On 05/22/2015 06:19 PM, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
On 22.05.2015 12:10, Marek Polacek wrote:
Thanks, applied. Here's the final version.
By the way, we have a feature test macro, __cpp_attributes=200809 which
can be used to determine, whether C++11 attribute syntax is supported by
the compiler.
I
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 02:00:26PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 05/07/2015 12:22 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
- mark_used (decl);
+ mark_used (decl, 0);
This should use tf_none rather than 0.
Fixed.
+ build_enumerator (DECL_NAME (decl), value, newtag,
+
On 22.05.2015 12:10, Marek Polacek wrote:
Thanks, applied. Here's the final version.
By the way, we have a feature test macro, __cpp_attributes=200809 which
can be used to determine, whether C++11 attribute syntax is supported by
the compiler.
I propose to add something similar for this
On 05/07/2015 12:22 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
- mark_used (decl);
+ mark_used (decl, 0);
This should use tf_none rather than 0.
+ build_enumerator (DECL_NAME (decl), value, newtag,
+ DECL_ATTRIBUTES (decl), DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (decl));
This is assuming
I'm pinging the C++ parts.
Thanks,
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 06:22:40PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
This (third) version of the patch entails the change in tsubst_enum Ed
suggested + new testcase.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2015-05-07 Marek Polacek
On Thu, 14 May 2015, Marek Polacek wrote:
Ping.
Joseph, do you have any further comments on the patch?
The C front-end changes are OK.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
Ping.
Joseph, do you have any further comments on the patch?
Jason, can you review the C++ parts?
Thanks,
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 06:22:40PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
This (third) version of the patch entails the change in tsubst_enum Ed
suggested + new testcase.
Bootstrapped/regtested on
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 11:23:51AM -0600, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
How about making the new Enumerator Attributes node a subsection of the Type
Attributes section, instead of a section of its own at the same level?
Sorry, I don't particularly like this idea. I think an enumerator is not
[ CC'ing Sandra: since you were recently cleaning up the attributes docs
(thanks), the doc/extend.texi bits in this patch might be of interest to
you. ]
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 08:44:10PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
2015-05-06 Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com
PR c/47043
*
On 05/07/2015 09:59 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 11:17:20PM -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
In addition to a PR this is 1/2 of a C=+17 feature. (The other half - really
a separate thing - is attributes on namespaces).
Ah, nice, I wasn't aware. For the record, this is
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 11:17:20PM -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
In addition to a PR this is 1/2 of a C=+17 feature. (The other half - really
a separate thing - is attributes on namespaces).
Ah, nice, I wasn't aware. For the record, this is
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 10:21:28AM -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
Instead of NULL_TREE in pt.c I grabbed the attrs.
/* Actually build the enumerator itself. */
build_enumerator
(DECL_NAME (decl), value, newtag, DECL_ATTRIBUTES (decl),
DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (decl));
On 05/07/2015 10:22 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
[snip]
* doc/extend.texi (Enumerator Attributes): New section.
Document syntax of enumerator attributes.
How about making the new Enumerator Attributes node a subsection of the
Type Attributes section, instead of a section of its
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 04:13:05PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Wed, 6 May 2015, Marek Polacek wrote:
2015-05-06 Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com
PR c/47043
* c-common.c (handle_deprecated_attribute): Allow CONST_DECL.
Do all other attributes already reject CONST_DECL? I
On Wed, 6 May 2015, Marek Polacek wrote:
2015-05-06 Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com
PR c/47043
* c-common.c (handle_deprecated_attribute): Allow CONST_DECL.
Do all other attributes already reject CONST_DECL? I don't see any tests
for unsupported attributes on enum values
In addition to a PR this is 1/2 of a C=+17 feature. (The other half -
really a separate thing - is attributes on namespaces).
I wonder if we should pedwarn for C++17?
Or it could be just an extension for C++17 - I guess that would match
with clang.
if (SCOPED_ENUM_P (newtag))
diff
This patch implements a feature quite a lot of people wanted: allow using
__attribute__ ((deprecated)) on an enumerator. Implementing it was quite
straightforward: parse the attributes and apply them to the CONST_DECL.
I hit an issue in the C++ FE though: since r217677 we produce the deprecated
17 matches
Mail list logo
