On 05/26/2011 08:50 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
Sigh, I am an idiot. It appears that we always have something pushed by
the time add_stmt is called. (I ran into problems implementing the
above approach, as I wound up with [ NULL_TREE, ] and that gave
pop_stmt heartburn.) I can't recall why I adde
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 09:39:30AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 05/25/2011 10:21 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> >An alternative solution would be to initialize cur_stmt_list somewhere with
> >an
> >actual 1-element VEC;
>
> Or just push NULL onto the stack and let append_to_statement_list_1
> allo
On 05/26/2011 09:46 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
On 05/26/2011 09:39 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 05/25/2011 10:21 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
An alternative solution would be to initialize cur_stmt_list somewhere with an
actual 1-element VEC;
Or just push NULL onto the stack and let append_to_statemen
On 05/26/2011 09:39 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 05/25/2011 10:21 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
>> An alternative solution would be to initialize cur_stmt_list somewhere with
>> an
>> actual 1-element VEC;
>
> Or just push NULL onto the stack and let append_to_statement_list_1 allocate
> the VEC?
Did
On 05/25/2011 10:21 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
An alternative solution would be to initialize cur_stmt_list somewhere with an
actual 1-element VEC;
Or just push NULL onto the stack and let append_to_statement_list_1
allocate the VEC?
the check in add_stmt would then be unnecessary, as we'd
alw
On 05/25/2011 10:18 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 05/25/2011 10:00 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
>> Jason commented on the TS_STATEMENT_LIST patch, but
>> the discussion didn't come to a resolution.
>
> Right, from your last mail I thought that you were investigating my question
> about add_stmt and you
On 05/25/2011 02:06 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>> "Nathan" == Nathan Froyd writes:
>
> Nathan> (C, Java, middle-end)
> Nathan> [PATCH 18/18] make TS_BLOCK a substructure of TS_BASE
> Nathan> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00564.html
>
> The Java parts are ok.
>
> I think thes
> "Nathan" == Nathan Froyd writes:
Nathan> (C, Java, middle-end)
Nathan> [PATCH 18/18] make TS_BLOCK a substructure of TS_BASE
Nathan> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00564.html
The Java parts are ok.
I think these sorts of changes should be obvious once approved from a
m
On Wed, 25 May 2011, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> These patches:
>
> (C, C++, middle-end)
> [PATCH 14/18] move TS_STATEMENT_LIST to be a substructure of TS_TYPED
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00560.html
>
> (C, Java, middle-end)
> [PATCH 18/18] make TS_BLOCK a substructure of
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> These patches:
>
> (C, C++, middle-end)
> [PATCH 14/18] move TS_STATEMENT_LIST to be a substructure of TS_TYPED
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00560.html
>
> (C, Java, middle-end)
> [PATCH 18/18] make TS_BLOCK a substructu
On 05/25/2011 10:00 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
Jason commented on the TS_STATEMENT_LIST patch, but
the discussion didn't come to a resolution.
Right, from your last mail I thought that you were investigating my
question about add_stmt and your suggestion about dropping the NULL
checking in appen
These patches:
(C, C++, middle-end)
[PATCH 14/18] move TS_STATEMENT_LIST to be a substructure of TS_TYPED
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00560.html
(C, Java, middle-end)
[PATCH 18/18] make TS_BLOCK a substructure of TS_BASE
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00
12 matches
Mail list logo
