On 12/13/18 7:07 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 12/13/18 3:52 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-12/msg00426.html
(I have now committed the @code{const} cleanup mentioned below.)
This patch is OK except for one nit.
@cindex pointer arguments
Note that a
On 12/13/18 3:52 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-12/msg00426.html
(I have now committed the @code{const} cleanup mentioned below.)
This patch is OK except for one nit.
@cindex pointer arguments
Note that a function that has pointer arguments and
Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-12/msg00426.html
(I have now committed the @code{const} cleanup mentioned below.)
On 12/6/18 6:12 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 12/3/18 11:04 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 12/3/18 2:47 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
[snip]
Attached is my proposed update.
On 12/3/18 11:04 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 12/3/18 2:47 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
[snip]
Attached is my proposed update. The user's email suggested going
into a lot of detail that I'm not sure would be helpful. I think
it's safer to keep it simple than to try to carefully outline tricky
On 12/3/18 2:47 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
[snip]
Attached is my proposed update. The user's email suggested going
into a lot of detail that I'm not sure would be helpful. I think
it's safer to keep it simple than to try to carefully outline tricky
conditions under which some const or pure
On 11/26/18 8:45 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 11/26/18 8:32 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/26/18 11:13 AM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 11/26/18 10:17 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/25/18 6:40 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
I've checked in the attached patch for PR79738.
I think we have lost
On 11/26/18 8:32 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/26/18 11:13 AM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 11/26/18 10:17 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/25/18 6:40 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
I've checked in the attached patch for PR79738.
I think we have lost something important with the clarification
of
On 11/26/18 11:13 AM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 11/26/18 10:17 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/25/18 6:40 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
I've checked in the attached patch for PR79738.
I think we have lost something important with the clarification
of attribute const:
The @code{const}
On 11/26/18 10:17 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/25/18 6:40 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
I've checked in the attached patch for PR79738.
I think we have lost something important with the clarification
of attribute const:
The @code{const} attribute imposes greater restrictions on
a
On 11/25/18 6:40 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
I've checked in the attached patch for PR79738.
I think we have lost something important with the clarification
of attribute const:
The @code{const} attribute imposes greater restrictions on
a function's definition than the similar @code{pure}
I've checked in the attached patch for PR79738.
-Sandra
2018-11-25 Sandra Loosemore
PR web/79738
gcc/
* doc/extend.texi (Common Function Attributes): Clarify that
functions with "const" attribute can read const global variables.
Index: gcc/doc/extend.texi
11 matches
Mail list logo
