[gomp4] Fix PR72741

Thomas found a bug in the fortran routine parser where errors involving invalid combinations of gang, worker, vector and seq clauses were getting suppressed. This patch does two things: 1) It moves the error handling into gfc_match_oacc_routine. So now gfc_oacc_routine_dims returns

Re: [PATCH] Improve forward jump threading of switch statements (PR18046)

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 11:46 PM, Patrick Palka wrote: > This patch improves the forward jump threader's ability to thread > GIMPLE_SWITCHes by making the VRP simplification callback attempt to > determine which case label will be taken. > > For example, if the index operand

[PATCH] Improve forward jump threading of switch statements (PR18046)

This patch improves the forward jump threader's ability to thread GIMPLE_SWITCHes by making the VRP simplification callback attempt to determine which case label will be taken. For example, if the index operand of a switch has a value range ~[5,6] along some edge and the switch statement has no

Re: [PR70920] transform (intptr_t) x eq/ne CST to x eq/ne (typeof x) cst

On 28 July 2016 at 19:18, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > >> On 28 July 2016 at 15:58, Andreas Schwab wrote: >> > On Mo, Jul 25 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni >> > wrote: >> > >> >> diff

Re: [RFC][PR68217] Improve value range for signed & sign-bit-CST

Hi Richard, Thanks for the review. On 27/04/16 00:14, Richard Biener wrote: On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:44 PM, kugan wrote: As pointed out by Richard, for signed & sign-bit-CST value range should be [-INF, 0] range, not a [-INF, INF] range as happens now.

Re: [RFC] [2/2] divmod transform: override expand_divmod_libfunc for ARM and add test-cases

On 28 July 2016 at 20:39, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > On 28/07/16 14:36, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: >> Um I had configured with --with-tune=cortex-a9. Is that incorrect for >> armv8l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf ? > > Why on earth would you want to generate code for ARMv8

Re: [RFC] [2/2] divmod transform: override expand_divmod_libfunc for ARM and add test-cases

On 28 July 2016 at 20:14, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > >> appear UNSUPPORTED. >> That's because this config appears to define >> __ARM_ARCH_EXT_IDIV__ however idiv appears not to be present. >> >> For instance __aeabi_div is called to perform >> division for the

PR fortran/70006 -- Patch

I intend to commit this patch in the next day or two unless someone objects. 2016-07-28 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/70006 * io.c (gfc_resolve_dt): Use correct locus. * resolve.c (resolve_branch): Ditto. 2016-07-28 Steven G. Kargl

[Committed] PR fortran/71067 -- set a pointer to NULL

Committed as obvious. 2016-07-28 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/71067 * decl.c (match_data_constant): On error, set 'result' to NULL. 2016-07-28 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/71067 * gfortran.dg/pr71067_1.f90: New test.

Re: [PATCH] Fix unsafe function attributes for special functions (PR 71876)

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > It is however not possible to remove the special handling by name > altogether, because the glibc does not add the return_twice function > attribute on _setjmp, __sigsetjmp and getcontext until today; a glibc > BZ is filed at:

Re: [PATCH, rs6000, libgcc] Implement temporary solution for __divkc3 and __mulkc3

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016, Bill Schmidt wrote: > Index: libgcc/config/rs6000/_divkc3.c > === > --- libgcc/config/rs6000/_divkc3.c(revision 0) > +++ libgcc/config/rs6000/_divkc3.c(working copy) > @@ -0,0 +1,64 @@ > +typedef float

Re: Implement C _FloatN, _FloatNx types [version 3]

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote: > These slightly complicate the description you give above as we now want > two behaviours. Where the 16-bit floating point extensions are available, > we want to use the native operations (FLT_EVAL_METHOD == 16). Where they > are not available we want

[v3 PATCH] Implement C++17 variable templates for type traits.

Tested on Linux-x64. 2016-07-29 Ville Voutilainen Implement C++17 variable templates for type traits. * include/std/chrono (treat_as_floating_point_v): New. * include/std/ratio: (ratio_equal_v, ratio_not_equal_v) (ratio_less_v, ratio_less_equal_v,

Re: [PATCH PR71734] Add missed check that reference defined inside loop.

