On 11/04/2015 07:35 AM, Alan Lawrence wrote:
s/explicitely/explicitly/ And remove the '*' from the 2nd and 3rd lines
of the comment.
It looks like get_ctor_element_at_index has numerous formatting
problems. In particular you didn't indent the braces across the board
properly. Also check for t
> s/explicitely/explicitly/ And remove the '*' from the 2nd and 3rd lines
> of the comment.
>
> It looks like get_ctor_element_at_index has numerous formatting
> problems. In particular you didn't indent the braces across the board
> properly. Also check for tabs vs spaces issues please.
Yes, y
On 10/29/2015 01:18 PM, Alan Lawrence wrote:
This is in response to https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2015-10/msg00097.html, where
Richi points out that CONSTRUCTOR elements are not necessarily ordered.
I wasn't sure of a good naming convention for the new get_ctor_element_at_index,
other suggestions w
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 8:18 PM, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> This is in response to https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2015-10/msg00097.html, where
> Richi points out that CONSTRUCTOR elements are not necessarily ordered.
>
> I wasn't sure of a good naming convention for the new
> get_ctor_element_at_index,
>
