On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 05:01:10PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Sep 2014, Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> > PR62294 reports that 4.9 does not emit an "incompatible pointer type"
> > warning in certain scenario. I unknowingly broke this in r207335, and
> > then fixed it in r210980, which is
On Tue, 2 Sep 2014, Marek Polacek wrote:
> PR62294 reports that 4.9 does not emit an "incompatible pointer type"
> warning in certain scenario. I unknowingly broke this in r207335, and
> then fixed it in r210980, which is a follow-up to the former. But 4.9
> doesn't have the latter. This patch
PR62294 reports that 4.9 does not emit an "incompatible pointer type"
warning in certain scenario. I unknowingly broke this in r207335, and
then fixed it in r210980, which is a follow-up to the former. But 4.9
doesn't have the latter. This patch is basically a backport of r210980,
only without t
