On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 04:14:03PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> I revamped the warning so that it follows what the C++ FE does (i.e. passing
> IF_P bools here and there) and it seems to work quite well. I didn't mean to
> tackle the OMP bits but I bet it would be just a matter of passing IF_P
>
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 05:00:00PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 04/13/2016 04:14 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >I revamped the warning so that it follows what the C++ FE does (i.e. passing
> >IF_P bools here and there) and it seems to work quite well. I didn't mean to
> >tackle the OMP bits but
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 05:43:25PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 05:09:58PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 04:14:03PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > PR c/70436
> > > * c-parser.c
> > > (c_parser_statement_after_labels): Add IF_P argument
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 05:09:58PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 04:14:03PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > PR c/70436
> > * c-parser.c
> > (c_parser_statement_after_labels): Add IF_P argument and adjust
> > callers.
>
> Can you put
Were you going to say
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 04:14:03PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> PR c/70436
> * c-parser.c
> (c_parser_statement_after_labels): Add IF_P argument and adjust
> callers.
Can you put
> @@ -5533,7 +5548,7 @@ c_parser_switch_statement (c_parser *parser)
>c_start_case
On 04/13/2016 04:14 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
I revamped the warning so that it follows what the C++ FE does (i.e. passing
IF_P bools here and there) and it seems to work quite well. I didn't mean to
tackle the OMP bits but I bet it would be just a matter of passing IF_P
somewhere.
Looks like Joseph will be on vacation for the next few days so if we
want to get this in sooner, someone else will need to review & approve
the patch.
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 04:14:03PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> I said I'd take care of the C FE part of this PR, so here it is.
>
> As this PR shows, our dangling else warning regressed in such a way that we
> weren't warning about cases such as
>
> if (A)
> for (;;)
> if (B)
> bar
I said I'd take care of the C FE part of this PR, so here it is.
As this PR shows, our dangling else warning regressed in such a way that we
weren't warning about cases such as
if (A)
for (;;)
if (B)
bar ();
else
baz ();
The problem was that we were setting FIRST_IF only when an