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 6:49 AM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote: > Richard, > > I prepare a patch which is based on yours. New test is also included. > Bootstrapping and regression testing did not show any new failures. > Is it OK for trunk? > > Thanks. > ChangeLog: > 2016-07-28 Yuri

Re: [PATCH] OpenACC routines in fortran modules

On 07/28/2016 02:55 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote: > Cesar Philippidis wrote: >> It turns out that the acc routine parallelism isn't being recorded in >> fortran .mod files. This is a problem because then the ME can't validate >> if a routine has compatible parallelism with the call site. > > Nothing

Re: [RFC, v2] Test coverage for --param boundary values

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016, Martin Liška wrote: > Well, I can imaging a guard which will test whether > "$objdir/../../params.options" file exits, and if so, then the tests are > executed? Is it acceptable approach? The correct way to test for build-tree testing is [info exists

PR fortran/71730 -- Patch

I plan to commit the following patch in the next day or two if no one objects. It falls into the trivially correct category. 2016-07-28 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/71730 * decl.c (match_data_constant): Set 'result' to NULL in error case.

Re: [PATCH 1/3] (v2) On-demand locations within string-literals

On 07/28/2016 02:38 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 07/28/2016 02:12 PM, David Malcolm wrote: On Wed, 2016-07-27 at 23:41 +0100, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: On 27 July 2016 at 15:30, David Malcolm wrote: Perhaps it could live for now in c-format.c, since it is the only place

[patch] Some testsuite cleanup

This is a set of small patches for issues in the testsuite that I noticed while working on a big change (coming soon). Self-explanatory: Fix invalid dg-do directives in libstdc++ tests * testsuite/22_locale/conversions/string/1.cc: Remove unintended dg-do compile

Re: [PATCH] Fix wrong code on aarch64 due to paradoxical subreg

Hi, On 07/27/16 23:31, Jeff Law wrote: > So you're stumbling into another really interesting area. > Absolutely, I am just too curious what's going on here ;-) > I can hazard a guess that the reason we create the paradoxical SUBREG > rather than a zero or sign extension is because various

Re: [PATCH] Move allocator in std::string and RB tree move constructors

On 22/07/16 16:06 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: The move constructors for strings and RB trees were not move constructing the allocator. PR libstdc++/71964 * include/bits/basic_string.h [_GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI] (basic_string::_Alloc_hider(pointer, _Alloc&&)): Add

Re: [PATCH 1/3] (v2) On-demand locations within string-literals

On 07/28/2016 02:12 PM, David Malcolm wrote: On Wed, 2016-07-27 at 23:41 +0100, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: On 27 July 2016 at 15:30, David Malcolm wrote: Perhaps it could live for now in c-format.c, since it is the only place using it? Martin Sebor [CC-ed] wants to use

[PATCH] aarch64: Add split-stack initial support

From: Adhemerval Zanella This patch adds the split-stack support on aarch64 (PR #67877). As for other ports this patch should be used along with glibc and gold support. The support is done similar to other architectures: a __private_ss field is added on TCB in

Re: [PATCH 1/3] (v2) On-demand locations within string-literals

On Wed, 2016-07-27 at 23:41 +0100, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: > On 27 July 2016 at 15:30, David Malcolm wrote: > > > Perhaps it could live for now in c-format.c, since it is the only > > > place using it? > > > > Martin Sebor [CC-ed] wants to use it from the middle-end: > >

Re: [PATCH, 2 of 4], Enhance PowerPC vec_extract support for power8/power9 machines

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 04:57:53AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 05:16:28PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote: > > * config/rs6000/vsx.md (UNSPEC_VSX_VSLO): New unspecs. > > (UNSPEC_VSX_EXTRACT): Likewise. > > "New unspec". Thanks. > >

Re: Implement -Wswitch-fallthrough

Coming back to this... On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 03:00:43PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: > > This patch is accompanied by more than 2000 lines of new tests to get the > > warning covered though I'm sure folks will come up with other test cases > > that I hadn't considered (hi Martin S. ;). > > > >

Re: Implement -Wimplicit-fallthrough: core

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 02:15:54PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > Yeah, that is true. I'm not sure if the warning can reasonably be expected > > to > > handle all such cases and really see through loops like that, most likely > > not. > > It's really just a heuristics. > > Fortunately I didn't see

Re: Implement -Wimplicit-fallthrough (take 2): fix missing breaks

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 02:17:35PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 07/27/2016 10:52 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > This is what the new warning pointed out. I think all these are bugs. > > > > This patch has been tested on powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu, > > aarch64-linux-gnu, > > and

Re: Implement -Wimplicit-fallthrough (take 2): fix missing breaks

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 10:05:25AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote: > On Jul 27, 2016, at 9:52 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > > > This is what the new warning pointed out. I think all these are bugs. > > > > --- gcc/libgo/runtime/heapdump.c > > +++ gcc/libgo/runtime/heapdump.c > > @@

Re: [C++ RFC/Patch] PR c++/71665

Hi, On 28/07/2016 16:28, Jason Merrill wrote: On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 7:48 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: Ah sorry, I missed the *type* bit. The below passes testing on x86_64-linux. I don't think we need to check the type again after cxx_constant_value?!? No, we don't.

