On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Laurynas Biveinis
laurynas.bivei...@gmail.com wrote:
For scalar fields or skipped fields, gengtype produces empty loops.
This patch checks for that case and breaks out if an empty loop body
is detected:
Bootstrappedtested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu. OK?
I think it merely points to a bogus GTY annotation, not sure if we want to
gobble this kind of gengtype hacks which only benefit -O0 ...
The annotation is libcpp/include/line-map.h
In the example above x1 (for token +) is going to be the same
as y1. x0 is the spelling location
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Laurynas Biveinis
laurynas.bivei...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it merely points to a bogus GTY annotation, not sure if we want to
gobble this kind of gengtype hacks which only benefit -O0 ...
The annotation is libcpp/include/line-map.h
In the example
2012/7/24 Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com:
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Laurynas Biveinis
laurynas.bivei...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it merely points to a bogus GTY annotation, not sure if we want to
gobble this kind of gengtype hacks which only benefit -O0 ...
This one indeed
I think it merely points to a bogus GTY annotation, not sure if we want to
gobble this kind of gengtype hacks which only benefit -O0 ...
../../trunk/gcc/../libcpp/include/line-map.h:168: option `length' may
not be applied to arrays of scalar types
../../trunk/gcc/emit-rtl.c:5913: option
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Laurynas Biveinis
laurynas.bivei...@gmail.com wrote:
s/arrays of scalar types/arrays of atomic types, add a ChangeLog entry
and the snippet above is approved ;)
Can you commit it along with your fixes? I think it'd be good to keep
this and your fixes together in
Laurynas == Laurynas Biveinis laurynas.bivei...@gmail.com writes:
Laurynas 2012-06-24 Laurynas Bivienis laurynas.bivei...@gmail.com
Laurynas * include/line-map.h (line_map_macro): Use the atomic GTY
option
Laurynas for the macro_locations field.
Laurynas gcc/java:
Laurynas
s/arrays of scalar types/arrays of atomic types, add a ChangeLog entry
and the snippet above is approved ;)
Can you commit it along with your fixes? I think it'd be good to keep
this and your fixes together in a single commit.
OK
--
Laurynas