Attempting to bootstrap gcc with -Wmisleading-indentation enabled I ran
into a few failures where the indentation, although bad, was arguably
not misleading.
In regrename.c:scan_rtx_address:
1308 case PRE_MODIFY:
1309/* If the target doesn't claim to handle autoinc, this must be
tree-nested.c has this code:
2333 for (c = gimple_omp_taskreg_clauses (stmt);
2334 c;
2335 c = OMP_CLAUSE_CHAIN (c))
2336if ((OMP_CLAUSE_CODE (c) == OMP_CLAUSE_FIRSTPRIVATE
2337 || OMP_CLAUSE_CODE (c) ==
-Wall
Bootstrapped®rtested the combination of patches with
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu; config-list.mk build using
gcc6 with -Wmisleading-indentation enabled is in-progress.
OK for trunk?
David Malcolm (4):
-Wmisleading-indentation: don't warn in presence of entirely blank
lines
Fix misleading i
tree-ssa-loop-unswitch.c has this bad indentation at line 452:
449if (dump_file && (dump_flags & TDF_DETAILS))
450 fprintf (dump_file, ";; Not unswitching, loop is not expected"
451 " to iterate\n");
452 return false;
which leads to this war
Our documentation describes -Wall as enabling "all the warnings about
constructions that some users consider questionable, and that are easy to avoid
(or modify to prevent the warning), even in conjunction with macros."
I believe that -Wmisleading-indentation meets these criteria, and is
likely to
On Thu, 2015-10-29 at 13:35 -0400, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 12:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > Attempting to bootstrap gcc with -Wmisleading-indentation enabled I ran
> > into a few failures where the indentation, although bad, was arguably
> > not m
On Thu, 2015-09-17 at 13:31 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 09/16/2015 02:34 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > Btw, this looks quite expensive - I'm sure we want to limit the effort
> > here a bit.
> A limiter is reasonable, though as it's been pointed out this only fires
> during error processing, so
This patch adds an implementation of Levenshtein distance to gcc,
along with unit testing of the algorithm.
The unit testing is implemented via a plugin within gcc.dg/plugin.
(I'd prefer to do this via the unit testing patches I've been
proposing in a separate patch kit, but to avoid depending on
This is similar to the field-name part of the v2 patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-09/msg01090.html
with the following changes:
- don't call unit tests from lookup_field_fuzzy
(instead, see patch 1 in the kit)
- use a cutoff: if more than half of the letters
were misspelle
This is a rebased version of this patch from back in April:
v2: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg00944.html
which in turn is a rewrite of this one:
v1: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-03/msg01087.html
The idea is to more gracefully handle merger conflict markers
in the sou
On Thu, 2015-10-29 at 22:49 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 10/28/2015 12:09 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> > * diagnostic-show-locus.c (struct point_state): New struct.
> > (class colorizer): New class.
> > (class layout_point): New class.
> &
On Sun, 2015-11-01 at 17:06 -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 6:38 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> >> On 10/29/2015 10:49 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Our documentation
On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 11:21 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Sun, 2015-11-01 at 17:06 -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 6:38 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> > >> On 10/2
On Fri, 2015-10-30 at 00:15 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 10/23/2015 02:41 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > As in the previous version of this patch
> > "Implement tree expression tracking in C FE (v2)"
> > the patch now captures ranges for all C expressions during pa
On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 13:39 -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Nov 2015, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2015-11-01 at 17:06 -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
> >> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Richard Biener
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015
On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 14:14 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-10-30 at 00:15 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> > On 10/23/2015 02:41 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > > As in the previous version of this patch
> > > "Implement tree expression tracking in C FE (v2)"
This patch adds hints to the option-not-found error in the driver,
using the Levenshtein distance implementation posted here:
"[PATCH 0/2] Levenshtein-based suggestions (v3)"
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03379.html
It splits out the identifier-based implementation into a new
spe
On Thu, 2015-10-29 at 22:49 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 10/28/2015 12:09 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> > * diagnostic-show-locus.c (struct point_state): New struct.
> > (class colorizer): New class.
> > (class layout_point): New class.
> &
Caveat: this patch is a work-in-progress, but I thought it was worth
posting to check that the concept is OK.
This patch builds on top of the patch kit:
"[PATCH 00/10] Overhaul of diagnostics (v5)"
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg02536.html
of which patches 1-4 are now in trunk.
N
I've been experimenting with using Sphinx [1] for GCC's documentation.
