On 06/28/2013 12:54 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
I agree with you and I have fixed it such that if TREE_TYPE is void then don't
bother creating a new variable.
This error happens in comma_exp.c testcase in Mac.
For example, the following expression:
array[:] = (atoi(argv[1]),
On 06/28/2013 12:54 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
/* If stride and start are of same type and the induction var
is not, convert induction variable to stride's type. */
if (TREE_TYPE (start) == TREE_TYPE (stride)
TREE_TYPE (stride) != TREE_TYPE
OK.
Jason
On 06/27/2013 02:36 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
I looked through the patch again. I was able to get rid of the first
if-statement in cp_parser_postfix_open_square_expression function. I think now
it looks exactly as you requested.
Much better, thanks.
+ /* Sometimes, it
On 06/25/13 13:42, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
What remaining obstacles are there to sharing most of the expansion
code between C and C++? That can be a separate patch, of course.
Jason
??
On 06/26/2013 01:31 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Attached, please find a fixed patch and ChangeLog entries:
This patch seems to be missing some hunks that are described in the
ChangeLog and were present in the previous patch, such as
* cp-array-notation.c
On 06/24/2013 06:23 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Actually, to reduce the amount of changes to non-AN code, let's put the AN case
third, after the offset and {} cases, so you get something like
else if (flag_enable_cilkplus)
{
tree an = cp_parser_array_notation (loc, parser, index,
-Original Message-
From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 10:39 AM
To: Iyer, Balaji V; Richard Henderson
Cc: Aldy Hernandez; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cilk Plus Array Notation for C++
On 06/24/2013 06:23 PM, Iyer, Balaji V
On 06/25/2013 02:27 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
This time, I ran the command you gave me. Please tell me how it looks.
No ChangeLog this time, thanks.
Another solution is to replace get_tmp_regvar with get_temporary_var () + add_decl_expr
(..). I have implemented this because it looks more
A few more comments:
+ if (processing_template_decl || !TREE_TYPE (t))
+ new_var = build_min_nt_loc (EXPR_LOCATION (t), VAR_DECL, NULL_TREE,
+ NULL_TREE);
Again, we shouldn't be trying to expand array notation during template
parsing.
Hmm, seems like I should have sent this yesterday even though I hadn't
made it through the whole patch. But I suppose it doesn't hurt to fix
it after checkin.
On 06/20/2013 07:39 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/c-family/ChangeLog b/gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
old mode 100644
new mode
On 06/20/2013 04:39 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
I couldn't put them into 1 structure, so I made 2 structures holding the
following information: array notation triplet information and array notation
expansion loop's information. It is fixed in the patch attached.
Excellent, thanks. One thing
-Original Message-
From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 12:11 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: Aldy Hernandez; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Jason Merrill
(ja...@redhat.com)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cilk Plus Array Notation for C++
On 06/20/2013 04:39 PM
On 06/21/2013 09:59 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
After I remove that field, will it be OK for trunk?
Yes.
r~
+/* Returns true if there is a length mismatch among exprssions that are at
the
+ same dimension and one the same side of the equal sign. The Array
notation
+ lengths (LIST) is passed in as a 2D vector of trees. */
+
+static bool
+cp_length_mismatch_in_expr_p (location_t loc,
Thanks for fixing everything. This looks much better.
I don't have much, just small typos. It's up to Jason and Richard to
take it from here.
Aldy
+ else
+ {
+ val = convert_like_with_context (conv, arg, fn, i-is_method,
+
] Cilk Plus Array Notation for C++
On 06/13/2013 09:11 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
The whole slew of these cases have a lot of duplicated code. For
instance, BUILT_IN_CILKPLUS_SEC_REDUCE_MIN is the same as
BUILT_IN_CILKPLUS_SEC_REDUCE_MAX, the only difference being GT_EXPR
vs
LT_EXPR
On 06/17/2013 10:00 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
In hindsight, I could have for __sec_reduce_max and __sec_reduce_min. I was
more familiar with conditional expression. Out of curiosity, is there a big
performance benefit of using max/min expr over conditional?
There can be. The COND-MIN/MAX
It looks like a NULL in INIT_INDEX is a specially handled case. Perhaps you
should document that INIT_INDEX can be null and what it means.
Also, you don't need to document what internal variable name you are using as
a return value (VALUE_TREE). Perhaps instead of The return value... you
On 06/13/2013 09:11 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
The whole slew of these cases have a lot of duplicated code. For instance,
BUILT_IN_CILKPLUS_SEC_REDUCE_MIN is the same as
BUILT_IN_CILKPLUS_SEC_REDUCE_MAX, the only difference being GT_EXPR vs
LT_EXPR. Surely you could do something like:
if
[Jason/Richard: there are some things below I could use your feedback on.]
Hi Balaji.
Overall, a lot of the stuff in cp-array-notation.c looks familiar from
the C front-end changes. Can't you reuse a lot of it?
Otherwise, here are some minor nits...
+ /* If the function call is
...@redhat.com);
r...@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cilk Plus Array Notation for C++
[Jason/Richard: there are some things below I could use your feedback on.]
Hi Balaji.
Overall, a lot of the stuff in cp-array-notation.c looks familiar from the C
front-
end changes. Can't you reuse
Overall, a lot of the stuff in cp-array-notation.c looks familiar
from the C front- end changes. Can't you reuse a lot of it?
I looked into trying to combine many functionality. The issue that
prohibited me was templates and extra trees. For example, IF_STMT,
FOR_STMT, MODOP_EXPR, etc are
-Original Message-
From: Aldy Hernandez [mailto:al...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 1:40 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Jason Merrill (ja...@redhat.com);
r...@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cilk Plus Array Notation for C++
Overall, a lot
24 matches
Mail list logo
