Re: Ping^3 Re: Defining C99 predefined macros for whole translation unit

2012-10-23 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 02:35:53PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > Ping^3. This patch > (non-C parts) is > still pending review. Looks ok to me. Jakub

Ping^3 Re: Defining C99 predefined macros for whole translation unit

2012-10-23 Thread Joseph S. Myers
Ping^3. This patch (non-C parts) is still pending review. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com

Ping^2 Re: Defining C99 predefined macros for whole translation unit

2012-10-15 Thread Joseph S. Myers
Ping^2. This patch (non-C parts) is still pending review. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com

Ping Re: Defining C99 predefined macros for whole translation unit

2012-10-08 Thread Joseph S. Myers
Ping. This patch (non-C parts) is pending review. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com

Re: Defining C99 predefined macros for whole translation unit

2012-09-28 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Fri, 24 Apr 2009, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > This patch to gcc is OK if the patch to glibc is OK. Now that the corresponding glibc patch is in glibc 2.16, I've updated the GCC patch (original submission ) for current sources and retested