On 01/07/14 08:14, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Yes this is fine. One could easily argue this falls within the Cilk+ maintainership and that you don't need approval for it.Hello Everyone, The attached patch will fix the issue reported in PR 59631. The main issue was the usage of Cilk spawn [and _Cilk_sync] with -fcilkplus caused an ICE. This patch should fix that. The issue was only reported for C++ but the issue exists in C compiler also. This patch fixes both C and C++. A test case is also included.Is this Ok for trunk? Here are the ChangeLog entries: +++ gcc/c/ChangeLog +2014-01-07 Balaji V. Iyer <balaji.v.i...@intel.com> + + PR c++/59631 + * c-parser.c (c_parser_postfix_expression): Replaced consecutive if + statements with if-elseif statements. +++ gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog +2014-01-07 Balaji V. Iyer <balaji.v.i...@intel.com> + + PR c++/59631 + * gcc.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp: Removed "-fcilkplus" from flags list. + * g++.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp: Likewise. + * c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawnee_inline.c: Replaced second dg-option + with dg-additional-options. + * c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/varargs_test.c: Likewise. + * c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/steal_check.c: Likewise. + * c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c: Likewise. + * c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawning_arg.c: Likewise. + * c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/invalid_spawns.c: Added a dg-options tag. + * c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/pr59631.c: New testcase. +++ gcc/cp/ChangeLog +2014-01-07 Balaji V. Iyer <balaji.v.i...@intel.com> + + PR c++/59631 + * parser.c (cp_parser_postfix_expression): Added a new if-statement + and replaced an existing if-statement with else-if statement. + Changed an existing error message wording to match the one from the C + parser.
jeff
