> Ok.
Committed as rev. 217342.
Thanks for the review!
FX
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 3:58 PM, FX wrote:
>> My knowledge of C++ is limited, but I think this additional patch to
>> wide-int.h is the proper fix to the issue reported by Jack, no?
>> I’m bootstrapping it right now, it already passed stage 2.
>
> Boostrapped succeeded on x86_64-apple-darwin14.
>
On Nov 10, 2014, at 10:10 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
> I’’ve asked Jack for the header in question that makes max/min ambiguous.
Ok, found it, page 903 of c++14. Also in the 97 version. We need the wi::
qualifications for wide-int with min and max. That part of the patch is Ok.
On Nov 10, 2014, at 6:58 AM, FX wrote:
>> My knowledge of C++ is limited, but I think this additional patch to
>> wide-int.h is the proper fix to the issue reported by Jack, no?
>> I’m bootstrapping it right now, it already passed stage 2.
>
> Boostrapped succeeded on x86_64-apple-darwin14.
> OK
Also confirmed that FX's proposed string.diff patch solves both
PR63699 and PR63750 on x86_64-apple-darwin13 against Xcode 6.1.
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:58 AM, FX wrote:
>> My knowledge of C++ is limited, but I think this additional patch to
>> wide-int.h is the proper fix to the issue reported
> My knowledge of C++ is limited, but I think this additional patch to
> wide-int.h is the proper fix to the issue reported by Jack, no?
> I’m bootstrapping it right now, it already passed stage 2.
Boostrapped succeeded on x86_64-apple-darwin14.
OK to commit to trunk?
string.diff
Description:
> Indeed is a system header and should not have been included from
> tree-chkp.c but system.h
Indeed.
My knowledge of C++ is limited, but I think this additional patch to wide-int.h
is the proper fix to the issue reported by Jack, no?
I’m bootstrapping it right now, it already passed stage 2.
2014-11-10 14:53 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>> Iain,
>> It doesn't look like it will be that simple. If I replace the
>> proposed patches with a change like...
>>
>> Index: gcc/system.h
>> ==
On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Iain,
> It doesn't look like it will be that simple. If I replace the
> proposed patches with a change like...
>
> Index: gcc/system.h
> ===
> --- gcc/system.h(revisio
Iain,
It doesn't look like it will be that simple. If I replace the
proposed patches with a change like...
Index: gcc/system.h
===
--- gcc/system.h(revision 217238)
+++ gcc/system.h(working copy)
@@ -194,6 +194,13
Hi Jack,
comments below apply also to the patch for PR63699
On 7 Nov 2014, at 17:13, Jack Howarth wrote:
> The attached revised patch eliminates the compilation error...
>
> error: use of undeclared
> identifier 'do_not_use_toupper_with_safe_ctype'
>
> on x86_64-apple-darwin14 when boots
The attached revised patch eliminates the compilation error...
error: use of undeclared
identifier 'do_not_use_toupper_with_safe_ctype'
on x86_64-apple-darwin14 when bootstrapping using the Clang 6.0
compiler by moving the include for earlier.
Okay for gcc trunk?
12 matches
Mail list logo