On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 01:38:21PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 03/14/2016 04:13 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 03:25:07PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> >>PR c++/67376 - [5/6 regression] Comparison with pointer to past-the-end
> >> of array fails inside constant expression
> >>PR c++/70170 - [6 regression] bogus not a constant expression error
> >>comparing
> >> pointer to array to null
> >>PR c++/70172 - incorrect reinterpret_cast from integer to pointer error
> >> on invalid constexpr initialization
> >>PR c++/60760 - arithmetic on null pointers should not be allowed in constant
> >> expressions
> >>PR c++/70228 - insufficient detail in diagnostics for a constexpr out of
> >>bounds
> >> array subscript
> >
> >Can you please check up the formatting in the patch?
> >Seems e.g. you've replaced tons of tabs with 8 spaces etc. (check your
> >editor setting, and check the patch with contrib/check-GNU-style.sh).
> >There is some trailing whitespace too, spaces before [, etc.
> Jakub, do you have any comments on the substance of the patch? If so, it
> would help immensely if you could provide them so that Martin could address
> technical issues at the same time as he fixes up whitespace nits.
No, I'll defer technical comments to Jason. The formatting is just
something that caught my eye during the 10 seconds or so spent on reading the
patch flying by.
Jakub