You can see an HTML sample of GCC docs built with Sphinx here:
https://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/gcc/2015-08-31/rst-experiment/gcc.html
(it's a work-in-progress; i.e. there are bugs).
Compare with:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlined
On Mon, 2015-11-09 at 11:47 -0500, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote:
> From: Trevor Saunders
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> 2015-11-09 Trevor Saunders
>
> * defaults.h (EH_RETURN_HANDLER_RTX): New default definition.
> * df-scan.c (df_get_exit_block_use_set): Adjust.
> * except.c (e
On Mon, 2015-11-09 at 16:54 +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On 08/11/15 13:55, David Malcolm wrote:
> > I've been experimenting with using Sphinx [1] for GCC's documentation.
> >
> > You can see an HTML sample of GCC docs built with Sphinx here:
On Sun, 2015-11-08 at 16:16 +0100, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> We've switched the Ada doc to sphinx indeed, so can only be
> in favor of this change for the rest of GCC.
>
> We do have also a texi2rst script which handles 90% of the work, the
> rest requiring manual adaptations. I can send the script
This is the most trivial example of a real fix-it example I could think
of: if the user writes
ptr.field
rather than ptr->field.
gcc/c/ChangeLog:
* c-typeck.c (build_component_ref): Special-case POINTER_TYPE when
generating a "not a structure of union" error message, and
This patch adds the ability to add "fix-it hints" to a rich_location,
which will be displayed when the corresponding diagnostic is printed.
It does not actually add any fix-it hints (that comes in the second
patch), but it adds test coverage of the machinery and printing,
by using the existing dia
This is a followup to:
[PATCH 10/10] Compress short ranges into source_location
which adds some worked examples of what a source_location/location_t
can encode.
Successfully bootstrapped®rtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
(although it only touches a comment).
OK for trunk?
libcpp/ChangeLog:
On Tue, 2015-11-10 at 17:26 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/10/2015 05:35 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > + /* Nasty workaround to convince the linker to add
> > + rich_location::add_fixit_insert
> > + rich_location::add_fixit_remove
> > + rich_
On Mon, 2015-11-09 at 16:37 -0700, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> On 11/08/2015 06:55 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > I've been experimenting with using Sphinx [1] for GCC's documentation.
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > The primary advantages of .rst/sphinx over .texi/
On Thu, 2015-11-12 at 15:06 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Tom de Vries
> > wrote:
> >> On 12/11/15 13:26, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Tom de Vries
> >>> wrote:
On Thu, 2015-11-12 at 15:43 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> > On 11/11/15 12:03, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Tom de Vries wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 09/11/15 16:35, Tom de Vries wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> this patc
On Tue, 2015-11-10 at 17:55 +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Nov 2015, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> > This is the most trivial example of a real fix-it example I could think
> > of: if the user writes
> > ptr.field
> > rather than ptr->field.
> >
&g
On Sun, 2015-11-01 at 23:44 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 10/30/2015 06:47 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> > The typename suggestion seems to be at least somewhat controversial,
> > whereas (I hope) the misspelled field names suggestion is more
> > acceptable.
> >
>
On Fri, 2015-11-13 at 07:57 +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> Probably coming too late, sorry.
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 09:08:36PM -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> > index 4335a87..eb4e1fc 100644
> > --- a/gcc/c/c-typeck.c
> > +++ b/gcc/c/c-typeck.c
> > @@ -47,6 +47,7 @
On Fri, 2015-11-13 at 09:12 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
[...snip...]
> > diff --git a/gcc/passes.c b/gcc/passes.c
> > index dd8d00a..e634c5c 100644
> > --- a/gcc/passes.c
> > +++ b/gcc/passes.c
> > @@ -81,6 +81,13 @@ opt_pass::clone ()
> >internal_erro
On Fri, 2015-11-13 at 14:57 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 13/11/15 11:35, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 4:33 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2015-11-12 at 15:06 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Richard
On Wed, 2015-10-14 at 11:00 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 5:32 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 10:15 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 2:25 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 15:
On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 14:14 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-10-30 at 00:15 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> > On 10/23/2015 02:41 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > > As in the previous version of this patch
> > > "Implement tree expression tracking in C FE (v2)"
This is analogous to:
"[PATCH 2/2] C FE: suggest corrections for misspelled field names"
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03380.html
but for the C++ frontend.
