Rafael Espindola wrote:
As I said, it's a minor polish issue. It may be sufficient to just have a
note in the documentation as Basil suggested.
I am sorry to be picky, but my first name is spelled Basile (in France,
where I live and am a citizen).
I do know that is it written Basil in English
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 09:32, Rafael Espindola wrote:
>> As I said, it's a minor polish issue. It may be sufficient to just have a
>> note in the documentation as Basil suggested.
>
> I would prefer just changing the documentation too. In general I think
> that plugins
> should see gcc the same wa
> As I said, it's a minor polish issue. It may be sufficient to just have a
> note in the documentation as Basil suggested.
I would prefer just changing the documentation too. In general I think
that plugins
should see gcc the same way a builtin pass does. If a plugin needs to
look at the
IL early
Diego Novillo wrote:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 15:33, Taras Glek wrote:
While developing my plugin I've noticed that many callbacks need to be
guarded with "if (errorcount)" or the plugin will cause a gcc crash due to
receiving less complete data than it expected.
More details please. Wh
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 15:33, Taras Glek wrote:
> While developing my plugin I've noticed that many callbacks need to be
> guarded with "if (errorcount)" or the plugin will cause a gcc crash due to
> receiving less complete data than it expected.
More details please. What exactly is the error and
Taras Glek wrote:
While developing my plugin I've noticed that many callbacks need to be
guarded with "if (errorcount)" or the plugin will cause a gcc crash
due to receiving less complete data than it expected.
Should the plugin API guard callbacks in invoke_plugin_callbacks() to
avoid 99% of
