Hi,
I'm committing the testcase and closing the PR as fixed. Tested
x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/
2012-10-10 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/43663
* g++.dg/init/bitfield3.C: New.
Index: g++.dg/init/bitfie
Hi,
I'm committing the testcase and closing the PR as fixed in mainline.
Thanks,
Paolo.
///
2012-10-11 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/43765
* g++.dg/parse/pr43765.C: New.
Index: g++.dg/parse/pr43
Hi
contributed by Daniel. Tested again and committed.
Paolo.
///
2012-10-11 Daniel Krugler
* testsuite/20_util/common_type/requirements/sfinae_friendly_1.cc:
Update / extend.
* testsuite/20_util/common_type/requirements/sfinae_friendly_2.cc:
Hi,
testcase added to testsuite, PR closed as fixed.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/
2012-10-11 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/36107
* g++.dg/ext/weak5.C: New.
Index: g++.dg/ext/weak5.C
===
--- g++.dg/ext/weak5.C
Hi,
not necessary anymore thanks to the resolution of c++/51213. Tested
x86_64-linux multilib, committed.
Thanks,
Paolo.
///
2012-10-12 Paolo Carlini
* include/bits/hashtable_policy.h: Revert libstdc++/53067 quick
hacks thanks to the resolution of c
Hi,
testcase committed, closed as fixed in 4.8.0.
Thanks,
Paolo.
//
2012-10-11 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/51878
* g++.dg/cpp0x/decltype45.C: New.
Index: g++.dg/cpp0x/decltype45.C
===
--- g++.dg
Hi,
testcase committed, PR closed as fixed in mainline. Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
2012-10-12 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/52744
* g++.dg/cpp0x/pr52744.C: New.
Index: g++.dg/cpp0x/pr52744.C
:
class Fooa
{
friend int main();
};
)
using the more accurate PROCESSING_REAL_TEMPLATE_DECL_P() correctly does
the trick, AFAICS.
Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
//
/cp
2012-10-12 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/24449
* decl.c (grokfndecl): When checking
On 10/12/2012 04:20 PM, Pavel Chupin wrote:
Please see attached patch (applicable after revert).
I've moved libgcc libstdc++ common configure thread header chunk into
separate gthr.m4.
Could you please try it on AIX?
Is it OK for trunk?
Looks Ok. If David can test is successfully on AIX I can a
eally handling the single argument case,
thus I also extended a bit the testcase.
Tested x86_64-linux. (Finally) Ok?
Thanks,
Paolo.
///
/cp
2012-10-14 Alexandre Oliva
Paolo Carlini
PR c++/17805
* call.c (build_new_op): Filter out ope
Hi,
testcase added, issue closed as fixed. Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
2012-10-14 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/52643
* g++.dg/opt/pr52643.C: New.
Index: g++.dg/opt/pr52643.C
===
--- g
Hi,
testcase added, issue closed as fixed. Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/
2012-10-14 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/53581
* g++.dg/template/crash113.C: New.
Index: g++.dg/template/crash113.C
Hi,
thus, if I understand correctly the resolution of Core/468 [CD1], we can
simplify a bit the parser and just accept these 'template' outside
templates. Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
///
/cp
2012-10-15 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/50080
On 10/15/2012 07:30 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
Actually, let's keep the diagnostic when compiling with -pedantic in
98 mode.
... too late! ;) So I prepared the below, I'm finishing testing it.
Thanks,
Paolo.
//
/cp
2012-10-15 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/50
idered various
solutions, I'm proposing to break the endless loop in
reshape_init_array, where we have information about the type of the
zero-size array and we can easily provide an accurate error message.
Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
//
/cp
2012-10-17 Pa
... oh well, I just realized that zero-size VECTORs don't make much
sense and are early rejected, thus I can improve my earlier patch.
Now I'm happier: essentially I'm only *moving* code around ;)
Thanks,
Paolo.
//
/cp
2012-10-17 Paolo Carlini
Hi,
On 10/18/2012 03:17 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
Hmm, I thought I fixed a very similar bug recently.
I'm concerned that this change will cause problems with brace-elision
situations. But then again, can we have a zero-length array followed
by anything else?
