> The gimplifier (because of Ada :( ) doesn't recurse to POINTER_TYPE's
> type when gimplifying types, so we need a DECL_EXPR to gimplify such
> types if they are VLAs. The following patch is an attempt to do that.
Well, you should rather say thanks... The gimplification point is also the
point
The -Wnonnull warning improvement (PR c/17308 - nonnull attribute
not as useful as it could be) causes a couple of false positives
in a powerpc64le bootstrap. The attached fix suppresses them.
It passes bootstrap on powerpc64le but tests are still running.
I couldn't reproduce the bootstrap comp
On Oct 19, 2016, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Sep 23, 2016, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> This patchset adds support for the C++ language to libcc1.
>> It updates a few patches for libcc1 by Jan Kratochvil, posted long ago
>> but IIRC not reviewed; it updates a patch that adds support for
>> represen
On 11/25/2016 06:55 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Martin Jambor wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 12:01:38PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
I am testing the following to beat some sanity into
compute_complex_assign_jump_func.
That the function does not handle ternary operat
Hello, gentle maintainer.
This is a message from the Translation Project robot.
A revised PO file for textual domain 'gcc' has been submitted
by the Spanish team of translators. The file is available at:
http://translationproject.org/latest/gcc/es.po
(This file, 'gcc-6.2.0.es.po', has just
On Wed, 2016-12-14 at 15:02 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 12/09/2016 08:32 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > Thanks. Unfortunately, applying the "locate_file" patch
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg01186.html
> > would now introduce a regression in a recently-added test case:
>
>
This patch by Than McIntosh removes an unnecessary initializer when
building the set of values to store in a slice of zero length. This
removes some code that dates back to 2008 and may have something to do
with different handling of nil slices back then (I no longer recall).
Bootstrapped and ran
Jakub,
Do you approve backporting this fix to the 6.x branch?
Martin
On 12/12/2016 08:53 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 12/12/2016 11:51 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The attached patch removes the unsafe assumption behind the ICE.
Is this okay for both trunk and GCC 6?
+ && TREE_CODE (inn
On 12/14/2016 03:56 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The -Wnonnull warning improvement (PR c/17308 - nonnull attribute
not as useful as it could be) causes a couple of false positives
in a powerpc64le bootstrap. The attached fix suppresses them.
It passes bootstrap on powerpc64le but tests are still runn
I suppose setting a range seemed better than giving up. Then again,
since with this patch GCC will warn on null %s pointers there may
not be much point in trying to see if there's also some other
problem after that, except perhaps in code that deliberately relies
on the Glibc feature. I'd be fin
On 12/14/2016 09:21 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I suppose setting a range seemed better than giving up. Then again,
since with this patch GCC will warn on null %s pointers there may
not be much point in trying to see if there's also some other
problem after that, except perhaps in code that delibera
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 08:10:10PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Do you approve backporting this fix to the 6.x branch?
Yes, but please wait a little bit with that (i.e. only commit it after
6.3 is released next week).
I'm also surprised this code does not care about what TREE_CODE inner is,
handl
101 - 112 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
