On 11/18/2014 02:32 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
So it effectively does nothing. Unless Jason can think of a good
reason for it, we probably ought to turf it. Its effectively a NOP.
Yeah, go ahead.
Jason
On 11/18/2014 01:36 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/18/14 09:30, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
I tried doing the if before chaning to TREE_TYPE... absolutely no
effect on the testsuite or anything else :-)
What do you think, should I check this in? What is there is clearly
incorrect.we could also rev
On 11/18/14 09:30, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
I tried doing the if before chaning to TREE_TYPE... absolutely no
effect on the testsuite or anything else :-)
What do you think, should I check this in? What is there is clearly
incorrect.we could also revert the original patch since that is what
On 11/18/2014 09:52 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 11/18/2014 09:40 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 11/18/2014 09:26 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
I was poking around attribs.c while trial running my tree-type-safety
stuff, and it triggered something in decl_attributes() that seems fishy
to me. It looks
On 11/18/2014 09:40 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 11/18/2014 09:26 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
I was poking around attribs.c while trial running my tree-type-safety
stuff, and it triggered something in decl_attributes() that seems fishy
to me. It looks like it was part of the fix for
https://gcc.gn
On 11/18/2014 09:26 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
I was poking around attribs.c while trial running my tree-type-safety
stuff, and it triggered something in decl_attributes() that seems fishy
to me. It looks like it was part of the fix for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35315
decl_att
