On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 04:21:43PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 03:52:39PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> > E.g. the constexpr function uses
> >> > same_type_ignoring_top_level_qualifiers_p
> >> > instead of == ty
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 6:55 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 04:21:43PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 03:52:39PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> >> > E.g. the constexpr function uses
>> >> > same_
On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 12:55:10PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 04:21:43PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 03:52:39PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > >> > E.g. the constexpr function uses
>
On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 10:15:45AM +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Jakub Jelinek writes:
> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 03:23:25PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 08:36:31PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >> >> > >
Jakub Jelinek writes:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 03:23:25PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 08:36:31PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> >> > > That was my first patch, but it was rejected:
>> >> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/
On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 03:52:39PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > E.g. the constexpr function uses same_type_ignoring_top_level_qualifiers_p
> > instead of == type comparisons, the COMPONENT_REF stuff, ...
>
> > For poly_* stuff, I think Richard S. wants to introduce it into the FEs at
> > some p
On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 08:36:31PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > That was my first patch, but it was rejected:
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-01/msg00271.html
> >
> > Then should we update fold_indirect_ref_1 to use the new code? Is
> > there a reason for them to stay out of sy
On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 03:52:39PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> > E.g. the constexpr function uses same_type_ignoring_top_level_qualifiers_p
>> > instead of == type comparisons, the COMPONENT_REF stuff, ...
>>
>> > For poly_* stuff, I think
On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 03:23:25PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 08:36:31PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> >> > > That was my first patch, but it was rejected:
On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 03:23:25PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 08:36:31PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >> > > That was my first patch, but it was rejected:
> >> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-01/msg002
On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 08:36:31PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> > > That was my first patch, but it was rejected:
>> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-01/msg00271.html
>> >
>> > Then should we update fold_indirect_ref_1 to use the
On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 01:23:49PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 12:26:04PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 02:11:19PM +0100, Ric
On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 12:26:04PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 02:11:19PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> >> POINTER_PLUS_EXPR offets are to be interpre
On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 12:26:04PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 02:11:19PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> >> POINTER_PLUS_EXPR offets are to be interpreted as signed (ptrdiff_t)
> >> >> so using uhwi and then per
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 02:11:19PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> POINTER_PLUS_EXPR offets are to be interpreted as signed (ptrdiff_t)
>> >> so using uhwi and then performing an unsigned division is wrong code.
>> >> See mem_ref_offset ho
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 02:11:19PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> POINTER_PLUS_EXPR offets are to be interpreted as signed (ptrdiff_t)
> >> so using uhwi and then performing an unsigned division is wrong code.
> >> See mem_ref_offset how to deal with this (ugh - poly-ints...). Basically
> >> yo
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 3:45 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 09:52:36AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 5:31 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> > Here we are crashing because cxx_fold_indirect_ref got a POINTER_PLUS_EXPR
>> > with offset > signed HOST_WIDE_INT a
On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 09:52:36AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 5:31 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Here we are crashing because cxx_fold_indirect_ref got a POINTER_PLUS_EXPR
> > with offset > signed HOST_WIDE_INT and we tried to convert it to sHWI.
> >
> > The matching code
On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 5:31 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> Here we are crashing because cxx_fold_indirect_ref got a POINTER_PLUS_EXPR
> with offset > signed HOST_WIDE_INT and we tried to convert it to sHWI.
>
> The matching code in fold_indirect_ref_1 uses uHWIs so I've followed suit.
> But that code
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 11:45:55AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 01/03/2018 11:31 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Here we are crashing because cxx_fold_indirect_ref got a POINTER_PLUS_EXPR
> > with offset > signed HOST_WIDE_INT and we tried to convert it to sHWI.
> >
> > The matching code in fold
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 05:40:32PM +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Marek Polacek writes:
> > Here we are crashing because cxx_fold_indirect_ref got a POINTER_PLUS_EXPR
> > with offset > signed HOST_WIDE_INT and we tried to convert it to sHWI.
> >
> > The matching code in fold_indirect_ref_1 uses
Marek Polacek writes:
> Here we are crashing because cxx_fold_indirect_ref got a POINTER_PLUS_EXPR
> with offset > signed HOST_WIDE_INT and we tried to convert it to sHWI.
>
> The matching code in fold_indirect_ref_1 uses uHWIs so I've followed suit.
> But that code now also uses poly_uint64 and I
On 01/03/2018 11:31 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
Here we are crashing because cxx_fold_indirect_ref got a POINTER_PLUS_EXPR
with offset > signed HOST_WIDE_INT and we tried to convert it to sHWI.
The matching code in fold_indirect_ref_1 uses uHWIs so I've followed suit.
But that code now also uses po
Here we are crashing because cxx_fold_indirect_ref got a POINTER_PLUS_EXPR
with offset > signed HOST_WIDE_INT and we tried to convert it to sHWI.
The matching code in fold_indirect_ref_1 uses uHWIs so I've followed suit.
But that code now also uses poly_uint64 and I'm not sure if any of the
conste
24 matches
Mail list logo