On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2017, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 12 Sep 2017, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>
> >> The following avoids adding DW_AT_alignment twice by not doing it
> >> for incomplete types.
> >>
> >> Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testi
On Sep 21, 2017, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2017, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> The following avoids adding DW_AT_alignment twice by not doing it
>> for incomplete types.
>>
>> Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing in progress.
>>
>> Alex, is that ok or do we want DW_AT_a
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> The following avoids adding DW_AT_alignment twice by not doing it
> for incomplete types.
>
> Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing in progress.
>
> Alex, is that ok or do we want DW_AT_alignment for incomplete types as
> well?
Alex,
The following avoids adding DW_AT_alignment twice by not doing it
for incomplete types.
Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing in progress.
Alex, is that ok or do we want DW_AT_alignment for incomplete types as
well?
Thanks,
Richard.
2017-09-12 Richard Biener
PR middle-