On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 08:43:57AM -0500, Diego Novillo wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> >> Thanks. Committed as rev 205023.
>> >
>> > Nice work, but why did you antedate the entries in the various Change
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 08:43:57AM -0500, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> >> Thanks. Committed as rev 205023.
> >
> > Nice work, but why did you antedate the entries in the various ChangeLog
>
> Oh, that's because of local commits and holding on to t
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 8:32 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59212
Thanks. Fixed.
PR 59212
* g++.dg/plugin/selfassign.c: Include stringpool.h
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/plugin/selfassign.c
b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/plugin/selfassign.c
inde
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> Thanks. Committed as rev 205023.
>
> Nice work, but why did you antedate the entries in the various ChangeLog
Oh, that's because of local commits and holding on to the patch for a
few days. That date is the date of the original local commit
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> This patch applies the rule that functions defined in FOO.c must be
> declared in FOO.h. One of the worst offenders in the code base is
> tree.h, unsurprisingly.
>
> The first patch contains the actual moves from tree.h into the
> various .h
> Thanks. Committed as rev 205023.
Nice work, but why did you antedate the entries in the various ChangeLog
files? That's rather confusing when you use them to track things in specific
directories (yes, we all know your opinion about ChangeLog files ;-)
--
Eric Botcazou
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 12:17 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> It looks OK to me.
Thanks. Committed as rev 205023.
Ian, the Go front end will need that patch committed now.
Diego.
On 11/18/13 11:47, Diego Novillo wrote:
Thanks for all the feedback.
Here is the patch with all the changes we discussed last week. OK for
trunk? I'm going to need another day or so to re-do all the target
builds to make sure nothing new has slipped in.
It looks OK to me. We've got some more
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:23 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/14/13 15:19, Diego Novillo wrote:
>>
>> A good chunk. I'm doing these FIXMEs in the next sequence of patches,
>> so we won't have them for long. Again, I was going for an orderly
>> transition here.
>
> However, I'm much more concerned abou
On 11/14/13 15:19, Diego Novillo wrote:
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/14/13 13:28, Diego Novillo wrote:
Functions in each corresponding .c file got moved to those
headers and others that already existed. I wanted to make this
patch as mechanical as possible, so I made
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/14/13 13:28, Diego Novillo wrote:
>>
>> Functions in each corresponding .c file got moved to those
>> headers and others that already existed. I wanted to make this
>> patch as mechanical as possible, so I made no attempt to fix
>> problems
On 11/14/13 13:28, Diego Novillo wrote:
Functions in each corresponding .c file got moved to those
headers and others that already existed. I wanted to make this
patch as mechanical as possible, so I made no attempt to fix
problems like having build_addr defined in tree-inline.c. I left
that for
12 matches
Mail list logo
