On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 05/20/2016 01:18 PM, Daniel Gutson wrote:
>>
>> (reposting in gcc@ and adding more information)
>>
>> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Andres Tiraboschi
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> While analysing this
(reposting in gcc@ and adding more information)
On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Andres Tiraboschi
wrote:
> While analysing this bug we arrived to the following code at
> tree.c:145 (lvalue_kind):
>
> case VAR_DECL:
> if (TREE_READONLY (ref) && ! TREE_STATIC (ref)
> && DECL_LANG_S
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Andres Tiraboschi
wrote:
> Hi
> This patch adds two plugins events when evaluated call expression and
> an init or modify expression in constexpr.
> The goal of this patch is to allow the plugins to analyze and or
> modify the evaluation of constant expressions.
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 11/10/2015 01:10 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> On 06/11/15 09:59 +, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>> On 11/06/2015 01:56 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>>> On 5 November 2015 at 23:31, Daniel Gutson
>>>
>&g
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 06/11/15 09:59 +, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>
>> On 11/06/2015 01:56 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5 November 2015 at 23:31, Daniel Gutson
>>
>>
>>>> The issue is, as I
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 5:46 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 6:34 AM, Zoran Jovanovic
> wrote:
>> Hello,
>> This is new patch version in which reported issue is fixed.
>> Also, patch is rebased to the revision 216452 and some minor code clean-up
>> is done.
>
> FYI. This cause
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Andres Tiraboschi
wrote:
> 2016-01-28 17:54 GMT-03:00 Joseph Myers :
>> Any patch adding a new option needs to add documentation for it to
>> invoke.texi (both substantive documentation, and inclusion in the summary
>> lists of options).
>>
>> --
>> Joseph S. Myer
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 5 November 2015 at 20:52, Daniel Gutson wrote:
>> Real use cases: statistics and logging. It's a (one time) callback
>> reporting that something went wrong,
>> but not intended to fix things e.g. by atte
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 3:20 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 4 November 2015 at 02:11, Daniel Gutson wrote:
>> Since this is a nothrow new, we thought that probably the system
>> might not be exceptions-friendly (such as certain embedded systems),
>> so we wanted to provid
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 5:25 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 11/03/2015 05:35 AM, Aurelio Remonda wrote:
>>
>> Currently, whenever operator new (std::nothrow) fails to allocate memory,
>> it'll
>> check if there is a new-handler function available. If there is, it'll
>> call
>> the handler and then tr
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015, Daniel Gutson wrote:
>
>> I presented the issue in the WG21 std-proposal mailing list and the general
>> consensus was that I should ask WG14 first. The problem is that this issue
>> is C++ o
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 7:30 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
Hello Joseph.
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Andres Tiraboschi wrote:
>
>> While we start a discussion with the C committee regarding the standarization
>> of this feature, we think that this is a useful nonstandard addition to be
>> early adopted.
>
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 09/21/2015 10:01 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>>
>> On 21 September 2015 at 15:46, Daniel Gutson
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> FWIW, we could make this plugin in 2 weeks (w already have stat
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 09/15/2015 01:20 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>>
>> On 15/09/15 15:26, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
Jason,
somme of our customers have 'interesting' C++ coding rules
Hi Ville,
On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 8:24 PM, Ville Voutilainen
wrote:
> The patch is a bit large since it does the baseline_symbols regeneration
> and other new-version api-dance.
> Hence attached gzipped.
>
> Tested on Linux x86-64.
>
> 2015-04-13 Ville Voutilainen
> Add support for std::un
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 03/19/14 08:06, Marcos Díaz wrote:
>>
>> Well, finally I have the assignment, could you please review this patch?
>
> Thanks.
>
> My first thought was that if we've marked the function with an explicit
> static protector attribute, then it ought
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> Applied, thanks. Sorry for the delay.
>
> It caused PR61066 on the branch.
>
> Richard.
>
>> Jason
It seems some tests didn't run when I tested the patch, sorry about that.
I'll try
Sorry, ping for maintainer.
We'd do need this for 4.8.3.
Thanks,
Daniel.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:15 AM, Daniel Gutson
wrote:
> Ping for maintainer please.
>
> Thanks,
>
>Daniel.
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Daniel Gutson
> wrote:
>> On Tu
Ping for maintainer please.
Thanks,
Daniel.
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Daniel Gutson
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> cc:ing Jason, who's the C++ maintainer.
>
>
> FWIW: I created http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Zoran Jovanovic
wrote:
> Hello,
> This is new patch version.
> Lowering is applied only for bit-fields copy sequences that are merged.
> Data structure representing bit-field copy sequences is renamed and reduced
> in size.
> Optimization turned on by default for
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> cc:ing Jason, who's the C++ maintainer.
FWIW: I created http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60850
>
> Daniel Gutson writes:
>> ping for maintainer.
>>
>> Could this be considere
Friendly reminder of maintainer review request.
Thanks,
Daniel.
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 6:50 PM, Daniel Gutson
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>please, if at ever possible, consider this patch for 4.8.3:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00026.html
>
>
Hi,
please, if at ever possible, consider this patch for 4.8.3:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00026.html
Thanks,
Daniel.
--
Daniel F. Gutson
Chief Engineering Officer, SPD
San Lorenzo 47, 3rd Floor, Office 5
Córdoba, Argentina
Phone: +54 351 4217888 / +54 351 421821
ping for maintainer.
Could this be considered for 4.8.3 please?
Thanks,
Daniel.
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Daniel Gutson
wrote:
>
> I just realized I posted the patch in the wrong list.
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Daniel Gutson
> Date
I just realized I posted the patch in the wrong list.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Daniel Gutson
Date: Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:43 AM
Subject: [PATCH] pedantic warning behavior when casting void* to
ptr-to-func, 4.8 and 4.9
To: gcc Mailing List
Hi,
I observed two different
25 matches
Mail list logo
