Re: [PATCH 1/3] libstdc++: Add time_get::get support.

Hi, On 04/15/2014 11:19 PM, Rüdiger Sonderfeld wrote: This patch adds support for std::time_get::get and std::time_get::do_get [locale.time.get]. Currently do_get is not virtual because this caused segfault errors for me. Those should be isolated and a compiler bug report opened including a mi

Re: [PATCH] offline gcda profile processing tool

Rong, David, Dehao, Teresa I would like to have some rought idea of what we could merge this stage1. There is certainly a lot of interesting stuff on the google branch including AutoFDO, LIPO, the multivalue profile counters that may be used by the new devirtualization bits and more. I also thin

Re: [PATCH] pedantic warning behavior when casting void* to ptr-to-func, 4.8 and 4.9

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > cc:ing Jason, who's the C++ maintainer. FWIW: I created http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60850 > > Daniel Gutson writes: >> ping for maintainer. >> >> Could this be considered for 4.8.3 please? >> >> Thanks, >> >>Daniel

[PING] [PATCH] PR debug/57519 - Emit DW_TAG_imported_declaration under the right class for 'using' statements in a class

This is a ping about a patch I had posted sometime back. Previous post: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-03/msg01332.html It was reviewed by Cary, but he said that a C++ front end maintainer needs to approve it: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00175.html The patch is attached.

Re: [PATCH v2] libstdc++: Add hexfloat/defaultfloat io manipulators.

>> Also the old standard seems to require that ios_base::fixed | >> ios_base::scientific (or any other combination) falls through to the >> uppercase test; I was trying to use abi_tag for a solution as not only >> would two versions of _S_format_float be necessary, but also num_get >> due to the pr

Re: [PATCH 1/3] libstdc++: Add time_get::get support.

On Tue, 15 Apr 2014, Paolo Carlini wrote: Anyway, the real issue is indeed that implementing those bits requires a new virtual function, and that would break the ABI. What is the status of the ABI half-break plan (abi_tag and such), necessary to get the remaining pieces of C++11? -- Marc Gl

<    1   2