On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:31 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> Jason Merrill writes:
>> I'm inclined to change the C++ FE to pass NULL_TREE instead until such
>> time as someone cares.
>
> The sh backend will at least not choke on that ;-)
Thus.
commit 301b543f38b687fe5d90010b3c82ef2160362b1b
Author: Jas
Jason Merrill writes:
> I'm inclined to change the C++ FE to pass NULL_TREE instead until such
> time as someone cares.
The sh backend will at least not choke on that ;-)
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 02:27:55PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 11:47:41AM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
> >>
> >> In my original proposal, I said this:
> >>
> >> > It includes a bunch of macro->hook conversions, mostly
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 11:47:41AM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
>>
>> In my original proposal, I said this:
>>
>> > It includes a bunch of macro->hook conversions, mostly because the
>> > hooks need an additional parameter (the function) to detec
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 11:47:41AM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> In my original proposal, I said this:
>
> > It includes a bunch of macro->hook conversions, mostly because the
> > hooks need an additional parameter (the function) to detect which ones
> > are Renesas ABI and which are GCC ABI.
>
>
In my original proposal, I said this:
> It includes a bunch of macro->hook conversions, mostly because the
> hooks need an additional parameter (the function) to detect which ones
> are Renesas ABI and which are GCC ABI.
The original documentation at least hinted that the parameter was a
functio
