On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 12:21, Tom Tromey wrote:
>> "Diego" == Diego Novillo writes:
>
> Lawrence> This change is not source compatible with existing code using
> Lawrence> the callbacks (which may not be in the gcc svn). Perhaps a new
> Lawrence> callback is needed?
>
> Diego> Well, it only
> "Diego" == Diego Novillo writes:
Lawrence> This change is not source compatible with existing code using
Lawrence> the callbacks (which may not be in the gcc svn). Perhaps a new
Lawrence> callback is needed?
Diego> Well, it only changes the return value for the callback. Existing
Diego>
> "Diego" == Diego Novillo writes:
Diego> During pph processing, when we find an included file that we are going
Diego> to instantiate from an image, we don't want libcpp to stack and read
Diego> it.
Diego> I've implemented this by allowing the 'include' callback to return a
Diego> boolean v
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 20:41, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> This change is not source compatible with existing code using
> the callbacks (which may not be in the gcc svn). Perhaps a new
> callback is needed?
Well, it only changes the return value for the callback. Existing
users do not really need
This change is not source compatible with existing code using
the callbacks (which may not be in the gcc svn). Perhaps a new
callback is needed?
On 4/12/11, Diego Novillo wrote:
>
> During pph processing, when we find an included file that we are going
> to instantiate from an image, we don't wa
During pph processing, when we find an included file that we are going
to instantiate from an image, we don't want libcpp to stack and read
it.
I've implemented this by allowing the 'include' callback to return a
boolean value. If it returns true, then we call _cpp_stack_include.
Otherwise, the