If I understand correctly your hes
Hi,
testcase added, PR closed as fixed in mainline.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/
2012-10-18 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/29633
* g++.dg/template/pr29633.C: New.
Index: g++.dg/template/pr29633.C
===
--- g++.dg
On 10/18/2012 06:02 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/18/2012 01:15 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
If I understand correctly your hesitations, I don't think there are
exceptions to the general rule that if the size of the array is zero
there can be no initializers.
I'm thinking of a testcase
Hi again,
On 10/18/2012 06:02 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/18/2012 01:15 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
If I understand correctly your hesitations, I don't think there are
exceptions to the general rule that if the size of the array is zero
there can be no initializers.
I'm thi
On 10/21/2012 04:00 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Based on a casual browsing of clock_gettime(3), CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW
seems to be a better fit for std::chrono::steady_clock's requirements
as given in 20.11.7.2, with recent Linux kernels,
Something like this:
Please always CC library patches to l
rrect diagnostics in all cases (eg, together with multiple members
initialization diagnostics too). I figured out the below. Tested
x86_64-linux, as usual.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/cp
2012-10-22 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/54922
* semantics.c (cx_check_missing_mem_
Hi,
I'm pinging this patchlet:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg01013.html
For sure not an high priority issue, neither I can say to fully
understand whether in C++ we can and should have the exact same
semantics of the __transparent_union__ attribute in C, but I think that
i
Hi
tested x86_64-linux multilib, committed to mainline. A similar fix will
go in 4_7-branch too.
Thanks,
Paolo.
2012-10-24 Haakan Younes
Paolo Carlini
PR libstdc++/55047
* include/bits/random.h (exponential_distribution<>::op
testcases, and I'm actually pretty happy with that, because we produce
much less verbose diagnostic in both cases (1 error message less / 2
respectively).
Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
//
/cp
2012-10-24 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/34892
*
Hi,
On 10/24/2012 07:30 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/24/2012 01:20 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
+ if (parm == error_mark_node
+ || TREE_PURPOSE (parm) == error_mark_node)
It seems odd to bail out early if the default argument is bad even if
we aren't trying to use it. Doesn
Hi,
On 10/24/2012 06:57 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/10/2012 11:13 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
- error ("type transparent class %qT does not have any fields", t);
+ if (TREE_CODE (t) == UNION_TYPE)
+error ("type transparent union %qT does not have
Hi,
On 10/24/2012 09:55 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/24/2012 03:48 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
+ error ("type transparent %q#T cannot be made transparent
because "
+ "a field has neither pointer nor integer type", t);
I'd say "%q#T cannot be mad
On 10/24/2012 09:53 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/24/2012 02:11 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
The problem is that the first time we go through the loop, when parm_idx
== 0 and TREE_PURPOSE is error_mark_node, the condition:
if (template_parameter_pack_p (TREE_VALUE (parm))
&&am
irements/sfinae_friendly_2.cc
===
--- testsuite/20_util/common_type/requirements/sfinae_friendly_2.cc
(revision 192762)
+++ testsuite/20_util/common_type/requirements/sfinae_friendly_2.cc
(working copy)
@@ -24,12 +24,11 @@
tem
.. Oh well, and the details of this are even subtler, because, assuming
we want the exact same behavior of the C front-end, we are going to accept:
typedef union {
int* f;
int y;
} __attribute__(( __transparent_union__ )) example_t;
and reject:
typedef union {
int f;
int* y;
} __attrib
ngle regression, at the end of pr39060.C, because NULL_TREE implies
that we don't do anymore the diagnostics about default argument part of
duplicate_decls (which ICC also gives). Besides that, for 34892 we give
like 6 different error messages ;)
////////
/cp
2012-10-24 Pa
Hi,
On 10/25/2012 03:53 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
We can stop it even sooner:
/* If the next token is an ellipsis, and we don't already have it
marked as a parameter pack, then we have a parameter pack (that
has no declarator). */
if (!*is_parameter_pack
&& cp_lexer_next_to
can't be improved, I'm not very familiar with dg-final. Also,
in case we agree that the fix can be such simple, we could maybe
consider 4_7-branch too...
