On 4/29/24 07:52, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 10:28:19AM -0400, Patrick Palka wrote:
Lightly tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu so far, does this look OK for
trunk/14.1 after bootstrap+regtest finishes?
LGTM.
Yes, OK.
-- >8 --
We're missing a dependence check for the second
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 10:28:19AM -0400, Patrick Palka wrote:
> Lightly tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu so far, does this look OK for
> trunk/14.1 after bootstrap+regtest finishes?
LGTM.
> -- >8 --
>
> We're missing a dependence check for the second operand in the
> sizeof / sizeof handling.
>
Lightly tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu so far, does this look OK for
trunk/14.1 after bootstrap+regtest finishes?
-- >8 --
We're missing a dependence check for the second operand in the
sizeof / sizeof handling.
PR c++/114888
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* typeck.cc (cp_build_binary_op) :