On Wed, 2018-08-01 at 17:39 -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > Please can you mail me when you commit, so I can rebase and retest
> > my
> > patch accordingly.
> >
> > Thanks!
>
> I've committed the patch in r263239.
Thanks!
Dave
Please can you mail me when you commit, so I can rebase and retest my
patch accordingly.
Thanks!
I've committed the patch in r263239.
Thanks
Martin
On Wed, 2018-08-01 at 13:53 -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 08/01/2018 08:33 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Tue, 2018-07-31 at 13:06 -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > > The GCC internal %G directive takes a gcall* argument and prints
> > > the call's inlining stack in diagnostics. The argument type
On 08/01/2018 08:33 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
On Tue, 2018-07-31 at 13:06 -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
The GCC internal %G directive takes a gcall* argument and prints
the call's inlining stack in diagnostics. The argument type makes
it unsuitable for gimple expressions such as those diagnosed by
On Tue, 2018-07-31 at 13:06 -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> The GCC internal %G directive takes a gcall* argument and prints
> the call's inlining stack in diagnostics. The argument type makes
> it unsuitable for gimple expressions such as those diagnosed by
> -Warray-bounds.
>
> As the first step i
The GCC internal %G directive takes a gcall* argument and prints
the call's inlining stack in diagnostics. The argument type makes
it unsuitable for gimple expressions such as those diagnosed by
-Warray-bounds.
As the first step in adding inlining context to -Warray-bounds
warnings the attached
