posted in gdb-patches,
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-07/msg00254.html but we
think it is better to put this macro in include/ansidecl.h so that
other projects can use it too.
include:
2017-09-15 Yao Qi
Pedro Alves
* ansidecl.h (DISABLE_COPY_AND_ASSIGN): New macro.
git-svn-id:
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Pedro Alves
> Yeah, this is a macro that lots of projects out there reinvent,
> can't imagine it being very controversial.
>
> I could have used this today in another spot in gdb.
>
> The patch as is touches areas with different maintainers, it
> may have fallen vic
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
> On 17-07-19 10:30:45, Yao Qi wrote:
>> We have many classes that copy cotr and assignment operator are deleted
>> in different projects, gcc, gdb and gold. So this patch adds a macro
>> to do this, and replace these existing
On 17-07-19 10:30:45, Yao Qi wrote:
> We have many classes that copy cotr and assignment operator are deleted
> in different projects, gcc, gdb and gold. So this patch adds a macro
> to do this, and replace these existing mechanical code with macro
> DISABLE_COPY_AND_ASSIGN.
>
/gdb-patches/2017-07/msg00254.html but we
think it is better to put this macro in include/ansidecl.h so that
other projects can use it too.
Boostrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu. Is it OK?
include:
2017-07-19 Yao Qi
Pedro Alves
* ansidecl.h (DISABLE_COPY_AND_ASSIGN): New macro
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 11:15:22AM +, Jiong Wang wrote:
>
> Hi GDB, Binutils maintainer:
>
> OK on this proposal and install this patch to binutils-gdb master?
>
This proposal is good to GDB, as long as you add a gdbarch hook and move
the code handling DW_CFA_GNU_window_save in
gdb/dwarf2-
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 7:06 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> I think this patch should fix it, will bootstrap/regtest it now:
>
Yes, the fails in gdb.cp/member-ptr.exp go away with the patched g++.
I run gdb.cp/member-ptr.exp with three different c++ variations,
Schedule of variations:
unix/-st
Hi Jakub,
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Andre Vieira (lists)
wrote:
> <2><8f5>: Abbrev Number: 38 (DW_TAG_member)
> <8f6> DW_AT_specification: <0x8be>
> <8fa> DW_AT_linkage_name: (indirect string, offset: 0x4a0):
> _ZN6BANANA1sE
> <8fe> DW_AT_location: 5 byte block: 3 64
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 2:55 PM, James Greenhalgh
wrote:
>
> OK? As this is an ABI break, I'm not proposing for it to go back to GCC 6,
> though it will apply cleanly there if the maintainers support that.
>
What do you mean by "ABI break"? AFAICS, with this patch, it conforms to
AAPCS.
The sub
Hi Eric,
Thanks for the examples. I am able to map these instructions in your
examples back to RTX in your patch.
On 07/10/15 10:09, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Yes, it will generate either individual probes or a probing loop before the
frame is established when -fstack-check is passed. For aarch64,
Hi Eric,
On 06/10/15 11:11, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Here's the implementation for aarch64, very similar but simpler since there is
no shortage of scratch registers; the only thing to note is the new blockage
pattern. This was tested on real hardware but not with Linux, instead with
Darwin (experim
On 18/08/15 20:32, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Aldyh, what other testing did you usually do for changes? Run
the gdb testsuite against the new compiler? Anything else?
gdb testsuite, and make sure you test GCC with
--enable-languages=all,go,ada, though the latter is mostly useful while
you iron out
This patch is one of patch set to add a new port (TI C6x) in gdb. In
this patch, "gdb" is removed from noconfigdirs in top-level configure.ac.
OK for gcc and binutils?
--
Yao (齐尧)
>From 321345017e27e908539502a3f08bc604c5f60c66 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yao Qi
Date: Mon, 11 J
13 matches
Mail list logo
