Re: [PATCH] Include from system.h (PR bootstrap/82610)

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 6:24 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 10/23/2017 04:50 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > >> FWIW, this one isn't from #pragma poison, it's from: >> #define abort() fancy_abort (__FILE__, __LINE__, __FUNCTION__) >> >> (I messed up the --in-reply-to when posting the

Re: [PATCH] Include from system.h (PR bootstrap/82610)

On 10/23/2017 04:50 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > FWIW, this one isn't from #pragma poison, it's from: > #define abort() fancy_abort (__FILE__, __LINE__, __FUNCTION__) > > (I messed up the --in-reply-to when posting the patch, but Gerald noted > the issue was due to: >

Re: [PATCH] Include from system.h (PR bootstrap/82610)

Hi, On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, David Malcolm wrote: > FWIW, this one isn't from #pragma poison, it's from: > #define abort() fancy_abort (__FILE__, __LINE__, __FUNCTION__) > > (I messed up the --in-reply-to when posting the patch, but Gerald noted > the issue was due to: >

Re: [PATCH] Include from system.h (PR bootstrap/82610)

On Mon, 2017-10-23 at 16:40 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 10/23/2017 04:17 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > On 23/10/17 17:07 +0200, Michael Matz wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > > > I guess so. But we have to make gdb happy as well. It really > >

Re: [PATCH] Include from system.h (PR bootstrap/82610)

On 10/23/2017 04:17 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 23/10/17 17:07 +0200, Michael Matz wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, Richard Biener wrote: >> >>> I guess so. But we have to make gdb happy as well. It really depends how >>> much each TU grows with the extra (unneeded) include grows in

Re: [PATCH] Include from system.h (PR bootstrap/82610)

On 23/10/17 17:07 +0200, Michael Matz wrote: Hi, On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, Richard Biener wrote: I guess so. But we have to make gdb happy as well. It really depends how much each TU grows with the extra (unneeded) include grows in C++11 and C++04 mode. The c++ headers unconditionally included

Re: [PATCH] Include from system.h (PR bootstrap/82610)

Hi, On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, Richard Biener wrote: > I guess so. But we have to make gdb happy as well. It really depends how > much each TU grows with the extra (unneeded) include grows in C++11 and > C++04 mode. The c++ headers unconditionally included from system.h, with: % echo '#include

Re: [PATCH] Include from system.h (PR bootstrap/82610)

On October 23, 2017 4:15:17 PM GMT+02:00, David Malcolm wrote: >On Mon, 2017-10-23 at 15:51 +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 2:58 PM, David Malcolm >> wrote: >> > On Sun, 2017-10-22 at 09:28 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: >> > > On

Re: [PATCH] Include from system.h (PR bootstrap/82610)

On Mon, 2017-10-23 at 15:51 +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 2:58 PM, David Malcolm > wrote: > > On Sun, 2017-10-22 at 09:28 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > > > On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, David Malcolm wrote: > > > > > In file included from

Re: [PATCH] Include from system.h (PR bootstrap/82610)

On 10/23/2017 02:51 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 2:58 PM, David Malcolm wrote: >> OK for trunk? > > Not entirely happy as unique-ptr.h doesn't use but well. > Actually it does. It's needed in C++11 mode, because that's where std::unique_ptr is

Re: [PATCH] Include from system.h (PR bootstrap/82610)

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 2:58 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > On Sun, 2017-10-22 at 09:28 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: >> On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, David Malcolm wrote: >> > > In file included from /scratch/tmp/gerald/gcc-HEAD/gcc/unique- >> > > ptr-tests.cc:23: >> > > In file included

[PATCH] Include from system.h (PR bootstrap/82610)

On Sun, 2017-10-22 at 09:28 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, David Malcolm wrote: > > > In file included from /scratch/tmp/gerald/gcc-HEAD/gcc/unique- > > > ptr-tests.cc:23: > > > In file included from /scratch/tmp/gerald/gcc- > > > HEAD/gcc/../include/unique-ptr.h:77: > > > In