Thanks!
Paolo.
////
/cp
2012-10-26 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/54984
* init.c (build_new): Don&
Hi,
On 10/26/2012 02:44 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/25/2012 09:15 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
I'm not sure the testcase can't be improved, I'm not very familiar with
dg-final.
You could do an execution test using a user-defined operator new which
initializes the memory to
On 10/26/2012 04:11 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
Committed.
I can't find the message actually approving the patch. And personally
I'm a bit nervous about it.
Paolo.
On 10/26/2012 04:36 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
On 10/26/2012 10:26 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
On 10/26/2012 04:11 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
Committed.
I can't find the message actually approving the patch. And personally
I'm a bit nervous about it.
Paolo.
Sorry, i though it
below.
Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/libcpp
2012-10-28 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/54526 (again)
* lex.c (_cpp_lex_direct): In C++11 mode, implement 2.5 p3, bullet 2.
/gcc/cp
2012-10-28 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/54526 (again)
* parser.c
On 10/28/2012 04:14 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
this patch lets some predicates on floating point constants answer
true for vectors, so optimizations are applied.
Great.
I wonder how are we doing lately in terms of function pointer inlining?!
If the current optimizers can already able to s
On 10/28/2012 04:46 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
On 10/28/2012 04:14 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
this patch lets some predicates on floating point constants answer
true for vectors, so optimizations are applied.
Great.
I wonder how are we doing lately in terms of function pointer
inlining
Hi,
On 10/28/2012 05:51 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Sun, 28 Oct 2012, Marc Glisse wrote:
[there are 4 real_*p that only differ by 1 character]
It is true that we could have a single function in tree.c:
bool real_intcstp (const_tree, int);
The helper function could even take a REAL_VALUE_TYPE
On 10/28/2012 06:06 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Sun, 28 Oct 2012, Paolo Carlini wrote:
I was writing something like the below.
I would move the one-liners (real_zerop, etc) to tree.h, but that
looks good, yes.
Ah great. But please, don't wait on me, I'm in the middle of too many
ot
Hi,
Florian Weimer ha scritto:
>Ping?
>
>Patch is at: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-08/msg01416.html
Sorry, I don't know the code well enough to review your patch, but since I'm in
CC, I still don't understand why, instead of adding a full libstdc++ testcase
you are extending a C++ t
2012-10-30 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/54583
* tree.c (build_cplus_array_type): Set TREE_NO_WARNING on the
TYPE_SIZE of VLAs.
/testsuite
2012-10-30 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/54583
* g++.dg/ext/vla13.C: New.
Index: testsuite/g++.dg/e
Applied.
Thanks,
Paolo.
Hi,
On 10/31/2012 02:50 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/30/2012 07:44 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
straightforward fix. The below, which regtests fine, simply acts on any
MULT_EXPR as TYPE_SIZE, which I think should be fine, but, in case the
idea is basically Ok, we could also consider the more
e that I'm adding a check in
finish_fully_implicit_template.
Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/////////
/cp
2013-10-02 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58565
* semantics.c (potential_constant_expression_1): Handle LABEL_EXPR.
/testsuite
2013-10-02 Paolo Carlini
... oops attached the patch which I just committed. Sorry. Right
attachments below.
Thanks,
Paolo.
//
/cp
2013-10-02 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58535
* parser.c (cp_parser_function_specifier_opt): Upon error about
virtual templates don'
, etc.
Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
//
/cp
2013-10-04 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58584
* decl2.c (cplus_decl_attributes): Correctly handle error_mark_node as
attributes argument.
* parser.c (cp_parser_std_attribute_spec): When alignas_expr is
k
fine (I also checked that with -fpermissive an eventual instantiation
produces hard errors, as it should)
Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/cp
2013-10-03 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58503
* parser.c (cp_parser_perform_range_for_lookup): If e
Hi,
On 10/03/2013 04:02 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/02/2013 09:02 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
- save_template_attributes (&attributes, decl);
+ if (attributes != error_mark_node)
+save_template_attributes (&attributes, decl);
I'd rather make save_template_attr
On 10/03/2013 07:33 PM, Tim Shen wrote:
Tested under -m32, -m64, however didn't do a bootstrap. Is that OK?
