I'm sorry! Is I am too impatient. Thank you for your remind and Suggestions. I'll take the time to put a bug in greater detail.
Best regards, jiang Thomas Preud'homme <[email protected]>编写： >Le lundi 30 juin 2014, 16:49:02 jiang a écrit : >> Struct improved algorithms and add struct warnings and other warnings. > >Hi Jiang, > >> >> The following can be compiled: >> struct st{int a;;;;;;;}; >> >> If you do not have advice, tomorrow pushed into the mob. > >No Jiang, that's not how it works. There is several problem with this request: > >1) You need to realize that we are all volunteer spending some of our free >time to improve tcc. We don't necessarily check emails about tcc everyday and >anyway 1 day is too short to review. Another consequence of this is that we >don't have to answer within a given delay. We will do our best to answer but >you just need to wait. Of course if too much time (like 2 weeks) pass without >answer you can ping to ask if we saw your email. And finally I think in your >case you should not commit without an approval first. Eventually, when your >commit will start to improve we might tell you that you don't need to ask for >a review anymore. > >2) I gave you some comments on another patch. Before asking for another review >you could maybe post a new version that fixes all my comments. It gives the >feeling that you don't want to address the remarks and discourages people to >review your patches. > >3) Don't bundle several changes in one patch. It makes it more difficult to >review. So you make one patch that fixes the bug you mentions and others (or >maybe just one other, it depends how big it is) with the warnings > >4) Your patch contains some formatting issues: > >+ if (v == 0 && (type1.t & VT_BTYPE) != VT_STRUCT){ >+ tcc_warning("declaration does not declare >anything"); >+ break; >+ }if (type_size(&type1, &align) < 0) { >+ if ((a == TOK_STRUCT) && (type1.t & VT_ARRAY)) >+ flexible = 1; >+ else >+ tcc_error("field '%s' has incomplete type", >get_tok_str(v, NULL)); > } > >There should be a space between the closing parenthesis ')' and the opening >curly brace '{'. The second "if" should be on a new line or should be preceded >by a "else" > >5) The commit message is not very informative. For the commit with the bugfix >you could say "Allow tcc to parse:" and then the example. See commit >82969f045c99b4d1ef833de35117c17b326b46c0 for an example. You can also simply >explain what bug you fix "Fix parsing of arbitrary number of semicolons" or >something better and that brings me to the next comment. > >6) You need to understand how a language is designed. > >- parse_btype(&btype, &ad); >+ if(!parse_btype(&btype, &ad)){ >+ if (tok == ';'){ >+ skip(';'); >+ continue; > >Here you are saying that it's ok to have struct st {int a;;;;;} but not struct >st {int a:10;;;;}. A better place to add such a check would be near the end of >the function, around the "skip(';'). You need to understand why this is >authorized. So as an exercise grab the C99 standard at [1] and tell me why >this is authorized. Hint: start to read from section 6.7.2.1. Definitions are >recursive, so you need to browse quite a lot to understand things. Try to tell >me which lexical elements to follow (sorry, I don't know the proper term, >shame on me) to create your testcase. Something like: > >struct-or-union-specifier > -> struct-or-union > -> identifier (no need to detail here) > -> struct-declaration-list > -> struct-declaration > >etc… > >[1] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/WG14/www/docs/n1256.pdf > >Best regards, > >Thomas _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
