RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-19 Thread Iyer, Balaji V
> -Original Message- > From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 2:23 PM > To: Iyer, Balaji V; Rainer Orth > Cc: Jakub Jelinek; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Marek Polacek > (pola...@redhat.com) > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/574

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-19 Thread Jason Merrill
On 08/19/2013 12:40 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: + /* If it is a built-in array notation function, then the return type of + the function is the element type of the array passed in as array + notation (i.e. the first parameter of the function). */ + if (flag_enable_cilkplus && TREE_CODE (

RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-19 Thread Iyer, Balaji V
> -Original Message- > From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 10:46 AM > To: Iyer, Balaji V; Rainer Orth > Cc: Jakub Jelinek; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Marek Polacek > (pola...@redhat.com) > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/574

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-19 Thread Jason Merrill
On 08/19/2013 10:37 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: I just want to make sure I get what you are saying. Are you suggesting that I do this in finish_call_expr() instead of cp_build_binary_op() ? I think build_cxx_call is the right place. Jason

RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-19 Thread Iyer, Balaji V
> -Original Message- > From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 10:20 AM > To: Iyer, Balaji V; Rainer Orth > Cc: Jakub Jelinek; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Marek Polacek > (pola...@redhat.com) > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/574

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-19 Thread Jason Merrill
On 08/19/2013 10:06 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Well, it is described in cilkplus.def. The return type of it changes based on the array that is passed in. So, it is given a fake type. Thus, we need to fix it up here. Right, but it should be fixed up when the CALL_EXPR is created, rather than w

RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-19 Thread Iyer, Balaji V
> -Original Message- > From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 9:51 AM > To: Iyer, Balaji V; Rainer Orth > Cc: Jakub Jelinek; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Marek Polacek > (pola...@redhat.com) > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/574

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-19 Thread Jason Merrill
On 08/18/2013 07:42 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: On 08/16/2013 02:13 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: + /* If it is a built-in array notation function, then the return type of + the function is the type of the array passed in as array notation. */ Ah, then the comment should say "...is the elemen

RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-18 Thread Iyer, Balaji V
> -Original Message- > From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] > Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2013 12:55 AM > To: Iyer, Balaji V; Rainer Orth > Cc: Jakub Jelinek; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Marek Polacek > (pola...@redhat.com) > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/574

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-16 Thread Jason Merrill
On 08/16/2013 02:13 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: + /* If it is a built-in array notation function, then the return type of + the function is the type of the array passed in as array notation. */ How can the function return an array? float x, A[10]; x = __sec_reduce_add (A[:]); // The sec_

RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-16 Thread Iyer, Balaji V
> -Original Message- > From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] > Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 2:08 PM > To: Iyer, Balaji V; Rainer Orth > Cc: Jakub Jelinek; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Marek Polacek > (pola...@redhat.com) > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/574

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-16 Thread Jason Merrill
On 08/12/2013 01:16 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: + /* If it is a built-in array notation function, then the return type of + the function is the type of the array passed in as array notation. */ How can the function return an array? Jason

[PING]RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-16 Thread Iyer, Balaji V
hat.com) > Subject: RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490 > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Rainer Orth [mailto:r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de] > > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 7:54 AM > > To: Iyer, Balaji V > > Cc: Jakub Jelinek; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu

RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-13 Thread Iyer, Balaji V
> -Original Message- > From: Rainer Orth [mailto:r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de] > Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 9:38 AM > To: Iyer, Balaji V > Cc: Jakub Jelinek; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Marek Polacek > (pola...@redhat.com) > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-13 Thread Rainer Orth
Hi Iyer, >> thanks for the patch. I've just bootstrapped it on i386-pc-solaris2.10 >> and all an- >> if.c failures are gone. That said, I wonder why we need the separate >> pr57490.c >> testcase, which is practically a preprocessed version of an-if.c with the >> HAVE_IO >> code removed. > > Well

RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-13 Thread Iyer, Balaji V
> -Original Message- > From: Rainer Orth [mailto:r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de] > Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 7:18 AM > To: Iyer, Balaji V > Cc: Jakub Jelinek; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Marek Polacek > (pola...@redhat.com) > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-13 Thread Rainer Orth
Hi Iyer, >First off, my sincerest apologies for letting this bug slip the cracks. I > am attaching a patch that seem to work fine with the .i file that you have > submitted in bugzilla for both C and C++. Please let me know if this fix > works for you and if it is OK for trunk. thanks for

RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-12 Thread Iyer, Balaji V
> -Original Message- > From: Rainer Orth [mailto:r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de] > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 7:54 AM > To: Iyer, Balaji V > Cc: Jakub Jelinek; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Marek Polacek > (pola...@redhat.com) > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/5

RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-09 Thread Iyer, Balaji V
> -Original Message- > From: Rainer Orth [mailto:r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de] > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 7:54 AM > To: Iyer, Balaji V > Cc: Jakub Jelinek; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Marek Polacek > (pola...@redhat.com) > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/5

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-08-09 Thread Rainer Orth
aji V >>>> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Rainer Orth >>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490 >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 05:02:57PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: >>>> > OK. The fixed patch is attached. Here are the ChangeLog en

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-07-23 Thread Rainer Orth
Rainer Orth writes: > "Iyer, Balaji V" writes: > >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] >>> Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 1:09 PM >>> To: Iyer, Balaji V >>> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Rainer

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-07-03 Thread Rainer Orth
"Iyer, Balaji V" writes: >> -Original Message- >> From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] >> Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 1:09 PM >> To: Iyer, Balaji V >> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Rainer Orth >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/5

RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-07-01 Thread Iyer, Balaji V
> -Original Message- > From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] > Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 1:09 PM > To: Iyer, Balaji V > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Rainer Orth > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490 > > On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 05:02:57PM +, Iyer

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-07-01 Thread Marek Polacek
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 05:02:57PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] > > Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 12:24 PM > > To: Iyer, Balaji V > > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Rainer Orth &

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-07-01 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 05:02:57PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: > OK. The fixed patch is attached. Here are the ChangeLog entries: > > gcc/cp/ChangeLog > 2013-07-01 Balaji V. Iyer > Still PR c/57490 hasn't been added to cp/ChangeLog and c/ChangeLog entries. > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc

RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-07-01 Thread Iyer, Balaji V
> -Original Message- > From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] > Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 12:24 PM > To: Iyer, Balaji V > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Rainer Orth > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490 > > On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 04:17:37PM +00

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490

2013-07-01 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 04:17:37PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: > gcc/c/ChangeLog > +2013-07-01 Balaji V. Iyer > + The PR c/57490 line belongs to all ChangeLog entries related to the fix, not just testsuite. > + * c-array-notation.c (fix_conditional_array_notations_1): Added a > +