Seems trivial enough, Ok.
Thanks,
Paolo
PS: I suppose isn't easy to prepare a testcase which would exercise
those lines?
Hi,
On 10/03/2013 10:55 PM, Tim Shen wrote:
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Seems trivial enough, Ok.
Committed.
PS: I suppose isn't easy to prepare a testcase which would exercise those
lines?
Telling the truth, this bug *is* revealed by rerunning testcases wit
Forgot...
But in
>principle yes, since we deliver two, and the users have a way to choose
>
>which one they want (X) we should add to the testsuite 2 copies of each
>
>test which doesn't use br and test both executors.
In practice, of course, we could also avoid the 2 physical copies. For examp
Hi,
Tim Shen ha scritto:
>Yes I think we should keep secret, because the standard doesn't
>specify it. They only way to publish the switch to user is making a
>library extension(is that true?), but there's no obvious benefit to do
>that(is that true? I shall be humble).
Well, the standard does
On 10/03/2013 03:27 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/03/2013 05:52 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
+ else if (!TREE_TYPE (*begin) || !TREE_TYPE (*end))
This should use type_dependent_expression_p.
And there should be a positive test for a dependent range that
exercises this code.
I see what
have of a positive test in this
context.
Thus the below, lightly tested so far but the tests both pass and the
patch itself isn't so different, besides type_dependent_expression_p.
Thanks!
Paolo.
/cp
2013-10-04 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58503
Hi,
this error recovery ICE (a low priority regression) can be easily
avoided by checking the TREE_TYPE of exp too. Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
///
/cp
2013-10-04 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58560
* typeck2.c (build_functional_cast): Use
... and this is a more straightforward approach. Also tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks!
Paolo.
/
/cp
2013-10-04 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58448
* pt.c (tsubst): Use error_operand_p on parameter t.
/testsuite
2013-10-04 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58448
Hi,
On 10/04/2013 04:13 PM, Tim Shen wrote:
This is based on disscusions
here(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2013-10/msg00034.html)
And it successfully find a bug in regex_executor.tcc :)
Booted and tested under -m32, -m64 and debug before the change in
regex_executor.tcc;
-m32 and -m64 only
On 10/04/2013 06:04 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
In particular, the new *_testsuite functions, isn't immediately clear
in what they differ from the non-_testsuite variants. In any case we
should figure out a better name, maybe even *_internal, if we can't
find anything more accurate, but
.. a final one: if you don't like all those *_debug functions around,
both in rehex.h and regex.tcc, you could move all of them to a new
header matching the new naming scheme, like regex_debug.h. For the time
being I would recommend putting it in bits/, installing it, including it
from , exactl
Hi Andrew,
On 10/04/2013 07:36 PM, Andrew Sutton wrote:
+ if (!check_template_constraints (tmpl, args))
+{
+ location_t loc = DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (function);
+ error ("%qD is not a viable candidate", function);
+ diagnose_constraints (
On 10/05/2013 03:58 AM, Tim Shen wrote:
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
A completely different option, which I also like a lot in fact, would be
putting the new *_testsuite functions inside the already existing
testsuite/util/testsuite/regex.h. There you would use
Hi,
Tim Shen ha scritto:
>Some are changed to size_t, some to long; some harmless ones are left.
>
>I'll do a bootstrap & full test before committing.
Patch looks great to me. If you don't get more comments over the next day or
so, please go ahead.
Thanks!
Paolo
look inside the expression via
PACK_EXPANSION_PATTERN: in the testcase, for "bar ..." as expression
the _PATTERN is a TEMPLATE_ID_EXPR which then is normally handled.
Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/cp
2013-10-06 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/56060
On 10/06/2013 07:46 AM, Tim Shen wrote:
Stupid errors hidden in some large commit.
Ok, thanks.
Paolo.
Hi,
Jason Merrill ha scritto:
>For EXPR_PACK_EXPANSION we can just return true; a pack expansion is
>always dependent, on the number of arguments if nothing else.
Thanks. I suspected that ;) Then I'm going to test the corresponding very
simple patch and commit it.
