On 10/24/14 01:15, Phil Muldoon wrote:
On 10/10/14 22:58, Jeff Law wrote:
On 10/09/14 03:07, Phil Muldoon wrote:
Sorry for taking so long to reply. We've talked, on irc and elsewhere
a little (some at the Cauldron too!). I think the consensus is as
nobody has explicitly mentioned anything, this is OK to go in?
Yes, please go ahead and check it in. You'll be the first contact point if
something goes wrong :-)
Given the length of time since the original post and now, can you please do
sanity bootstrap to make sure nothing's bitrotted before you commit?
I rebased the patch on top of GCC head (from the git repository),
updated the ChangeLogs, etc from two days ago (it takes two days to do
a full rebase, pristine and patched bootstrap and testrun on my poor
laptop ;).
Get a new laptop :-) The process for getting one from corporate isn't
bad. In fact, I just got my refreshed laptop last week.
I've built both pristine and patched branches with bootstrap enabled.
I ran both testsuites and used contrib/compare_tests to make sure
everything was as it should be. compare_tests reports everything as
fine. One minor change I found, was due to some ongoing work on
hash_tables. It seems to parameterless constructor call for a new
hash table has been removed. This was trivially fixed with the patch
attached. Even though (to me) it is obvious, what do you think?
Looks fine to me.
jeff