[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Costa) wrote on 13.10.05 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 13 Oct 2005, at 7:41 AM, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >> yeah, if it were in one of those books it could be added to the -
> >> weff-c+
> >> + option. It doesn't seem sensible to add a different option for an
>
Kai Henningsen wrote:
So what you say is that any decent modern C++ coding guide/list wants to
forbid catching the C++ standard exceptions, and anything derived from
them?
no, only catch by value is problematic, as it can lead to slicing.
catch by reference is perfectly fine.
CVS write access users should give the subversion setup a try this week.
Directions on how to do common operations are at
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/SvnHelp
I have placed the repo in exactly the place on gcc.gnu.org it will end
up in during the final conversion, and in the exact condition (IE tags,
Does the uberbaum tree exist on savanna, or is it only on
sources.redhat.com? If so, what is the procedure for accessing it?
Thanks in advance...
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 16 Oct 2005, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> Note that this is a pretty straightforward conversion, but the whole
> script is really overkill for the following reason:
>
> We can now identify the exact version of gcc t have simply by the
> revision number and branch name. So maintaining all this
So remember all that stuff I said earlier about it being intractibly
hard to realign the current stack frame? It appears that the generic
bits of the compiler have improved since I last tried it. In
particular, the argument pointer can now be a pseudo register. I
think we had to add this for hpp
> Presumably, no longer tagging any snapshots, instead just reporting the
> revision number and branch name in the snapshot announcements?
Uh, tags are cheap, it can tag them if it likes. Who cares.
>
> > The other contrib scripts have been updated by Ben Elliston, and were
> > posted to gcc
Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> CVS write access users should give the subversion setup a try this week.
Is there a branch that represents the tip of the old-gcc repository? It
appears that premerge-fsf-branch is intented to be this, but it is missing
many files from old-gcc reposito
This should get more than just bootstrap testing. Anyone care to
help out here?
I'm bringing my mainline tree up to speed, as all the porting work
I recently did was on the 4.0 branch, but once that's done I'll
be glad to help out. Aside from the full testsuite, I will compile
up Xorg and an int
On Sun, 2005-10-16 at 22:19 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > CVS write access users should give the subversion setup a try this week.
>
> Is there a branch that represents the tip of the old-gcc repository?
No. old-gcc got merged into the current gc
On Fri, 2005-10-14 at 11:40 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Oct 2005, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:
>
> > their corresponding svn commands posted on the website? Hmm, I guess
> > we would need to update these pages to the svn equivalents which would
> > pretty much cover the basics of a how-to
On Sun, 2005-10-16 at 23:20 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Daniel Berlin:
>
> > CVS write access users should give the subversion setup a try this week.
> >
> > Directions on how to do common operations are at
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/SvnHelp
> >
> > I have placed the repo in exactly the plac
Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > CVS write access users should give the subversion setup a try this week.
>
> Is there a branch that represents the tip of the old-gcc repository? It
> appears that premerge-fsf-branch is intented to be
* Daniel Berlin:
>> Is it okay to make an unreviewed test commit?
> Uh, commit all you want.
Permissions don't seem to be set correctly:
SendingChangeLog
Sendinglibgcc2.h
Transmitting file data ..svn: Commit failed (details follow):
svn: Can't create directory '/svn/gcc/db/trans
On Sun, 2005-10-16 at 23:59 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Daniel Berlin:
>
> >> Is it okay to make an unreviewed test commit?
>
> > Uh, commit all you want.
>
> Permissions don't seem to be set correctly:
>
> SendingChangeLog
> Sendinglibgcc2.h
> Transmitting file data ..svn:
Hi,
Is this spam, a temporary glitch at gcc-central or what? I checked my
mailbox and all is well.
Paul Thomas
--- Begin Message ---
Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list.
Messages to you from the fortran mailing list seem to
have been bouncing. I'v
Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is this spam, a temporary glitch at gcc-central or what? I checked my
> mailbox and all is well.
This type of message is best sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]; thanks.
As far as I can tell, e-mail messages to you are going through fine.
You are still on the fo
> > We can now identify the exact version of gcc t have simply by the
> > revision number and branch name. So maintaining all this stuff in a
> > DATESTAMP, etc, is severe overkill when you could simply use the result
> > of "svnversion .' and commit that to a file, or do it client side).
>
> I th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Can someone familiar with Tree-SSA please fix the following
documentation oddities?
In tree-ssa-operands.c, the comment for the function
update_stmt_operands() seems to be wrong - it's referring
to get_stmt_operands(), which is nowhere to be fo
19 matches
Mail list logo