Re: Implement -Wimplicit-fallthrough (take 2): fix missing breaks

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:43:22AM -0600, Tom Tromey wrote: > > "Marek" == Marek Polacek writes: > > Marek> gcc/java/ > Marek>* jcf-dump.c (print_constant): Add break. > > This bit is ok. Thanks Tom. I think I'll just commit this hunk separately to not post

C PATCH for c/71573 (ICE with invalid redeclaration)

When we're trying to implicitly declare a function, we first search the scope looking for whether the function identifier is already bound to a declaration. But as the following test shows, we might find something else other than a FUNCTION_DECL like we're expecting, which would mean that an ICE

Re: [RFC] [2/2] divmod transform: override expand_divmod_libfunc for ARM and add test-cases

On 28/07/16 14:36, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > Um I had configured with --with-tune=cortex-a9. Is that incorrect for > armv8l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf ? Why on earth would you want to generate code for ARMv8 and then tune for best performance on a core that can only run ARMv7? R.

[Patch, fortran] PR71883] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE in identical_array_ref, at fortran/dependency.c:104

Dear All, Given the origins of the patch, it has been committed as 'obvious' to trunk. It both bootstraps and regtests OK. I will apply to the 5- and 6-branches. Cheers Paul > --- Comment #11 from Paul Thomas --- > Author: pault > Date: Thu Jul 28 14:47:02 2016 > New Revision: 238822 > >

Re: [RFC] [2/2] divmod transform: override expand_divmod_libfunc for ARM and add test-cases

> appear UNSUPPORTED. > That's because this config appears to define > __ARM_ARCH_EXT_IDIV__ however idiv appears not to be present. > > For instance __aeabi_div is called to perform > division for the following test-case: > int f(int x, int y) > { > int r = x / y; > return r; > } > >

Re: [C++ RFC/Patch] PR c++/71665

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 7:48 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > Ah sorry, I missed the *type* bit. The below passes testing on x86_64-linux. > I don't think we need to check the type again after cxx_constant_value?!? No, we don't. The patch is OK. > While finally spending a

Re: [PATCH PR71734] Add missed check that reference defined inside loop.

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote: > Richard, > > I prepare a patch which is based on yours. New test is also included. > Bootstrapping and regression testing did not show any new failures. > Is it OK for trunk? Ok. Thanks, Richard. > Thanks. >

Re: [PATCH PR71734] Add missed check that reference defined inside loop.

Richard, I prepare a patch which is based on yours. New test is also included. Bootstrapping and regression testing did not show any new failures. Is it OK for trunk? Thanks. ChangeLog: 2016-07-28 Yuri Rumyantsev PR tree-optimization/71734 * tree-ssa-loop-im.c

Re: [PR70920] transform (intptr_t) x eq/ne CST to x eq/ne (typeof x) cst

On Thu, 28 Jul 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > On 28 July 2016 at 15:58, Andreas Schwab wrote: > > On Mo, Jul 25 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni > > wrote: > > > >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr70920-4.c > >>

divmod transform: add test-cases

Hi, The following patch adds test-cases for divmod transform. I separated the SImode tests into separate file from DImode tests because certain arm configs (cortex-15) have hardware div insn for SImode but not for DImode, and for that config we want SImode tests to be disabled but not DImode

Re: [RFC] [2/2] divmod transform: override expand_divmod_libfunc for ARM and add test-cases

On 27 July 2016 at 18:56, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni > wrote: >> On 23 May 2016 at 14:28, Prathamesh Kulkarni >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> This patch

Re: RFC [1/2] divmod transform

On 8 June 2016 at 19:53, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, 3 Jun 2016, Jim Wilson wrote: > >> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 12:45 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> > Joseph - do you know sth about why there's not a full set of divmod >> > libfuncs in libgcc? >> >>

C PATCH for c/71574 (ICE with alloc_align attribute)

Many attributes that accept integer constant as a parameter call default_conversion for such constants to perform the usual arithmetic conversions. The call to default_conversion is always guarded so as to prevent a NULL_TREE, an IDENTIFIER_NODE, or a FUNCTION_DECL from getting into this

C PATCH for c/71583 (ICE with bogus compound literal)

Since r157233, build_compound_literal will return error_mark_node for erroneous initializers of compound literals. This caused an ICE in c_parser_postfix_expression_after_paren_type because the code dealing with evaluating variably modified types wasn't prepared for expr.value being

Re: [Patch GCC]Support constraint flags in loop structure.

