> On 02/16/2015 07:27 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >Jason, I wonder if there is more informative way to print destructor during
> >LTO than as __comp_dtor?
>
> You could print the mangled name, and possibly run it through
> __cxa_demangle if it starts with _Z.
>
> >Laos for named types,
> >perhaps p
On 02/16/2015 07:27 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Jason, I wonder if there is more informative way to print destructor during LTO
than as __comp_dtor?
You could print the mangled name, and possibly run it through
__cxa_demangle if it starts with _Z.
Laos for named types,
perhaps printing just typ
Hi,
the warning about types of fields seems misplaced:
> ../../third_party/WebKit/public/platform/WebCryptoAlgorithmParams.h:295:0:
> warning: type ???struct WebCryptoEcKeyImportParams??? violates one definition
> rule [-Wodr]
> class WebCryptoEcKeyImportParams : public WebCryptoAlgorithmParams
On 16 February 2015 at 17:45, Jonny Grant wrote:
> While I remember:
> Stroustrup lists C++ extensions as .cxx and .cpp
> http://www.stroustrup.com/glossary.html
>
> ISO sample sources use .cpp:
> http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/c043351_ISO_IEC_TR_18015_2006(E).zip
>
> .C i
On 2 February 2015 at 23:56, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 2 February 2015 at 21:11, Jonny Grant wrote:
>> Is this a consensus agreement to rename those .C -> .cc ?
>
> No.
While I remember:
Stroustrup lists C++ extensions as .cxx and .cpp
http://www.stroustrup.com/glossary.html
ISO sample sources
On 12-02-15 23:51, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 12-02-15 14:57, Michael Matz wrote:
I'm not really sure yet why std_gimplify_va_arg_expr has a part
commented out. Michael, can you comment?
I think I did that because of SSA form. The old sequence calculated
vatmp = valist;
vatmp = vatmp +
-Original Message-
From: Jan Hubicka [mailto:hubi...@ucw.cz]
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 10:34 PM
To: Ajit Kumar Agarwal
Cc: hubi...@ucw.cz; gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Vinod Kathail; Shail Aditya Gupta;
Vidhumouli Hunsigida; Nagaraju Mekala
Subject: Re: Function outlining and partial Inlini
[off-topic for gcc; redirect to gcc-help]
On 15/02/15 22:00, Niklaus wrote:
> I'm trying to do a live update of a function without killing or
> stopping the program. This is a single threaded application which runs
> something similar to the below code. Maximum time is spent in the
> while(1)
I’m implementing C++ proposal N4166, “Movable initializer lists.” It defines a
class derived from initializer_list. What is the best way to initialize such an
object?
Currently, the construction of initializer_list objects is a bit odd. They are
not aggregates, because the fields are private, b
