Hi Boris,
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 05:53:44PM +0200, Boris Kolpackov wrote:
> Segher Boessenkool writes:
>
> > Patches should go to gcc-patches.
>
> Ok, will keep in mind for future (seeing that we have a discussion
> already it probably doesn't make sense to move this patch).
Please do move it
Segher Boessenkool writes:
> Patches should go to gcc-patches.
Ok, will keep in mind for future (seeing that we have a discussion
already it probably doesn't make sense to move this patch).
> Two spaces after a full stop (all three times).
Fixed, new revision included.
Thanks,
Boris
Index:
Joseph Myers writes:
> I suppose a question for the present proposal would be making sure any
> dependencies generated in this case do not include dependencies on files
> that don't exist (so #include "some-misspelling.h" doesn't create any sort
> of dependency on such a header).
Good point.
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Jeff Law wrote:
> This directly reverts part of Joseph's changes from 2009. I'd like to
> hear from him on this change.
The point of those changes was to make cpplib diagnostics use the
compiler's diagnostic machinery rather than a separate set of diagnostic
machinery in c
On 08/06/2017 01:59 AM, Boris Kolpackov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Currently GCC does not write extracted header dependency information
> if there are errors. However, this can be useful when dealing with
> outdated generated headers that trigger errors which would have been
> resolved if we could update it
Hi!
Patches should go to gcc-patches.
Just a trivial remark:
> --- gcc/c-family/c-opts.c (revision 250514)
> +++ gcc/c-family/c-opts.c (working copy)
> @@ -1152,8 +1152,11 @@
> {
>FILE *deps_stream = NULL;
>
> - /* Don't write the deps file if there are errors. */
> - if (cpp_o
