On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 05:43:32PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 6/22/21 11:23 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 02:01:24PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > > On 6/21/21 1:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 6:03 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
> > > > >
> >
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 6:28 PM Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>
> Richard Biener via Gcc-patches writes:
> > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 12:22 PM Richard Sandiford
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Richard Biener writes:
> >> > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 7:23 AM Trevor Saunders
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue,
Richard Biener via Gcc-patches writes:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 12:22 PM Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>>
>> Richard Biener writes:
>> > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 7:23 AM Trevor Saunders
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 02:01:24PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> >> > On 6/21/21 1:15
On 6/24/21 3:27 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 12:56 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/23/21 1:43 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 7:23 AM Trevor Saunders wrote:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 02:01:24PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/21/21 1:15 AM, Richard Biener
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 12:56 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 6/23/21 1:43 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 7:23 AM Trevor Saunders
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 02:01:24PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> >>> On 6/21/21 1:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > [...]
>
On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 12:22 PM Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>
> Richard Biener writes:
> > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 7:23 AM Trevor Saunders
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 02:01:24PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> >> > On 6/21/21 1:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > [...]
> >> > >
> >> >
On 6/22/21 11:23 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 02:01:24PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/21/21 1:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 6:03 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/18/21 4:38 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 4:43 PM Martin Sebor
On 6/23/21 1:43 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 7:23 AM Trevor Saunders wrote:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 02:01:24PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/21/21 1:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
[...]
But maybe I'm misunderstanding C++ too much :/
Well, I guess b) from above means
Richard Biener writes:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 7:23 AM Trevor Saunders wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 02:01:24PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> > On 6/21/21 1:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> [...]
>> > >
>> > > But maybe I'm misunderstanding C++ too much :/
>> > >
>> > > Well, I guess b)
On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 7:23 AM Trevor Saunders wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 02:01:24PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > On 6/21/21 1:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
[...]
> > >
> > > But maybe I'm misunderstanding C++ too much :/
> > >
> > > Well, I guess b) from above means auto_vec<> passing
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 02:01:24PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 6/21/21 1:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 6:03 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
> > >
> > > On 6/18/21 4:38 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 4:43 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
> > > > >
> > > >
On 6/21/21 1:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 6:03 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/18/21 4:38 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 4:43 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/17/21 12:03 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 6:01 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 6:03 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 6/18/21 4:38 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 4:43 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
> >>
> >> On 6/17/21 12:03 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 6:01 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 6/16/21 6:46
On 6/18/21 4:38 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 4:43 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/17/21 12:03 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 6:01 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/16/21 6:46 AM, Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches wrote:
Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 at 12:03, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 at 11:54, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 12:38:09PM +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > > > Yes, as we discussed in the review below, vec is not a good model
> > > > because (as
On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 at 11:54, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 12:38:09PM +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> > > Yes, as we discussed in the review below, vec is not a good model
> > > because (as you note again above) it's constrained by its legacy
> > > uses. The
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 12:38:09PM +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > Yes, as we discussed in the review below, vec is not a good model
> > because (as you note again above) it's constrained by its legacy
> > uses. The best I think we can do for it is to make it safer to
> > use.
>
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 4:43 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 6/17/21 12:03 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 6:01 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
> >>
> >> On 6/16/21 6:46 AM, Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >>> Richard Biener via Gcc-patches writes:
> On Tue, Jun 15,
On 6/17/21 12:03 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 6:01 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/16/21 6:46 AM, Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches wrote:
Richard Biener via Gcc-patches writes:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 8:02 AM Trevor Saunders wrote:
This makes it clear the caller owns
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 08:03:53AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 6:01 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
> >
> > On 6/16/21 6:46 AM, Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > > Richard Biener via Gcc-patches writes:
> > >> On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 8:02 AM Trevor Saunders
> > >>
On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 6:01 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 6/16/21 6:46 AM, Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > Richard Biener via Gcc-patches writes:
> >> On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 8:02 AM Trevor Saunders
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> This makes it clear the caller owns the vector, and
On 6/16/21 6:46 AM, Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches wrote:
Richard Biener via Gcc-patches writes:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 8:02 AM Trevor Saunders wrote:
This makes it clear the caller owns the vector, and ensures it is cleaned up.
Signed-off-by: Trevor Saunders
bootstrapped and
Richard Biener via Gcc-patches writes:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 8:02 AM Trevor Saunders wrote:
>>
>> This makes it clear the caller owns the vector, and ensures it is cleaned up.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Trevor Saunders
>>
>> bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-linux-gnu, ok?
>
> OK.
>
> Btw, are
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 8:02 AM Trevor Saunders wrote:
>
> This makes it clear the caller owns the vector, and ensures it is cleaned up.
>
> Signed-off-by: Trevor Saunders
>
> bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-linux-gnu, ok?
OK.
Btw, are "standard API" returns places we can use 'auto'?
This makes it clear the caller owns the vector, and ensures it is cleaned up.
Signed-off-by: Trevor Saunders
bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-linux-gnu, ok?
gcc/ChangeLog:
* dominance.c (get_dominated_by_region): Return auto_vec.
* dominance.h (get_dominated_by_region):
25 matches
Mail list logo