public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "manu at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/44426] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] gcc 4.5.0 requires c9x compiler to build
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 19:39:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100605193940.27562.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-44426-16543@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>



------- Comment #8 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-06-05 19:39 -------
(In reply to comment #7)
> > 
> > > For the cases that are inserting UNKNOWN_LOCATION, I'd suggest just 
> > > changing all the call sites of the macro to pass UNKNOWN_LOCATION 
> > > explicitly, and removing the macro.  That should deal with build_call_expr 
> > > and with build_call_nofold in builtins.c.
> > 
> > OK for me but this was done on purpose. So I won't even try to fix this until
> > the corresponding maintainer pre-approves such patch.
> 
> Please instead make a static inline variadic alternative instead (so we
> still use variadic macros if available).
> 

You'll have to be more specific. What is the alternative in the above case when
no variadic stuff can be used? If the alternative is to change all call sites,
then we do not need variadic stuff.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44426


  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-06-05 19:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-06-05 14:24 [Bug bootstrap/44426] New: " jay dot krell at cornell dot edu
2010-06-05 14:54 ` [Bug bootstrap/44426] [4.5/4.6 Regression] " jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-05 15:14 ` jay dot krell at cornell dot edu
2010-06-05 15:51 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-05 17:37 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2010-06-05 17:40 ` [Bug bootstrap/44426] [4.4/4.5/4.6 " jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-05 17:52 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-05 19:05 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-05 19:10 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-05 19:39 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
2010-06-05 21:33 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2010-06-14  8:55 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-14 10:20 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-14 15:54 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-14 16:01 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-21 16:27 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-21 17:07 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-21 17:11 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-21 17:20 ` jakub 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=20100605193940.27562.qmail@sourceware.org \
    --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: link
Be 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).