OK for trunk if it passes bootstrap®rtest?
gcc/c/ChangeLog:
* c-typeck.c (lookup_field_fuzzy): Move determinat
On Fri, 2015-11-13 at 15:35 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> This is analogous to:
> "[PATCH 2/2] C FE: suggest corrections for misspelled field names"
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03380.html
> but for the C++ frontend.
>
> OK for trunk if it p
On Sat, 2015-11-14 at 09:50 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> This patch causes numerous new testsuite failure on AIX caused by the
> compiler crashing during compilation, e.g.
>
> gcc.c-torture/execute/20020206-1.c
>
> in GCC libcpp
>
> 991 linemap_assert (line >= LINEMAPS_MACRO_LOWEST_LOCAT
(v2 of the patch, fixing some issues, and rebasing to be on top of
r230393 i.e. after the merge of delayed-folding).
This patch is analogous to:
"[PATCH 06/10] Track expression ranges in C frontend"
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg02535.html
in that it adds range information to th
On Sun, 2015-11-15 at 12:08 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 15/11/15 11:55, Tom de Vries wrote:
> > [ was: Re: [PATCH] Remove first_pass_instance from pass_vrp ]
> >
> > This patch series removes first_pass_instance.
> >
> > 1Remove first_pass_instance from pass_vrp
> > 2Remove
On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 19:17 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> So Jeff and I just had a chat, and we came up with some thoughts about
> how to proceed. I think we both agree that it would be good to have a
> special testing backend, along with frontends designed to be able to
> read in gimple or rtl
On Sat, 2015-11-14 at 23:32 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-11-14 at 09:50 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > This patch causes numerous new testsuite failure on AIX caused by the
> > compiler crashing during compilation, e.g.
> >
> > gcc.c-torture/execute/2
On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 22:34 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/16/2015 09:50 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > The root cause is uninitialized data. Specifically, the C parser's
> > struct c_expr gained a "src_range" field, and it turns out there are a
> > few pla
On Tue, 2015-11-17 at 16:24 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/17/2015 04:13 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 22:34 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> >>
> >> Should c_expr perhaps acquire a constructor so that this problem is
> >> avoided
On Wed, 2015-11-18 at 14:57 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/10/2015 09:35 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > This patch adds the ability to add "fix-it hints" to a rich_location,
> > which will be displayed when the corresponding diagnostic is printed.
> >
> > It d
Committed to trunk (as r230609) as obvious, having
verified that the docs build.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* doc/gty.texi (Support for inheritance): Fix missing
parentheses in example.
---
gcc/doc/gty.texi | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/doc/gty.te
Jeff pre-approved the plugin version of this (as a new
file unittests/test-bitmap.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03284.html
with:
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up moving it
> elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is pre-approved.
This
This is effectively v4 of the unittests proposal; for the earlier
versions see:
* v1: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg00765.html
* v2: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg01224.html
* v3: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg02947.html
This patch adds a selftest
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-gimple.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03304.html
> Comment indicates addition. But code actually generates a
> MULT_EXPR. Please fix.
Fixed
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end
> up moving it e
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-hash-map.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03301.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is
> pre-approved.
This version moves the
Upon porting from gtest.h to selftest.h I ran into this warning which
is fatal during bootstrap:
In file included from ../../../src/gcc/toplev.c:89:0:
../../../src/gcc/function-tests.c: In member function ‘virtual void
{anonymous}::function_test_fndecl_int_void::run()’:
../../../src/gcc/selftest.
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-tree.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03303.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is
> pre-approved.
This version puts the tests
Jeff approved an earlier version of this:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03295.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files
> is pre-approved.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* et-forest.c: Include "selfte
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-hash-set.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03300.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is
> pre-approved.
This version moves the
Jeff approved an older version of this (as a separate
unittests/test-folding.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03305.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files
> is pre-approved.
gcc/ChangeLog:
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-ggc.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03306.html
> Not terribly happy with that counter to used to create a big list
> to detect recursion. But I'm not offhand sure how to avoid without
> exposing more of the ggc system t
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-functions.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03310.html
with:
> There's some if (0) code in here that needs to be eliminated.
(done)
> The RTL case in particular is probably stretching the limits of what
> we can do wit
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-vec.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03308.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is
> pre-approved.
This version puts the tests
Jeff approved an older version of this:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03285.html
with:
> Unless there's a good reason, drop the presumably redundant tests
> and this is OK. Save preapprovald for these changes as the bitmap
> patch.
This version removes the redundant tests, and mo
ider desirable for such relatively
> simple data structures.
>
> Thoughts?
I like the idea.
Here's another iteration of the patch kit, which implements it (mostly).
