On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 07:06:52AM -0700, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> On 07/13/2015 06:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 11:35:36AM -0700, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>
> Everything addressed except this, which I'll address as a follow-up:
>
> >If you want to spend time on something st
On 07/13/2015 06:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 11:35:36AM -0700, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Everything addressed except this, which I'll address as a follow-up:
If you want to spend time on something still in the FE, it would be nice to
resolve the C++ iteration var issue (i.
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 10:11:35AM -0700, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> On 07/13/2015 06:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 11:35:36AM -0700, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>
> >On the C++ FE side, please also try a testcase in g++.dg/gomp/ where
> >the ordered(n) loop with #pragma omp ordere
On 07/13/2015 06:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 11:35:36AM -0700, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
On the C++ FE side, please also try a testcase in g++.dg/gomp/ where
the ordered(n) loop with #pragma omp ordered depend({source,sink}) will be
in a template, to make sure pt.c does the
On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 11:35:36AM -0700, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> It looks like the C++ bits are quite similar to the C ones. AFAICT, only
> numbers are allowed for the sink offsets, so no C++ iterators, which would
> likely complicate matters. If they are eventually allowed, we can implement
> t
+ c->iter_vars.safe_push(0);
+ c->iter_vars.pop();
Whoops. Consider this removed. This was left over from some tests I
was doing with the vector.
Aldy
It looks like the C++ bits are quite similar to the C ones. AFAICT,
only numbers are allowed for the sink offsets, so no C++ iterators,
which would likely complicate matters. If they are eventually allowed,
we can implement them as a follow up.
The attached patch addresses all your concerns
On 07/09/2015 11:53 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 11:24:44AM -0700, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Thanks for working on it.
+ wide_int offset = wi::neg (addend, &overflow);
+ addend = wide_int_to_tree (TREE_TYPE (addend), offset);
+ if (overf
The following patch goes along with Jakub's parsing of ordered(n) loops.
With it, we can now parse his testcase, along with a variety of other
tests with appropriate diagnostics.
The lowering to gimple is still not done, as we should agree on what
needs to be emitted first.
I'll follow up w
Hi!
On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 11:24:44AM -0700, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Thanks for working on it.
> + wide_int offset = wi::neg (addend, &overflow);
> + addend = wide_int_to_tree (TREE_TYPE (addend), offset);
> + if (overflow)
> + warning_at (c_parser_peek_t
10 matches
Mail list logo
