On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
lopeziba...@gmail.com wrote:
* In C a const variable which is neither extern nor static is
visible outside of the current translation unit. In C++ it is not,
without an explicit extern declaration. I'm not sure how best to
handle
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 8:42 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
lopeziba...@gmail.com wrote:
BTW, why is this warned about?
I imagine because in C it is not conventional to use extern when
defining something, only on a declaration that is not a definition.
But may it lead to some confusion or subtle
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
lopeziba...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
BTW, why is this warned about?
I imagine because in C it is not conventional to use extern when
defining
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
lopeziba...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
BTW,
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
I've finished my set of patches which fix -Wc++-compat to check for enum
conversions which are valid in C++. Adding those checks forced a lot of
changes in mainline to compile cleanly with -Wc++-compat. I have merged
In order to be able to use namespaces in my endeavour to
support gcc with multiple targets, I've first done a merge
from the gcc-in-cxx branch.
For my initial implementation, I choose as configuration
--target=m32r-elf --with-extra-target-list='sh64-elf arc-elf32' .
I've found some issues with
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
* The C++ frontend warns about while (true); when there is no
whitespace between the ')' and the ';'. The C frontend does not. I'm
not sure how to best handle this. It doesn't make much sense to warn
about this with -Wc++-compat. Should
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Joern Rennecke wrote:
What are your thoughts on using gcc extensions for gcc-in-cxx ?
I believe we agreed in a previous discussion to aim for building with the
intersection of C++98/C++03 and C++ as supported by GCC 3.4 (including
making sure at an appropriate point that
Quoting Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Joern Rennecke wrote:
What are your thoughts on using gcc extensions for gcc-in-cxx ?
I believe we agreed in a previous discussion to aim for building with the
intersection of C++98/C++03 and C++ as supported by GCC 3.4
2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
* The C++ frontend warns about while (true); when there is no
whitespace between the ')' and the ';'. The C frontend does not. I'm
not sure how to best handle this. It doesn't make much
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Joern Rennecke wrote:
Quoting Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Joern Rennecke wrote:
What are your thoughts on using gcc extensions for gcc-in-cxx ?
I believe we agreed in a previous discussion to aim for building with the
On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 13:21 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Joern Rennecke wrote:
Quoting Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Joern Rennecke wrote:
What are your thoughts on using gcc extensions for gcc-in-cxx ?
I believe we
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
* The C++ frontend warns about while (true); when there is no
whitespace between the ')' and the ';'. The C frontend does not. I'm
not
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
The question is not just one for bootstrapping a native compiler but also
one of what compiler can be used to build a cross compiler (such as that
with multiple targets), which is not bootstrapped in the usual GCC sense.
There we presently
2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
I don't know the rationale for this warning. Is it to do with the C++0x
specification that certain loops may be assumed to terminate?
I guess the rationale is that there is little use for
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
* The C++ frontend warns about while (true); when there is no
whitespace between the ')' and the ';'.
2009/4/29 Sebastian Redl sebastian.r...@getdesigned.at:
So MSC will warn about this construct, but GCC will not, due to its
whitespace rule:
I think we should just remove the whitespace rule and implement the
warning in C.
Cheers,
Manuel.
Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
* The C++ frontend emits some warnings on code which is known to be
never executed, which the C frontend does not. This leads to some
warnings compiling code in gcc. I think it is reasonable to fix this
in the C++ frontend.
Or just
Joern Rennecke amyl...@spamcop.net writes:
I've found some issues with gcc-in-cxx both specific to these
targets, and specific to (parts of) compiler passes that are
only compiled for a subset of all tagets, which include one or
more of the above mentioned three.
I'd be happy to see and
Manuel López-Ibáñez lopeziba...@gmail.com writes:
2009/4/29 Sebastian Redl sebastian.r...@getdesigned.at:
So MSC will warn about this construct, but GCC will not, due to its
whitespace rule:
I think we should just remove the whitespace rule and implement the
warning in C.
Actually it
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
BTW, why is this warned about?
I imagine because in C it is not conventional to use extern when
defining something, only on a declaration that is not a definition.
But may it lead to some confusion or subtle error? It seems overly
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
(I'm not personally convinced that a multi-targeted gcc is particularly
useful, though I don't object if there is a general desire to support
it.)
I think the cleanups involved in using the target vector / class more, and
other cleanups involved
2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
BTW, why is this warned about?
I imagine because in C it is not conventional to use extern when
defining something, only on a declaration that is not a definition.
But may it lead to some
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
BTW, why is this warned about?
I imagine because in C it is not conventional to use extern when
defining something, only on a
2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
BTW, why is this warned about?
I imagine because in C it is not conventional to use
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
If you are building a non-C front end without bootstrapping you need at
least 2.95:
To build all languages in a cross-compiler or other configuration where
3-stage bootstrap is not performed,
Quoting Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com:
I'm not sure why you are singling me out.
You seemed to be actively working on the branch, and the c++ enum type
checks provide a motivation to make changes. Also, this issue should
be considered in general when people change their coding habits in
Quoting Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
I think the cleanups involved in using the target vector / class more, and
other cleanups involved in the natural approach to multi-target GCC of
which the target vector is a part, are more useful than the end result
(for which compiling large
On Wednesday 29 April 2009 12:47:04 Joern Rennecke wrote:
Something which I miss in C++ is a way to declare that a function uses
an integral type to pass an enum value (in arguments or return value),
and then at function definition time only check that the integral type
is sufficently large to
On Wednesday 29 April 2009 12:47:04 Joern Rennecke wrote:
Something which I miss in C++ is a way to declare that a function uses
an integral type to pass an enum value (in arguments or return value),
and then at function definition time only check that the integral type
is sufficently large to
30 matches
Mail list logo
