On 6/15/21 4:58 AM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 at 00:58, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
wrote:
On 6/2/21 3:46 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 03:40:49PM -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
+ if (!gimple_call_builtin_p (stmt, BUILT_IN_NORMAL))
+
Hi,
On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 at 00:58, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On 6/2/21 3:46 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 03:40:49PM -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> >> + if (!gimple_call_builtin_p (stmt, BUILT_IN_NORMAL))
> >> +{
> >> + /* See if th
On 6/2/21 3:46 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 03:40:49PM -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
+ if (!gimple_call_builtin_p (stmt, BUILT_IN_NORMAL))
+{
+ /* See if this is a call to placement new. */
+ if (!fn
+ || !DECL_IS_OPERATOR_NEW_P (fn)
+
On 6/13/21 5:45 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 6/2/2021 3:40 PM, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
The two forms of placement operator new defined in return their
pointer argument and may not be displaced by user-defined functions.
But because they are ordinary (not built-in) functions this propert
On 14 June 2021 07:56:38 CEST, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
>On 14 June 2021 01:45:36 CEST, Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>On 6/2/2021 3:40 PM, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
>>> The two forms of placement operator new defined in return
>their
>>> pointer argument and may not
On 14 June 2021 01:45:36 CEST, Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
>
>On 6/2/2021 3:40 PM, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> The two forms of placement operator new defined in return their
>> pointer argument and may not be displaced by user-defined functions.
>> But because they are ordinary
On 6/2/2021 3:40 PM, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
The two forms of placement operator new defined in return their
pointer argument and may not be displaced by user-defined functions.
But because they are ordinary (not built-in) functions this property
isn't reflected in their declarati
Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-June/571777.html
On 6/2/21 3:40 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The two forms of placement operator new defined in return their
pointer argument and may not be displaced by user-defined functions.
But because they are ordinary (not built-in) function
On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 03:40:49PM -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
> + if (!gimple_call_builtin_p (stmt, BUILT_IN_NORMAL))
> +{
> + /* See if this is a call to placement new. */
> + if (!fn
> + || !DECL_IS_OPERATOR_NEW_P (fn)
> + || DECL_IS_REPLACEABLE_OPERATO
The two forms of placement operator new defined in return their
pointer argument and may not be displaced by user-defined functions.
But because they are ordinary (not built-in) functions this property
isn't reflected in their declarations alone, and there's no user-
level attribute to annotate t
10 matches
Mail list logo