On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Ville Voutilainen
wrote:
> On 27 May 2016 at 17:46, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> OK, thanks.
> Should this fix be backported to the gcc6-branch? I have no plans to
> backport it any further than that.
No, the bug isn't a regression and only affects invalid code, so
On 27 May 2016 at 17:46, Jason Merrill wrote:
> OK, thanks.
Should this fix be backported to the gcc6-branch? I have no plans to
backport it any further than that.
>
> Jason
>
>
> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Ville Voutilainen
> wrote:
>> On 20 May 2016 at 07:05, Ville Voutilainen
>> wro
OK, thanks.
Jason
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Ville Voutilainen
wrote:
> On 20 May 2016 at 07:05, Ville Voutilainen
> wrote:
>> On 19 May 2016 at 19:40, Jason Merrill wrote:
>>> Any thoughts on doing something similar for extern variable declarations?
>>
>> Ah, we diagnose local extern
On 20 May 2016 at 07:05, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> On 19 May 2016 at 19:40, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> Any thoughts on doing something similar for extern variable declarations?
>
> Ah, we diagnose local extern variable declarations that clash with
> previous declarations,
> but we don't diagnose ca
On 19 May 2016 at 19:40, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 05/05/2016 09:11 AM, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
>>
>> On 5 May 2016 at 13:36, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>>>
>>> .. minor nit: the new testcase has a number of trailing blank lines.
>>
>>
>> New patch attached. :)
>
>
> Sorry for the delay.
>
> Please us
On 05/05/2016 09:11 AM, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
On 5 May 2016 at 13:36, Paolo Carlini wrote:
.. minor nit: the new testcase has a number of trailing blank lines.
New patch attached. :)
Sorry for the delay.
Please use ".diff" for patches so that they are properly recognized as
text/x-patc
On 5 May 2016 at 13:36, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> .. minor nit: the new testcase has a number of trailing blank lines.
New patch attached. :)
69855.diff5
Description: Binary data
.. minor nit: the new testcase has a number of trailing blank lines.
Paolo.
Tested on Linux-PPC64. Comments very much welcomed on the change
to g++.old-deja/g++.pt/crash3.C, I'm not at all sure what that test
is trying to do; it looks like it may have never cared about the names
of the local functions, but rather about the fact that the function
bodies of the member functi
