Jakub Jelinek writes:
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 01:26:34PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> On Jul 31 2020, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>
>> >* gcc.dg/pr96377-1.c: New test.
>> >* gcc.dg/pr96377-2.c: Likewise.
>>
>> Excess errors:
>> /daten/gcc/gcc-20200801/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr96377-2.c:
On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 01:26:34PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Jul 31 2020, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
> > * gcc.dg/pr96377-1.c: New test.
> > * gcc.dg/pr96377-2.c: Likewise.
>
> Excess errors:
> /daten/gcc/gcc-20200801/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr96377-2.c:11:1: warning: GCC
> vector p
On Jul 31 2020, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> * gcc.dg/pr96377-1.c: New test.
> * gcc.dg/pr96377-2.c: Likewise.
Excess errors:
/daten/gcc/gcc-20200801/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr96377-2.c:11:1: warning: GCC
vector passed by reference: non-standard ABI extension with no compatibility
guaran
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, aarch64_be-elf and x86_64-linux-gnu.
> OK to instal?
OK.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 11:41:59AM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> @@ -10135,11 +10176,7 @@ process_init_element (location_t loc, struct c_expr
> value, bool implicit,
> /* Otherwise, if we have come to a subaggregate,
>and we don't have an element of its type, push into it.
One of the problems in this PR was that if we had:
vector_type1 array[] = { vector_value1 };
process_init_element would only treat vector_value1 as initialising
a vector_type1 if they had the same TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT. This has
several problems:
(1) It gives confusing error messages if the vecto