Thanks again!
Paolo
Hi,
tested x86_64-linux, committed to mainline.
Paolo.
///
2013-10-06 Oleg Endo
Paolo Carlini
PR libstdc++/58625
* include/c_global/cmath (signbit): Use __builtin_signbitf and
__builtin_signbitl.
Index: include/c_global/cmath
"class 'B'" and "base class 'A'" for
these structs too?
//
/cp
2013-10-06 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58126
* class.c (check_bases): Propagate CLASSTYPE_READONLY_FIELDS_NEED_INIT
and CLASSTYPE_REF_FIELDS_NEED_INIT fro
On 10/07/2013 12:43 AM, Tim Shen wrote:
Here's a simple piece of code
https://gist.github.com/innocentim/6849759 the reveals _BFSExecutor's
inefficiency.
... which we want in testsuite/performance/28_regex!
Thanks!
Paolo.
Hi,
On 10/07/2013 11:14 AM, Adam Butcher wrote:
+ if (!cp_disable_auto_as_implicit_function_template_parm &&
+ current_binding_level->kind == sk_function_parms)
Stylistic nit: && should be on the next line.
Thanks!
Paolo.
5.C) I don't get the impression that explicitly talking
about derivation ever adds much, if anything.
Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/
/cp
2013-10-08 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58568
* lambda.c (begin_lambda_type): Check return value of xref_tag
committing the
tentative parse when the flag is true.
Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
///
/cp
2013-10-08 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58633
* parser.c (cp_parser_postfix_dot_deref_expression,
cp_parser_pseudo_destructor_name): Add bool parameter
On 10/04/2013 02:04 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
... and this is a more straightforward approach. Also tested x86_64-linux.
I reverted this for now. Was causing problems (c++/58665).
Thanks,
Paolo.
.. a curiosity: the cp_parser_commit_to_tentative_parse at the end of
cp_parser_pseudo_destructor_name, which didn't exist in 4.6.x and we can
consider the root of this issue, is also my fault:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg02246.html
From a different angle, I'm happy of the
the parsing of valid postfix-expressions
!= member access expression.
Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks!
Paolo.
/////
/cp
2013-10-09 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58633
* parser.c (cp_parser_decltype_expr): Restructure parsing of
expressio
Hi,
On 10/09/2013 03:56 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/08/2013 07:03 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
.. a curiosity: the cp_parser_commit_to_tentative_parse at the end of
cp_parser_pseudo_destructor_name, which didn't exist in 4.6.x and we can
consider the root of this issue, is also my
,
Paolo.
/cp
2013-10-10 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/31671
* pt.c (convert_nontype_argument): Adjust TREE_TYPE (expr) to
the cv-qualifiers of TREE_TYPE (probe_type).
/testsuite
2013-10-10 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/31671
* g++.dg/template
Hi,
On 10/10/2013 08:26 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/10/2013 08:33 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
+ expr_type = TREE_TYPE (expr) = cp_build_qualified_type
+(TREE_TYPE (expr), cp_type_quals (TREE_TYPE (probe_type)));
Won't that end up being the same as the contents of expr
Hi,
On 10/11/2013 05:55 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/10/2013 03:31 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
On 10/10/2013 08:26 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/10/2013 08:33 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
+ expr_type = TREE_TYPE (expr) = cp_build_qualified_type
+(TREE_TYPE (expr), cp_type_quals
oo, what should we do in those
branches? I'm thinking applying the change to 4_8 too and either not
fixing in 4_7 or just reverting the cp_parser_commit_to_tentative_parse
change which improved the diagnostic for 47277?
Thanks,
Paolo.
///////
/cp
2013-10-11 Paolo Carli
On 10/11/2013 03:59 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/11/2013 06:28 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
The issue is a regression in 4_7/4_8 too, what should we do in those
branches? I'm thinking applying the change to 4_8 too and either not
fixing in 4_7 or just revertin
bunch of those returned untouched leads to the same error message of 4_7
and no ICE. Not sure at the moment whether something deeper is going on,
though.
Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
//
/cp
2013-10-11 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58466
* s
Hi,
On 10/11/2013 07:46 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
How does a TEMPLATE_PARM_INDEX get this far? It should have been
detected as dependent before this.
