Re: [patch,openacc] Fix infinite recursion in OMP clause pretty-printing, default label

2018-11-30 Thread Joseph Myers
On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Julian Brown wrote: > ChangeLog > > gcc/ > * tree-pretty-print.c (dump_omp_clause): Make default case > gcc_unreachable. OK. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com

Re: [patch,openacc] Fix infinite recursion in OMP clause pretty-printing, default label

2018-11-30 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:35:45PM +, Julian Brown wrote: > How's this? (Obvious, but re-tested anyway.) > > Thanks, > > Julian > > ChangeLog > > gcc/ > * tree-pretty-print.c (dump_omp_clause): Make default case > gcc_unreachable. Ok, thanks. > diff --git

Re: [patch,openacc] Fix infinite recursion in OMP clause pretty-printing, default label

2018-11-30 Thread Julian Brown
On Thu, 29 Nov 2018 21:25:33 + Joseph Myers wrote: > On Thu, 29 Nov 2018, Julian Brown wrote: > > > On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 10:08:51 -0700 > > Cesar Philippidis wrote: > > > > > Apparently, Tom ran into an ICE when we were adding support for > > > new clauses back in the gomp-4_0-branch

Re: [patch,openacc] Fix infinite recursion in OMP clause pretty-printing, default label

2018-11-29 Thread Joseph Myers
On Thu, 29 Nov 2018, Julian Brown wrote: > On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 10:08:51 -0700 > Cesar Philippidis wrote: > > > Apparently, Tom ran into an ICE when we were adding support for new > > clauses back in the gomp-4_0-branch days. This patch shouldn't be > > necessary because all of the clauses are

Re: [patch,openacc] Fix infinite recursion in OMP clause pretty-printing, default label

2018-11-29 Thread Julian Brown
On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 10:08:51 -0700 Cesar Philippidis wrote: > Apparently, Tom ran into an ICE when we were adding support for new > clauses back in the gomp-4_0-branch days. This patch shouldn't be > necessary because all of the clauses are fully implemented now, but > it may prevent similar

[patch,openacc] Fix infinite recursion in OMP clause pretty-printing, default label

2018-09-20 Thread Cesar Philippidis
Apparently, Tom ran into an ICE when we were adding support for new clauses back in the gomp-4_0-branch days. This patch shouldn't be necessary because all of the clauses are fully implemented now, but it may prevent similar bugs from occurring in the future at least during development. Is this