Re: [PATCH] C++0x, teach the parser to parse virt-specifier-seq for member functions

2011-04-28 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Ville Voutilainen wrote: > On 28 April 2011 01:40, Gabriel Dos Reis > wrote: >> My configuration command line is: >>  /home/gdr/src/gcc.svn/configure --enable-languages=c,c++ >> --enable-build-with-cxx --disable-multilib --disable-nls >> and the builds is progres

Re: [PATCH] C++0x, teach the parser to parse virt-specifier-seq for member functions

2011-04-28 Thread Ville Voutilainen
On 28 April 2011 01:40, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > My configuration command line is: >  /home/gdr/src/gcc.svn/configure --enable-languages=c,c++ > --enable-build-with-cxx --disable-multilib --disable-nls > and the builds is progressing quite very well with "g++". > There is no need for manual setti

Re: [PATCH] C++0x, teach the parser to parse virt-specifier-seq for member functions

2011-04-27 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Ville Voutilainen wrote: > On 28 April 2011 00:56, Gabriel Dos Reis > wrote: >>> Seems to fall over itself in a bunch of places. C++ bootstrap smells >>> like a red herring >>> to me at this point. >> Hmm, do you mean GCC fails to bootstrap with C++ a compiler be

Re: [PATCH] C++0x, teach the parser to parse virt-specifier-seq for member functions

2011-04-27 Thread Ville Voutilainen
On 28 April 2011 00:56, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: >> Seems to fall over itself in a bunch of places. C++ bootstrap smells >> like a red herring >> to me at this point. > Hmm, do you mean GCC fails to bootstrap with C++ a compiler before your mods? I did make distclean, followed by CC=g++ GCC=g++ CF

Re: [PATCH] C++0x, teach the parser to parse virt-specifier-seq for member functions

2011-04-27 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Ville Voutilainen wrote: > On 27 April 2011 10:14, Ville Voutilainen wrote: >> The -fpermissive because there are conversions from literals to char*, >> and c++ nowadays doesn't like that. I'm not at the build machine right >> now, so I'll check >> later how it fa

Re: [PATCH] C++0x, teach the parser to parse virt-specifier-seq for member functions

2011-04-25 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 12:23 PM, Ville Voutilainen wrote: > On 25 April 2011 20:06, Jason Merrill wrote: could we use enums instead? >>> No reason not to, except that we don't for the cp_cv_quals above. :) I >>> followed >>> the same approach. >> Sure, let's use enums for the named values.

Re: [PATCH] C++0x, teach the parser to parse virt-specifier-seq for member functions

2011-04-25 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Ville Voutilainen wrote: > On 25 April 2011 18:32, Gabriel Dos Reis > wrote: >>>  typedef int cp_cv_quals; >>> +/* A type-qualifier, or bitmask therefore, using the VIRT_SPEC >>> +   constants.  */ >>> +typedef int cp_virt_specifiers; >> could we use enums inste

Re: [PATCH] C++0x, teach the parser to parse virt-specifier-seq for member functions

2011-04-25 Thread Jason Merrill
On 04/25/2011 01:23 PM, Ville Voutilainen wrote: Would you like me to convert the cp_cv_quals values to enums in the same go? Sure. Where should I put the flags for semantic analysis? DECL_LANG_FLAG? Or TREE_LANG_FLAG? Use a two-bit bit-field in lang_decl_fn. To avoid a size increase for

Re: [PATCH] C++0x, teach the parser to parse virt-specifier-seq for member functions

2011-04-25 Thread Ville Voutilainen
On 25 April 2011 20:06, Jason Merrill wrote: >>> could we use enums instead? >> No reason not to, except that we don't for the cp_cv_quals above. :) I >> followed >> the same approach. > Sure, let's use enums for the named values.  But I think we still want to > use the int typedef for variables a

Re: [PATCH] C++0x, teach the parser to parse virt-specifier-seq for member functions

2011-04-25 Thread Jason Merrill
On 04/25/2011 11:34 AM, Ville Voutilainen wrote: On 25 April 2011 18:32, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: typedef int cp_cv_quals; +/* A type-qualifier, or bitmask therefore, using the VIRT_SPEC + constants. */ +typedef int cp_virt_specifiers; could we use enums instead? No reason not to, except

Re: [PATCH] C++0x, teach the parser to parse virt-specifier-seq for member functions

2011-04-25 Thread Jason Merrill
On 04/25/2011 07:03 AM, Ville Voutilainen wrote: This is just for the parser, the semantic analysis of virt-specifiers will be done later. Also, these changes don't yet support a final specifier on class. I mentioned the minor formatting issues in personal mail; also, please include ChangeLog

Re: [PATCH] C++0x, teach the parser to parse virt-specifier-seq for member functions

2011-04-25 Thread Ville Voutilainen
On 25 April 2011 18:32, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: >>  typedef int cp_cv_quals; >> +/* A type-qualifier, or bitmask therefore, using the VIRT_SPEC >> +   constants.  */ >> +typedef int cp_virt_specifiers; > could we use enums instead? No reason not to, except that we don't for the cp_cv_quals above.

Re: [PATCH] C++0x, teach the parser to parse virt-specifier-seq for member functions

2011-04-25 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 6:03 AM, Ville Voutilainen wrote: > > This is just for the parser, the semantic analysis of virt-specifiers > will be done later. Also, these changes don't yet support a final > specifier on class. > > diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h b/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h > index e538825..08d939

[PATCH] C++0x, teach the parser to parse virt-specifier-seq for member functions

2011-04-25 Thread Ville Voutilainen
This is just for the parser, the semantic analysis of virt-specifiers will be done later. Also, these changes don't yet support a final specifier on class. diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h b/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h index e538825..08d939f 100644 --- a/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h +++ b/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h @@ -4420,6 +4420