public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug pch/14137] [pch] ICE in cgraph_finalize_compilation_unit, at cgraphunit.c:407 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 21:52:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20040323215254.19907.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20040213062200.14137.mattyt-bugzilla@tpg.com.au> ------- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-23 21:52 ------- I'm not sure what to say about this patch. You've fixed just one of a tiny number of problems of the same flavor. (For example, consider -fabi-version=X!) Most (all other?) compilers with PCH implementations store the entire command-line and compare it. We should do the same, but that would take some infrastructure. One good step would be to organize all of our flags into a single structure; then that structure could be emitted as part of the PCH file. For example: struct flags { int unit_at_a_time; ... }; (These could also be bitfields of course.) Then, you wouldn't have to translate between flag_* and bits in the PCH header, and you could just memcmp the two structures. Yes, there might be cases where that would incorrect reject a PCH, but that is the conservative choice. You could make override the comparison of particular fields to make the comparison laxer as required. I'll approve this patch for GCC 3.4.0 and mainline, but I'd like to see a more comprehensive approach attempted in future. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14137
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-23 21:52 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2004-02-13 6:22 [Bug c++/14137] New: " mattyt-bugzilla at tpg dot com dot au 2004-02-13 6:36 ` [Bug pch/14137] [pch] [unit-at-a-time] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-02-13 6:42 ` [Bug pch/14137] [pch] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-02-13 18:55 ` geoffk at desire dot geoffk dot org 2004-03-22 17:54 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-22 18:34 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-23 21:52 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message] 2004-03-23 22:50 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-24 22:28 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-24 22:30 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-26 23:38 ` geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-26 23:53 ` stevenb at suse dot de 2004-03-27 6:16 ` geoffk at desire dot geoffk dot org 2004-03-27 10:11 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-30 17:23 ` mark at codesourcery dot com 2004-03-30 23:07 ` geoffk at desire dot geoffk dot org 2004-03-30 23:26 ` bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-04-08 19:55 ` geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-04-08 20:16 ` mark at codesourcery dot com 2004-04-08 23:41 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-04-08 23:45 ` geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20040323215254.19907.qmail@sources.redhat.com \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).