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Bin Cheng wrote: >>> Hi, >>> This patch adds support for constraint flags in

Re: [Patch GCC]Support constraint flags in loop structure.

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Bin Cheng wrote: >> Hi, >> This patch adds support for constraint flags in loop structure. Different >> to existing boolean flags which are set by niter

Re: [PR70920] transform (intptr_t) x eq/ne CST to x eq/ne (typeof x) cst

On 28 July 2016 at 15:58, Andreas Schwab wrote: > On Mo, Jul 25 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni > wrote: > >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr70920-4.c >> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr70920-4.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000..dedb895 >> ---

Re: [PATCH 13/17][ARM] Add VFP FP16 instrinsics.

On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Matthew Wahab wrote: > On 17/05/16 15:44, Matthew Wahab wrote: >> The ARMv8.2-A architecture introduces an optional FP16 extension adding >> half-precision floating point data processing instructions to the >> existing scalar (floating

Re: [PATCH 12/17][ARM] Add builtins for NEON FP16 intrinsics.

On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Matthew Wahab wrote: > On 17/05/16 15:42, Matthew Wahab wrote: >> This patch adds the builtins data for the ACLE intrinsics introduced to >> support the NEON instructions of the ARMv8.2-A FP16 extension. > > Updated to fix the

Re: [PATCH 11/17][ARM] Add builtins for VFP FP16 intrinsics.

On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Matthew Wahab wrote: > On 17/05/16 15:41, Matthew Wahab wrote: >> The ACLE intrinsics introduced to support the ARMv8.2 FP16 extensions >> require that intrinsics for scalar floating pointer (VFP) instructions >> are available under

Re: [PATCH 10/17][ARM] Refactor support code for NEON builtins.

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 3:39 PM, Matthew Wahab wrote: > The ACLE intrinsics introduced to support the ARMv8.2 FP16 extensions > require that intrinsics for scalar (VFP) instructions are available > under different conditions from those for the NEON intrinsics. To >

Re: [PATCH 9/17][ARM] Add NEON FP16 arithmetic instructions.

On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Matthew Wahab wrote: > On 18/05/16 01:58, Joseph Myers wrote: >> On Tue, 17 May 2016, Matthew Wahab wrote: >> >>> As with the VFP FP16 arithmetic instructions, operations on __fp16 >>> values are done by conversion to single-precision.

Re: [patch, avr] Fix mmcu to specs issues

On Tuesday 26 July 2016 06:00 PM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: On 26.07.2016 12:20, Pitchumani Sivanupandi wrote: avr-gcc expected to find the device specs in the search paths specified. But it doesn't work as expected when device specs in different place than the installed location. Example-1:

Re: [C++ RFC/Patch] PR c++/71665

Hi, On 18/07/2016 20:16, Jason Merrill wrote: On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: On 30/06/2016 19:49, Jason Merrill wrote: I think we should check the type before calling cxx_constant_value. Ok, I got the point. I'm not sure however how far we

Re: [PATCH 8/17][ARM] Add VFP FP16 arithmetic instructions.

On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Matthew Wahab wrote: > On 19/05/16 15:54, Matthew Wahab wrote: >> On 18/05/16 16:20, Joseph Myers wrote: >>> On Wed, 18 May 2016, Matthew Wahab wrote: >>> >>> In short: instructions for direct HFmode arithmetic should be described >>>

Re: [RFC][IPA-VRP] Early VRP Implementation

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 9:35 AM, kugan wrote: > Hi Richard, > > Thanks for the review. >> >> >> It seems that in your pop_value_range you assume you only pop one >> range per BB - while that's likely true at the moment it will be a >> limitation >> in the

RE: [PATCH][COMMITTED] Revert r238497 because of PR 71961.

Thanks.. I wonder if you could add the testcase in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71961#c11 to the testsuite, as it catches the underlying issue. Regards, Joost VandeVondele

[PATCH][COMMITTED] Revert r238497 because of PR 71961.