David Malcolm (15):
Selftest framework (unittests v4)
Add selftests to bitmap.c
Add selftests to tree-cfg.c
Add
Jeff conditionally approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-locations.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03307.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is
> pre-approved.
>
> Cons
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-rtl.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03302.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is
>pre-approved.
This version puts the tests i
On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 18:35 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> In general I'm much happier with this approach, and I think this series
> is close to ready, but I want to bring up some questions that could use
> wider discussion.
> > This patch adds a selftest.h/.c to gcc, with an API loosely
> > mode
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu; adds 15 PASS results to
gcc.sum.
OK for trunk?
>From afdae8b15f71164d0d05e790078519b38bd674a4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: David Malcolm
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 11:12:47 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] Fix PR objc/68438 (uninitialized source ranges)
gcc/c/ChangeLog:
PR objc/68438
On Sat, 2015-11-21 at 13:54 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 3:12 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-11-17 at 16:24 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> >> On 11/17/2015 04:13 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 22
On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 23:28 +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2015, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> > The source ranges are verified using the same unit-testing plugin used
> > for C expressions. This leads to a wart, which is that it means having
> > a .m test f
On Mon, 2015-11-23 at 10:59 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 02:16:49AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> On 11/19/2015 03:46 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> >On 11/15/2015 12:01 AM, David
This patch fixes PR c/68473 by bulletproofing the new
diagnostic_show_locus implementation against ranges that finish before
they start (which can happen when using the C preprocessor), falling
back to simply printing a caret.
Successfully bootstrapped®rtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu; adds 7 new
PA
On Mon, 2015-11-23 at 18:59 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/23/2015 06:52 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > This patch fixes PR c/68473 by bulletproofing the new
> > diagnostic_show_locus implementation against ranges that finish before
> > they start (which can happen when usi
On Mon, 2015-11-23 at 10:25 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/23/2015 04:13 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Nov 2015, David Malcolm wrote:
> >
> >> Is there (or could there be) a precanned dg- directive to ask if ObjC is
> >> available?
> >
> > I
On Tue, 2015-11-24 at 10:40 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > On 11/23/2015 12:07 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 05:57:54PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >>>
> >>&
On Tue, 2015-11-24 at 13:44 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/19/2015 11:44 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > On 11/19/2015 07:08 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> >> gcc_assert terminates the process and no further testing is done,
> >> whereas the approach the kit tries to run
This patch avoids the need for calls to protected_set_expr_location
in the followup patch by adding location_t params to the following
functions:
- build_new
- cp_build_indirect_ref
- cp_build_unary_op
- cp_build_c_cast
- cp_build_modify_expr
It's not clear to me whether I should be pass
On Sat, 2015-11-21 at 02:16 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 11/19/2015 03:46 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > On 11/15/2015 12:01 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> >> As with the C frontend, there's an issue with tree nodes that
> >> don't have locations: VAR_DECL, IN
Changes from previous version:
- all new calls to protected_set_expr_location removed; instead
the location is passed into a tree-building function, using
the preceding patch.
- removal of #if 0 code
- generates meaningful ranges for new expressions, using
cp_lexer_previous_token.
- share
On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 19:44 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/19/2015 07:08 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > gcc_assert terminates the process and no further testing is done,
> > whereas the approach the kit tries to run as much of the testsuite as
> > possible, and then fail i
On Wed, 2015-11-25 at 11:55 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/25/2015 03:26 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > Consider the case where an assumption that the host is little-endian
> > assumption creeps into one of the bitmap functions. Some time later,
> > another developer updat
On Tue, 2015-12-01 at 00:19 -0800, Gary Funck wrote:
> On 12/01/15 09:12:44, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > > All languages (c, c++, fortran, go, lto, objc, obj-c++) have been
> > > bootstrapped; no test suite regressions were introduced,
> > > relative to the GCC trunk.
> >
> > That's not all languages
eck-operator.f90: New testcase.
> * gfortran.dg/spellcheck-procedure.f90: New testcase.
> * gfortran.dg/spellcheck-structure.f90: New testcase.
>
> ---
>
> David Malcolm nice Levenshtein distance spelling check helpers
> were used in some parts of other frontends.