Thanks. Interesting. We get there from the convert_nontype_argument call
at line 6453 of pt.c (in convert_template_argument) , which is protected
On 10/11/2013 08:29 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Are we maybe failing to bump processing_template_decl somewhere while
processing the specialization?
... I'm finishing testing this, already past g++.dg/dg.exp...
Paolo.
Index: cp
On 10/11/2013 09:31 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
On 10/11/2013 08:29 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Are we maybe failing to bump processing_template_decl somewhere while
processing the specialization?
... I'm finishing testing this, already past g++.dg/dg.exp...
In the meanwhile testing comp
behavior.
Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/
/cp
2013-10-14 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58700
* decl.c (grokdeclarator): Don't try to pass declarator->id_loc
to build_lang_decl_loc when declarator is null.
/testsuite
2013-10-14 Paolo Carlini
Hi,
today I noticed that in cp_parser_lookup_name the code in the
object_type != NULL_TREE else can be tidied a bit and a lookup_name_real
often avoided. Tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/
2013-10-14 Paolo Carlini
* parser.c (cp_parser_lookup_name
Hi
On 10/14/2013 05:43 PM, Paulo Matos wrote:
* cp/error.c (code_to_string): Use new wrapper get_tree_code_name.
* cp/cxx-pretty-print.c (pp_cxx_assignment_operator): Use new wrapper
get_tree_code_name.
* cp/pt.c (tsubst): Use new wrapper get_tree_code_name.
* cp
On 10/15/2013 04:56 PM, Tim Shen wrote:
This memory leak is because forgetting virtual destructor of the base
class _Executor.
Of course.
Thanks,
Paolo.
l case c++11 vs c++98. Neither wrap only the cp_parser_expression
call.
///
/cp
2013-10-15 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58707
* parser.c (cp_parser_postfix_open_square_expression): Set
parser->greater_than_is_operator_p for the argument.
/testsuite
2
.
Thanks,
Paolo.
///
2013-10-16 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58724
* doc/extend.texi [visibility ("visibility_type")]: Add example
about visibility attribute on namespace declaration.
/cp
2013-10-16 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58724
* nam
Hi,
bootstrap is currently broken, I'm going to test and commit the below if
everything goes well.
Thanks,
Paolo.
///
Index: pt.c
===
--- pt.c(revision 203698)
+++ pt.c(working copy)
@@ -12102,7 +1
On 10/16/2013 11:48 PM, Tim Shen wrote:
It's detected by `clang++ -g -std=c++11 -fsanitize=undefined` but not
detected by g++ with flags `g++ -g -std=c++11 -fsanitize=undefined
-lpthread`. Am I on the right way?
-m32 and -m64 tested :)
Thank you!
Paolo.
On 10/17/2013 12:29 AM, Tim Shen wrote:
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Thank you!
Committed.
By the way, please feel free to prepare a reduced testcase for the
-fsanitize people (Marek, Jakub?)
Thanks,
Paolo.
On 10/17/2013 12:39 AM, Tim Shen wrote:
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
By the way, please feel free to prepare a reduced testcase for the
-fsanitize people (Marek, Jakub?)
Here it is.
And we should get undefined behaviors before this commit(r203732).
To be honest, I
On 10/17/2013 09:17 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Though, in the above case, the question is why people ignore warnings
from the compiler and need to have special runtime instrumentation to
remind them instead. I'm not objecting to that sanitization, only find
it weird.
I had the same thought.
Pao
Hi,
On 10/17/2013 09:04 AM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
This patch bootstraps and tests clean on x86-64-linux.
Truthfully, dynamic_bitset needs some more love wrt C++11 and a
testsuite.
It got put in before it was baked really.
That will be later.
Patch is Ok with me. Before committing you may w
4-linux.
Thanks!
Paolo.
////
/cp
2013-10-17 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58596
* lambda.c (lambda_expr_this_capture): Handle NSDMIs in the
cp_unevaluated_operand case.
/testsuite
2013-10-17 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58596
* g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-
201 - 300 of 3018 matches
Mail list logo
