OK, thanks.
On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 03/11/2017 18:56, Jason Merrill wrote:
>>
>> Looking at the code again, it seems that the problem is the difference
>> between start_decl_1 and grokfield, in that the former has
>>
>>/* If an explicit initializer is
Hi,
On 03/11/2017 18:56, Jason Merrill wrote:
Looking at the code again, it seems that the problem is the difference
between start_decl_1 and grokfield, in that the former has
/* If an explicit initializer is present, or if this is a definition
of an aggregate, then we need a complete
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 6:17 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> On 24/10/2017 20:58, Jason Merrill wrote:
>>
>> This seems like an odd place to add the complete_type call. What
>> happens if we change the COMPLETE_TYPE_P (type) in
>> cp_apply_type_quals_to_decl to COMPLETE_TYPE_P (complete_
Hi again,
On 24/10/2017 20:58, Jason Merrill wrote:
This seems like an odd place to add the complete_type call. What
happens if we change the COMPLETE_TYPE_P (type) in
cp_apply_type_quals_to_decl to COMPLETE_TYPE_P (complete_type (type))?
Finally I'm back with some information.
Simply doing t
Hi Jason,
On 24/10/2017 20:58, Jason Merrill wrote:
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:28 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
this is a relatively old bug already analyzed by Martin last year. He also
proposed a patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-03/msg00593.html
After a short exchange Jas
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:28 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this is a relatively old bug already analyzed by Martin last year. He also
> proposed a patch:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-03/msg00593.html
>
> After a short exchange Jason proposed a different approach based on si
Hi,
this is a relatively old bug already analyzed by Martin last year. He
also proposed a patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-03/msg00593.html
After a short exchange Jason proposed a different approach based on
simply completing the involved vars:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/
