https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
Andreas Arnez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #24 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Mon Nov 9 15:35:10 2015
New Revision: 230024
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230024&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR debug/67192] Further fix C loops' back-jump location
gcc/c/Chang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #23 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Mon Nov 9 15:31:32 2015
New Revision: 230023
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230023&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR debug/67192] Fix C loops' back-jump location
gcc/c/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #22 from Andreas Arnez ---
Here's another version of the fix:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg00368.html
It addresses an issue with the previous version that was brought up by Bernd
Schmidt: A breakpoint on the "whi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #21 from Andreas Arnez ---
(In reply to Andreas Arnez from comment #20)
> Posted a patch that is not as ambitious as completely getting rid of
> input_location, but also doesn't require a new function like
> c_parser_peek_token_keep_i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #20 from Andreas Arnez ---
Posted a patch that is not as ambitious as completely getting rid of
input_location, but also doesn't require a new function like
c_parser_peek_token_keep_input_location():
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #19 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #18)
> The "simpler" progression seems to be to remove code like
>
> if (CAN_HAVE_LOCATION_P (t) && code != LABEL_EXPR)
> {
> if (!EXPR_HAS_LOCATIO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
The "simpler" progression seems to be to remove code like
if (CAN_HAVE_LOCATION_P (t) && code != LABEL_EXPR)
{
if (!EXPR_HAS_LOCATION (t))
SET_EXPR_LOCATION (t, input_location);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #17 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Andreas Arnez from comment #16)
> Well, I'm rather a GDB- than a GCC developer. My interest in this is to
> ensure that GDB doesn't become completely useless ;-)
> Also, I thought that Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #16 from Andreas Arnez ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #15)
> (In reply to Andreas Arnez from comment #11)
> > Any news here? AFAIK the problem still exists.
>
> I still think the solution in comment #10 is the lea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #15 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Andreas Arnez from comment #11)
> Any news here? AFAIK the problem still exists.
I still think the solution in comment #10 is the least invasive without being a
hack. But someone (you?)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
--- Comment #14 from Manuel Ló
12 matches
Mail list logo
