I just noticed that the C and C++ compiler output pointer types differently:
Consider
int i;
printf("%p", );
When compiled as C that gives the warning
format '%p' expects argument of type 'void *', but argument 2 has type 'int *'
but when compiled as C++ it gives the warning
format '%p'
In gcc-5/changes.html the section about __has_include and __has_include_next
says:
The header search paths for __has_include_next and __has_include_next are
equivalent to those of the standard directive #include and the extension
#include_next respectively.
I think the first __has_include_next
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 03:28:37PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
Committed as obvious.
* tree-ssa-threadedge.c (cond_arg_set_in_bb): Remove unused
debugging argument.
Could you please remove the third argument in the calls to cond_arg_set_in_bb
as well?
/MF
Index:
On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 14:59 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
This patch adds some typedef printers to libstdc++.
This relies on a gdb patch that hasn't yet gone in (pending on the list).
If the gdb patch changes, I'll change these printers as well.
The basic idea is that you can now have gdb
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 07:55:51AM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
Richi, this implements your idea for fixing PR 54281. I don't
have an old enough compiler. Could you please test it in your
system?
I debated whether to remove the GENERATOR_FILE predicate from the
inclusion (some files
Hello.
Ever since the ISL patch went in my builds have failed.
I am building with local copies of all the libraries, so I have added
gmp, mpfr, mpc, isl and cloog from ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/infrastructure
to my source directory.
The command sequence I use is
svn co
On Wed, 2012-06-27 at 05:01 -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Mark Butler butl...@middle.net wrote:
On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 3:22:45 PM UTC-6, H.J. wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Mark Butler wrote:
x32 is designed to replace ia32 where long is
On Mon, 2012-06-25 at 15:17 -0700, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
On 6/25/12, Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jun 2012, Diego Novillo wrote:
[ Added doc maintainers in CC ]
I have added a bit more in the rationale, reached through the link
at the end of that section.
On Sat, 2011-10-29 at 20:48 +0300, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
Could someone please review this?
+ if (cxx_dialect cxx0x !in_system_header)
+ pedwarn (input_location, OPT_pedantic,
+ comma at end of enumerator list);
Why not use maybe_warn_cpp0x there?
Could someone please review this?
On Sun, 2011-10-09 at 16:27 +0200, Magnus Fromreide wrote:
Hi.
As I understand it C++-11 allows trailing commas in enum definitions.
Thus I think the following little patch should be included.
/MF
2011-10-09 Magnus Fromreide ma...@lysator.liu.se
Hi.
As I understand it C++11 allows trailing commas in enum definitions.
Thus I think the following little patch should be included.
On a side note I have to say that the effects of pedwarn_cxx98 are
unexpected, especially in light of the comment above the function body.
/MF
2011-10-09 Magnus
Hello.
I noticed that (foo.cpp):
enum gaz { foo, };
generated a warning
foo.cpp:1:15: warning: comma at end of enumerator list [-pedantic]
when compiled with
g++ -std=gnu++0x -pedantic -fsyntax-only foo.cpp
According to n3290 this is acceptable so I tried to make this warning go
away.
This
On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 00:48 +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi!
over the last 2 days or so, Daniel Krugler - having filed in due course
his Copyright Assignment - finally kindly contributed to the project
shiny new std::is_constructible, std::is_default_constructible and
On Sat, 2011-04-09 at 09:21 +0100, N.M. Maclaren wrote:
On Apr 8 2011, Michael Matz wrote:
It adds a new option -fstack-arrays which makes the frontend put
all local arrays on stack memory. ...
Excellent!
I haven't rechecked performance now, but four months ago this was the
result
On Mon, 2010-09-20 at 10:39 +0200, Rodrigo Rivas wrote:
This is quite unreadable and not very informative.
Totally agree.
Here there are two problems...
snipped
I think that you are taking the wrong approach: you call
cp_parser_range_for with C++98 and then if such a loop is parsed
Hello.
At the moment compilation of a range-based for in c++98 fails with the
error message:
foo.cpp: In function 'int foo()':
foo.cpp:4:13: error: expected initializer before ':' token
foo.cpp:6:1: error: expected primary-expression before '}' token
foo.cpp:6:1: error: expected ';' before '}'
On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 08:44 +0800, yuanbin wrote:
typedef struct CBase { int i; } CBase;
typedef struct CT1 { EXTENDS(CBase) ... } CT1;
typedef struct CT2 { EXTENDS(CT1) ... } CT2;
...
typedef struct CTN { EXTENDS(CTN_1) ... } CTN;
CTN t;
t.i=1; //need not t.CTN_1CT2.CT1.CBase.i
I recently ended up in a discussion about the -pthread flag at work and
when looking at the documentation I noticed that it is defined onlt for
SPARC and RS/6000/PowerPC.
Additionally -fopenmp and -ftree-parallelize-loops say they are only
supported on targets where -pthread are available.
Now,
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 15:07 -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 02:40:44PM -0800, Magnus Fromreide wrote:
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 12:06:01PM -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 11:38:23AM -0800, Magnus Fromreide wrote:
Hello.
I tried to do
Hello.
I tried to do
for (;; ({ break; }))
printf(Hello\n);
and got an error message:
error: break statement not within loop or switch
when compiling it as C. Given that 9899:1999 §6.8.6.3 says that a break
statement only shall appear in or as a switch or loop body that is expected.
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 12:06:01PM -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 11:38:23AM -0800, Magnus Fromreide wrote:
Hello.
I tried to do
for (;; ({ break; }))
printf(Hello\n);
and got an error message:
error: break statement not within loop or switch
Hello.
I tried to look at fixing DR/354 but ended up lost in cp/parser.c
I have the following test case:
template int* struct S { };
S(int*)0 s;
and end up with the following errors
:2:9: error: a cast to a type other than an integral or enumeration type
cannot appear in a constant-expression
On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 18:12 -0300, Pedro Lamarão wrote:
2009/8/11 Pedro Lamarão pedro.lama...@ccppbrasil.org:
I've recently started my contributions to the gcc-in-cxx project, and
eventually decided on the qsort suggestion because it seems the
easiest one.
Attached is a much more
On ons, 2007-08-29 at 16:42 -0400, Daniel Drake wrote:
Hi,
Take the following code sample:
#define BREAK_GCC4_2
templatetypename Op
void foo(Op op) { op(); }
class My {
public:
static void myOp() { }
void test() {
#ifdef
I got so happy when __sync_bool_compare_and_swap showed up in 4.1 but
now HEAD have changed the behaviour for me.
Earlier I got (gcc version 4.1.2 20061028 (prerelease) (Debian
4.1.1-19)) (Yes, vendor version, but gcc.gnu.org versions did the same)
lock
cmpxchgl%edx,
On fre, 2007-01-05 at 17:05 +, Andrew Haley wrote:
Magnus Fromreide writes:
But it can't unless you use an architecture that has cmpxchgl.
cmpxchgl is a 486 instruction; if you compile for 386, we have to
generate the call because there is no such instruction.
Sigh - I failed to tell
On fre, 2007-01-05 at 12:53 -0800, H. J. Lu wrote:
On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 09:27:35PM +0100, Magnus Fromreide wrote:
On fre, 2007-01-05 at 17:05 +, Andrew Haley wrote:
Magnus Fromreide writes:
But it can't unless you use an architecture that has cmpxchgl.
cmpxchgl is a 486
On tor, 2006-09-21 at 23:10 -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 23:54 -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
Peter,
Wouldn't we want something like...
+#ifdef __powerpc64__
+unsigned long FindTopOfStack(unsigned long stack_start) {
+#else
unsigned long
28 matches
Mail list logo
