On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 04:10:21PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:28:36PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > I found a problem with this patch--we can't call
> > do_warn_duplicated_branches in
> > build_conditional_expr, because that way the C++-specific codes might leak
>
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 04:10:21PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:28:36PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> > I found a problem with this patch--we can't call
>> > do_warn_duplicated_branches in
>> > build_conditional
On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 09:41:20AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 04:10:21PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:28:36PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >> > I found a problem with this patch--we
On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:53:58PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 09:41:20AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 04:10:21PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:28:36PM +
On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:53:58PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 09:41:20AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 04:10:21PM +0200, Marek
On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 09:27:55AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:53:58PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 09:41:20AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Marek
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 04:41:28PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 04:39:40PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Coming back to this...
>
> > > Right, after h0 == h1 is missing && operand_equal_p (thenb, elseb, 0)
> > > or so (the exact last operand needs to be figured out).
> >
On Mon, 9 Jan 2017, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 04:41:28PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 04:39:40PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > Coming back to this...
> >
> > > > Right, after h0 == h1 is missing && operand_equal_p (thenb, elseb, 0)
> > > > or so
On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 11:57:48AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jan 2017, Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 04:41:28PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 04:39:40PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > Coming back to this...
> > >
> > > > > Right
On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 10:21:47AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> +/* Callback function to determine whether an expression TP or one of its
> + subexpressions comes from macro expansion. Used to suppress bogus
> + warnings. */
> +
> +static tree
> +expr_from_macro_expansion_r (tree *tp, int *,
On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 12:18:01PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 10:21:47AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > +/* Callback function to determine whether an expression TP or one of its
> > + subexpressions comes from macro expansion. Used to suppress bogus
> > + warnings.
On 01/09/2017 02:21 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 04:41:28PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 04:39:40PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
Coming back to this...
Right, after h0 == h1 is missing && operand_equal_p (thenb, elseb, 0)
or so (the exact last operan
On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 02:39:30PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 12:18:01PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 10:21:47AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > +/* Callback function to determine whether an expression TP or one of its
> > > + subexpressions
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 05:52:14PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > I agree that not warning for
> > if (foo)
> > return NULL;
> > else
> > return NULL;
> > is bad. But how can I compare those expressions side-by-side? I'm not
> > finding
> > anything. :(
>
> Seems like ENOTIME to a
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 03:32:59PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> s/indentical/identical in the doc/invoke.texi changes.
Fixed.
> > diff --git gcc/c/c-typeck.c gcc/c/c-typeck.c
> > index 96e7351..ed8ffe4 100644
> > --- gcc/c/c-typeck.c
> > +++ gcc/c/c-typeck.c
> > @@ -5193,6 +5193,15 @@ build_conditio
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 10:05:22AM -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> This patch introduced a new testsuite failure:
>
> FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Wduplicated-branches1.C -std=gnu++98 (test for excess
> errors)
> Excess errors:
> /nasfarm/edelsohn/src/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wduplicated-branches1.C:9:
This patch introduced a new testsuite failure:
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Wduplicated-branches1.C -std=gnu++98 (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
/nasfarm/edelsohn/src/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wduplicated-branches1.C:9:3:
warning: this condition has identical branches [-Wduplicated-branches]
/n
On 11/3/16, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 09:27:55AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> > On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:53:58PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 09:41:20AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> >>
Coming back to this...
On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 02:38:50PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 09:27:55AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:53:58PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > >> On Tue, Nov 0
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 04:39:40PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> Coming back to this...
> > Right, after h0 == h1 is missing && operand_equal_p (thenb, elseb, 0)
> > or so (the exact last operand needs to be figured out).
> > OEP_ONLY_CONST is certainly wrong, we want the same VAR_DECLs to mean th
On January 5, 2017 4:41:28 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 04:39:40PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> Coming back to this...
>
>> > Right, after h0 == h1 is missing && operand_equal_p (thenb, elseb,
>0)
>> > or so (the exact last operand needs to be figured out).
>> > OE
21 matches
Mail list logo