On Tue, 2015-12-01 at 18:51 +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On 1 December 2015 at 18:28, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-12-01 at 13:55 +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>
>
> >> +/* Lookup function FN fuzzily, taking names in FUN into account. */
The patch kit changes the output of this case:
1 //PR c++/27668
2
3 template // { dg-error
"nested-name-specifier|two or more|valid type" }
4 struct A {};
5
6 template void foo(A); // { dg-error "cast|argument" "" { target
c++98_only } }
but only for c++98, from:
g++.dg/templ
This testcase's output is changed by the patchkit from printing at the "=":
BEFORE:
g++.dg/warn/Wconversion-real-integer2.C: In function 'void h()':
g++.dg/warn/Wconversion-real-integer2.C:32:12: warning: conversion to 'float'
alters 'int' constant value [-Wfloat-conversion]
vfloat = INT_MAX
With the location patch, various errors in g++.dg/ubsan/pr63956.C
change:
8 constexpr int
9 fn1 (int a, int b)
10 {
11if (b != 2)
12 a <<= b;
13return a;
14 }
15
16 constexpr int i1 = fn1 (5, 3);
17 constexpr int i2 = fn1 (5, -2); // { d
The patch kit affects the locations of the errors reported by
g++.dg/gomp/loop-1.C.
I reviewed the new locations, and they seemed sane.
This patch updates the locations of omp_for_cond to use the location of
the cond if available, falling back to the existing behavior of using
input_location othe
When building new-expressions, we use cp_lexer_previous_token
and access its location to get the final position in the source
range.
Within g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template14.C, the previous token
within a new expr can have been purged, leading to UNKNOWN_LOCATION.
g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template14.C:11
Testcase g++.dg/template/ref3.C:
1 // PR c++/28341
2
3 template struct A {};
4
5 template struct B
6 {
7A<(T)0> b; // { dg-error "constant|not a valid" }
8A a; // { dg-error "constant|not a valid" }
9 };
10
11 B b;
The output of t
This testcase was broken by the patch kit; upon investigation
the best fix is to try to use the location of the relevant
expression when warning about conversions, rather than
input_location, falling back to the latter via EXPR_LOC_OR_LOC.
One dg-warning needed moving, since the caret is on the "?
in the hope it will make review easier. (The kit would be
applied as a single commit; I've been testing it as one).
The following 10-patch kit bootstraps®rtests successfully on
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
It adds 213 new PASS results to g++.sum, and changes the location
of 154 PASS results there
Here's what it now emits (if caret-printing were enabled):
g++.dg/template/pr64100.C: In instantiation of ‘class foo’:
g++.dg/template/pr64100.C:8:16: required from here
g++.dg/template/pr64100.C:5:41: error: invalid use of incomplete type ‘class
foo’
static_assert(noexcept(((foo *)1)->~fo
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/template/pseudodtor3.C: Update column numbers in dg-error
directives.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/pseudodtor3.C | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/pseudodtor3.C
b/gcc/testsui
Changes in this version:
- removal of gcc_assert (m_loc != UNKNOWN_LOCATION) from cp_expr ctor
- uses protected_set_expr_location or cp_expr::set_location/set_range,
rather than attempting to add location_t arguments
- adds location support and test coverage based on issues seen in
the analogou
There are about 220 or so diagnostics in trunk that use "%q+D" in
their format string, which, as well as printing a quoted decl,
overwrites any location_t supplied to the diagnostic, instead using
the location of the associated decl.
During development of the location range patch kit I adjusted
th
On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 15:33 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 09:55 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > This patch adds bulletproofing to detect purged tokens, and avoid using
> > them.
> >
> > Alternatively, is it OK to access purged tokens for this kind of thing?
&g
On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 15:38 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 09:55 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > Testcase g++.dg/template/ref3.C:
> >
> > 1 // PR c++/28341
> > 2
> > 3 template struct A {};
> > 4
> &
On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 17:17 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 04:43 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 15:33 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> On 12/03/2015 09:55 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> >>> This patch adds bulletproofing to detect
On Fri, 2015-12-04 at 11:01 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 05:08 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 15:38 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> On 12/03/2015 09:55 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> >>> Testcase g++.dg/template/ref3.C:
> &g
On Fri, 2015-12-04 at 12:10 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 09:55 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > @@ -362,10 +362,11 @@ convert_to_real_1 (tree type, tree expr, bool fold_p)
> > case REAL_TYPE:
> > /* Ignore the conversion if we don't
On Fri, 2015-12-04 at 12:09 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 09:33 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > The attached patch updates the handling of %q+D, simplifying
> > the implementation, and ensuring that it retains the range
> > information of the decl, giving:
> >
1001 - 1100 of 5423 matches
Mail list logo