Hi all, This patch reverts the change for PR 71902 since it causes 178.gagel miscompile in spec2000 as reported in PR 71961 which was observed in x86_64, aarch64, powerpc64. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71961 As a consequence, I will reopen PR 71902:

Re: libgo patch committed: Update to 1.7rc3

> I have committed a patch to update libgo to the 1.7rc3 release > candidate. This is very close to the upcoming 1.7 release. As usual > with libgo updates, the patch is too large to include in this e-mail > message. I've appended the changes to the gccgo-specific directories. A new testsuite

Re: [PR70920] transform (intptr_t) x eq/ne CST to x eq/ne (typeof x) cst

On Mo, Jul 25 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr70920-4.c > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr70920-4.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000..dedb895 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr70920-4.c > @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ > +/* {

Re: [PATCH v3] S/390: Add splitter for "and" with complement.

Version 4 of the patch. Activated the patterns als for -mesa, as discussed internally. Bootstrapped and regression testes on s390 and s390x biarch. Ciao Dominik ^_^ ^_^ -- Dominik Vogt IBM Germany gcc/ChangeLog * config/s390/s390.md ("*andc_split", "*andc_split2"): New splitters

Re: C PATCH for c/71853 (ICE with uninitialized memory on invalid)

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:50:56PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote: > This testcase was breaking because we were using uninitialized memory > coming from c_expr in c_parser_switch_statement. There, in case we hadn't > seen '(' after switch, we called c_finish_case with uninitialized CE. > Fixed thus.

Re: [PATCH, 2 of 4], Enhance PowerPC vec_extract support for power8/power9 machines

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 05:16:28PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote: > * config/rs6000/vsx.md (UNSPEC_VSX_VSLO): New unspecs. > (UNSPEC_VSX_EXTRACT): Likewise. "New unspec". > (VEC_EXTRACT_OPTIMIZE_P): New macro to say whether we can optmize > vec_extract on 64-bit ISA 2.07

Re: [PATCH] OpenACC routines in fortran modules

Cesar Philippidis wrote: > It turns out that the acc routine parallelism isn't being recorded in > fortran .mod files. This is a problem because then the ME can't validate > if a routine has compatible parallelism with the call site. Nothing against saving such information in .mod files.

Re: libgo patch committed: Update to 1.7rc3

Hello! > I have committed a patch to update libgo to the 1.7rc3 release > candidate. This is very close to the upcoming 1.7 release. As usual > with libgo updates, the patch is too large to include in this e-mail > message. I've appended the changes to the gccgo-specific directories. There is

Re: [PATCH] Introduce no_profile_instrument_function attribute (PR gcov-profile/68025)

On 07/27/2016 11:33 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 07/27/2016 02:27 AM, Martin Liška wrote: >> Hi. >> >> As mentioned in the PR gcov-profile/68025, there's a request not to >> instrument >> some functions (e.g. a in linux kernel). Thus, I come with a new attribute >> no_profile_instrument_function >>

Re: PR fortran/71859 -- Patch

Hi Karl, see below for comment: On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 17:19:42 -0700 Steve Kargl wrote: > Patch is self-explanatory. OK? > > 2016-07-26 Steven G. Kargl > > PR fortran/71859 > * check.c(numeric_check): Prevent ICE. Issue

Re: [RFC][IPA-VRP] Early VRP Implementation

Hi Richard, Thanks for the review. It seems that in your pop_value_range you assume you only pop one range per BB - while that's likely true at the moment it will be a limitation in the future. You want to pop ranges until you hit the NULL marker in after_dom_children and unconditionally push

[Patch, tentative, reload] Make push_reload work with more types of subregs?

Hi, When analyzing PR 71873 (ICE in push_reload), I found that that code in push_reload that recursively calls push_reload for subreg expressions doesn't correctly set subreg_in_class for a few cases. Specifically, reload_inner_reg_of_subreg returns true if SUBREG_REG(x) is CONSTANT_P

[PATCH RFC] do not throw in std::make_exception_ptr

[resent with hopefully correct libstdc++ mailing list address this time] Here is my attempt to fix https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68297. The resulting patch is a little bit long because I had to split and cxxabi.h include files. The former had to be split due to circular dependency

[PATCH RFC] do not throw in std::make_exception_ptr

Here is my attempt to fix https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68297. The resulting patch is a little bit long because I had to split and cxxabi.h include files. The former had to be split due to circular dependency that formed after including in exception_ptr.h and the later is because

Re: [C++ PATCH] for PR72457

On 2016.07.27 at 17:21 -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:50 AM, Markus Trippelsdorf > wrote: > > On 2016.07.23 at 22:55 -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > >> Using build_value_init in a base initialization is wrong, because it > >> calls the complete