On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 3:22 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> For reference, these docs are:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/User-GC.html#User-GC
Thanks.
> (It seems a shame that one has to write 3 almost-identical functions; I
> wonder if there's a clean way of writing the traversal code only
On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 12:29 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On 2013-04-03 12:09 , David Malcolm wrote:
> > I tried grepping for these, but didn't see any. Where are these? Is
> > this in svn trunk, or in a branch?
> vec and edge_def. You need to grep for 'GTY((user))'.
Many thanks; got it now.
[I
On 2013-04-03 12:09 , David Malcolm wrote:
I tried grepping for these, but didn't see any. Where are these? Is
this in svn trunk, or in a branch?
vec and edge_def. You need to grep for 'GTY((user))'. The
documentation should guide you in what you need to do.
Diego.
On Thu, 2013-03-28 at 10:06 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Thu Mar 28 08:53:03 2013, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> >
> > Eh - in fact you _promised_ to do that in trade for accepting the C++
> > conversion!
> > Never trust promises from google ... *sigh*
>
>
> You need to calm down. This childish
On 2013-03-28 17:32 , Richard Biener wrote:
Ah well, sorry about that.
Thanks. No harm done.
Fine. As long as reviewers resist enhancements to gengtype and push
people to rely on manual marking.
Agreed. In this sense, I would like to consider gengtype*.[ch] frozen
to new features and eve
Diego Novillo wrote:
>On Thu Mar 28 08:53:03 2013, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>>
>> Eh - in fact you _promised_ to do that in trade for accepting the C++
>> conversion!
>> Never trust promises from google ... *sigh*
>
>
>You need to calm down. This childish attitude is insulting and
>counterproduct
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 7:06 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Thu Mar 28 08:53:03 2013, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>>
>> Eh - in fact you _promised_ to do that in trade for accepting the C++
>> conversion!
>> Never trust promises from google ... *sigh*
>
>
>
> You need to calm down. This childish attitu
On Thu Mar 28 09:53:24 2013, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
what about -- as interim plan -- add support for inheritance while we are
still working on the longer term?
Support for inheritance is tricky and convoluted. Using manual markers
in your class is much more direct. There may be rough edges
On Thu Mar 28 08:53:03 2013, Richard Biener wrote:
Eh - in fact you _promised_ to do that in trade for accepting the C++
conversion!
Never trust promises from google ... *sigh*
You need to calm down. This childish attitude is insulting and
counterproductive.
The gengtype conversion was pa
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 7:49 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On 2013-03-28 07:57 , Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>>
>> Does gengetype works with inheritance now? I could not
>> find anything to that effect in the documentation.
>>
> No. The plan is to get rid of gengtype by implementing manual markers
> (h
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>> On 2013-03-28 07:57 , Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>>>
>>> Does gengetype works with inheritance now? I could not
>>> find anything to that effect in the documentation.
>>>
>> No. The pl
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On 2013-03-28 07:57 , Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>>
>> Does gengetype works with inheritance now? I could not
>> find anything to that effect in the documentation.
>>
> No. The plan is to get rid of gengtype by implementing manual markers
> (h
On 2013-03-28 07:57 , Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
Does gengetype works with inheritance now? I could not
find anything to that effect in the documentation.
No. The plan is to get rid of gengtype by implementing manual markers
(http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/cxx-conversion/gc-alternatives). But those
pl
Hi Diego,
Does gengetype works with inheritance now? I could not
find anything to that effect in the documentation.
Thanks,
-- Gaby
14 matches
Mail list logo
