ABI so far I'm
>> not sure we really need
>> a -Wpsabi warning for that.
>
> Attached are two (updated) ve
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 04:23:24PM +0200, Andreas Krebbel via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Given that this is something which hasn't been covered by the ABI so far I'm
> not sure we really need
> a -Wpsabi warning for that.
Attached are two (updated) versions of the patch on top of the
powerpc+middle-end
On 4/28/20 10:38 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 04:23:24PM +0200, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
Our ABI doesn't specify anything regarding C++ so there is nothing in there
which really conflicts
with that. I assume these things will be part of a cross-platform C++ ABI
instead? I don
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 04:23:24PM +0200, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
> Our ABI doesn't specify anything regarding C++ so there is nothing in there
> which really conflicts
> with that. I assume these things will be part of a cross-platform C++ ABI
> instead? I don't see a way
> to add this to our pla
On 28.04.20 14:13, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> So, based on the yesterday's discussions, similarly to powerpc64le-linux
> I've done some testing for s390x-linux too.
>
> First of all, I found a bug in my patch from yesterday, it was printing
> the wrong type like 'double' etc. rather than the
