On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 03:24:52PM +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 15/05/19 14:29, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> > On 5/14/19 5:20 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> > > Hi again,
> > >
> > > ... so the below passes testing on x86_64-linux. In fact, I think we
> > > are on a pretty safe ground, now at
Hi,
On 15/05/19 14:29, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 5/14/19 5:20 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi again,
... so the below passes testing on x86_64-linux. In fact, I think we
are on a pretty safe ground, now at the beginning of Stage 1: if,
over the next months we get a testcase which causes one of th
On 5/14/19 5:20 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi again,
... so the below passes testing on x86_64-linux. In fact, I think we are
on a pretty safe ground, now at the beginning of Stage 1: if, over the
next months we get a testcase which causes one of the 4 tightened
gcc_assert to trip we'll comfort
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 11:20:16PM +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> On 14/05/19 21:21, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 14/05/19 21:05, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 03:01:35PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> > > > On 5/14/19 11:28 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>
Hi again,
On 14/05/19 21:21, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
On 14/05/19 21:05, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 03:01:35PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 5/14/19 11:28 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
another straightforward one sitting in my tree... Sanity checked on
x86_64-linux.
I suspec
Hi,
On 14/05/19 21:05, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 03:01:35PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 5/14/19 11:28 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
another straightforward one sitting in my tree... Sanity checked on
x86_64-linux.
I suspect many/all of the TREE_CODE (x) == TEMPLATE_DECL
(or
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 03:01:35PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 5/14/19 11:28 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>
> > another straightforward one sitting in my tree... Sanity checked on
> > x86_64-linux.
>
> I suspect many/all of the TREE_CODE (x) == TEMPLATE_DECL
> (or DECL_FUNCTION_TEMPLATE_P) coul
On 5/14/19 11:28 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
another straightforward one sitting in my tree... Sanity checked on
x86_64-linux.
I suspect many/all of the TREE_CODE (x) == TEMPLATE_DECL
(or DECL_FUNCTION_TEMPLATE_P) could also be elided -- we don't have
naked function templates at that point, they
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 05:28:09PM +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Hi,
>
> another straightforward one sitting in my tree... Sanity checked on
> x86_64-linux.
>
> Thanks, Paolo.
>
> ///
>
> 2019-05-14 Paolo Carlini
>
> * call.c (perform_overload_resolution, build_new_me
Hi,
another straightforward one sitting in my tree... Sanity checked on
x86_64-linux.
Thanks, Paolo.
///
2019-05-14 Paolo Carlini
* call.c (perform_overload_resolution, build_new_method_call_1):
Use OVL_P.
* decl.c (grokfndecl): Likewise.
*
10 matches
Mail list logo