On 24/10/16 12:01, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 10/21/2016 10:59 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
On Oct 21, 2016, at 12:47 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The latest patch works as expected for me, both with an operand
and with stdin. But since I'm not empowered to approve it one
of the others reviewers will need
On 10/21/2016 10:59 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
On Oct 21, 2016, at 12:47 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The latest patch works as expected for me, both with an operand
and with stdin. But since I'm not empowered to approve it one
of the others reviewers will need to give it their blessing.
Seems fine f
On Oct 21, 2016, at 12:47 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> The latest patch works as expected for me, both with an operand
> and with stdin. But since I'm not empowered to approve it one
> of the others reviewers will need to give it their blessing.
Seems fine from a test suite perspective, but not
The latest patch works as expected for me, both with an operand
and with stdin. But since I'm not empowered to approve it one
of the others reviewers will need to give it their blessing.
Thanks
Martin
On 10/21/2016 07:56 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Ping.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-1
Ping.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg00982.html
Thanks,
Kyrill
On 13/10/16 09:11, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/10/16 17:49, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 10/12/2016 06:43 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/10/16 11:18, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/10/16 10:57, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
O
On 12/10/16 17:49, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 10/12/2016 06:43 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/10/16 11:18, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/10/16 10:57, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 11/10/16 20:19, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 01:11:04PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
Also, the pattern t
On 10/12/2016 06:43 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/10/16 11:18, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/10/16 10:57, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 11/10/16 20:19, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 01:11:04PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
Also, the pattern that starts with "/\+\+\+" looks like it's
On 12/10/16 11:18, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/10/16 10:57, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 11/10/16 20:19, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 01:11:04PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
Also, the pattern that starts with "/\+\+\+" looks like it's missing
the ^ anchor. Presumably it should be
On 12/10/16 10:57, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 11/10/16 20:19, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 01:11:04PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
Also, the pattern that starts with "/\+\+\+" looks like it's missing
the ^ anchor. Presumably it should be "/^\+\+\+ \/testsuite\//".
No, it will be
On 11/10/16 20:19, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 01:11:04PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
Also, the pattern that starts with "/\+\+\+" looks like it's missing
the ^ anchor. Presumably it should be "/^\+\+\+ \/testsuite\//".
No, it will be almost never +++ /testsuite/
There needs t
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 01:11:04PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Also, the pattern that starts with "/\+\+\+" looks like it's missing
> the ^ anchor. Presumably it should be "/^\+\+\+ \/testsuite\//".
No, it will be almost never +++ /testsuite/
There needs to be .* in between "+++ " and "/testsuit
On 10/11/2016 09:22 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 11/10/16 16:13, Jeff Law wrote:
On 10/11/2016 05:01 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 10/11/2016 12:56 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:47:21AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
check_GNU_style.sh complains a lot about dg-* directives
On 11/10/16 16:13, Jeff Law wrote:
On 10/11/2016 05:01 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 10/11/2016 12:56 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:47:21AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
check_GNU_style.sh complains a lot about dg-* directives in the
testsuite and in particular about line l
On 10/11/2016 05:01 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 10/11/2016 12:56 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:47:21AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
check_GNU_style.sh complains a lot about dg-* directives in the
testsuite and in particular about line lengths.
There's nothing we can do abo
On 11/10/16 11:56, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:47:21AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
check_GNU_style.sh complains a lot about dg-* directives in the testsuite and
in particular about line lengths.
There's nothing we can do about the directives and sometimes they're supposed
On 10/11/2016 12:56 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:47:21AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
check_GNU_style.sh complains a lot about dg-* directives in the testsuite and
in particular about line lengths.
There's nothing we can do about the directives and sometimes they're suppo
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:47:21AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> check_GNU_style.sh complains a lot about dg-* directives in the testsuite and
> in particular about line lengths.
> There's nothing we can do about the directives and sometimes they're supposed
> to be long, in particular the scan-
Hi all,
check_GNU_style.sh complains a lot about dg-* directives in the testsuite and
in particular about line lengths.
There's nothing we can do about the directives and sometimes they're supposed
to be long, in particular the scan-assembler
checks in dg-final. Currently check_GNU_style.sh ha
18 matches
Mail list logo
