On 05/07/2013 03:46 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Here in a form of patch, seems to work and the patch is 12KB shorter
that way.
This patch is OK.
Jason
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 08:22:48AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 03:25:43PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > On 05/06/2013 02:25 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > >I did it that way because if I understand the code well, often
> > >grokdeclarator/start_decl/start_function/grokmeth
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 03:25:43PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 05/06/2013 02:25 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >I did it that way because if I understand the code well, often
> >grokdeclarator/start_decl/start_function/grokmethod/grokfield
> >is called with a chain of declarators, not just a singl
On 05/06/2013 02:25 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
I did it that way because if I understand the code well, often
grokdeclarator/start_decl/start_function/grokmethod/grokfield
is called with a chain of declarators, not just a single one.
True, perhaps adding it to declspecs->attributes would be simpl
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 12:23:07PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 05/06/2013 11:04 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >isn't it too invasive to the C++ FE?
>
> It is pretty invasive. Why not put the information in
> cp_declarator, as you suggested in your earlier email? You could
> even put it in the
On 05/06/2013 11:04 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
isn't it too invasive to the C++ FE?
It is pretty invasive. Why not put the information in cp_declarator, as
you suggested in your earlier email? You could even put it in the
attributes field.
Jason
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 10:35:21AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 04/29/2013 02:32 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >Should I copy the parser->omp_declare_simd_clauses vector pointer
> >say into cp_declarator structure so that grokfndecl could grab it from
> >there?
>
> That sounds good.
>
> >Also, f
