* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
[not found] <bug-44774-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2011-03-23 9:35 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-04-19 15:17 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-03-23 9:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |Denis.Excoffier at airbus
| |dot com
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-03-23 09:04:48 UTC ---
*** Bug 48247 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
[not found] <bug-44774-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2011-03-23 9:35 ` [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-04-19 15:17 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-17 0:35 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-04-19 15:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |doko at ubuntu dot com
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-04-19 15:17:39 UTC ---
*** Bug 48687 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
[not found] <bug-44774-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2011-03-23 9:35 ` [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-04-19 15:17 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-02-17 0:35 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-22 19:18 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-22 19:58 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-02-17 0:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
--- Comment #15 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-02-17 00:22:21 UTC ---
Created attachment 26688
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26688
patch
Bootstrapped and regression tested, but without documentation updated or
testcase. Anyway, it is probably too late for 4.7 and I don't know when I will
have time to pick this up again, so anyone feel free to take it/improve it.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
[not found] <bug-44774-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2012-02-17 0:35 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-04-22 19:18 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-22 19:58 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-04-22 19:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
--- Comment #16 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-04-22 19:17:51 UTC ---
Author: manu
Date: Sun Apr 22 19:17:47 2012
New Revision: 186681
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=186681
Log:
2012-04-22 Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu@gcc.gnu.org>
PR c/44774
gcc/
* doc/invoke.texi (pedantic): Rename to Wpedantic.
* common.opt (Wpedantic): New.
(pedantic): Alias Wpedantic.
* diagnostic.c (warning_at): Likewise.
* c-decl.c (diagnose_mismatched_decls): Likewise.
(build_array_declarator): Likewise.
(mark_forward_parm_decls):
(check_bitfield_type_and_width): Likewise.
(grokdeclarator): Likewise.
(grokfield): Likewise.
(finish_struct): Likewise.
(build_enumerator): Likewise.
(store_parm_decls_oldstyle): Likewise.
(declspecs_add_qual): Likewise.
(declspecs_add_type): Likewise.
(finish_declspecs): Likewise.
* c-typeck.c (composite_type): Likewise.
(comp_target_types): Likewise.
(build_array_ref): Likewise.
(pointer_diff): Likewise.
(build_unary_op): Likewise.
(build_conditional_expr): Likewise.
(build_c_cast): Likewise.
(convert_for_assignment): Likewise.
(maybe_warn_string_init): Likewise.
(digest_init): Likewise.
(pop_init_level): Likewise.
(set_init_index): Likewise.
(c_finish_goto_label): Likewise.
(c_finish_return): Likewise.
(do_case): Likewise.
(build_binary_op): Likewise.
* c-parser.c (static): Likewise.
(c_parser_external_declaration): Likewise.
(c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Likewise.
(c_parser_static_assert_declaration_no_se): Likewise.
(c_parser_enum_specifier): Likewise.
(c_parser_struct_or_union_specifier): Likewise.
(c_parser_struct_declaration): Likewise.
(c_parser_alignas_specifier): Likewise.
(c_parser_braced_init): Likewise.
(c_parser_initelt): Likewise.
(c_parser_compound_statement_nostart): Likewise.
(c_parser_conditional_expression): Likewise.
(c_parser_alignof_expression): Likewise.
(c_parser_postfix_expression): Likewise.
(c_parser_postfix_expression_after_paren_): Likewise.
(c_parser_objc_class_instance_variables): Likewise.
(c_parser_objc_method_definition): Likewise.
(c_parser_objc_methodprotolist): Likewise.
c-family/
* c.opt (Wpedantic): New.
(pedantic): Alias Wpedantic.
* c-opts.c (c_common_handle_option): Replace -pedantic with -Wpedantic.
(c_common_post_options): Likewise.
(sanitize_cpp_opts): Likewise.
* c-lex.c (interpret_float): Likewise.
* c-format.c (check_format_types): Likewise.
* c-common.c (pointer_int_sum): Likewise.
(c_sizeof_or_alignof_type): Likewise.
(c_add_case_label): Likewise.
(c_do_switch_warnings): Likewise.
* c-pragma.c (handle_pragma_float_const_decimal64): Likewise.
cp/
* typeck.c (composite_pointer_type): Likewise.
(cxx_sizeof_or_alignof_type): Likewise.
(cp_build_array_ref): Likewise.
(cp_build_function_call_vec): Likewise.
(cp_build_addr_expr_1): Likewise.
(convert_member_func_to_ptr): Likewise.
* decl.c (check_tag_decl): Likewise.
(check_static_variable_definition): Likewise.
(compute_array_index_type): Likewise.
(create_array_type_for_decl): Likewise.
(grokdeclarator): Likewise.
(grok_op_properties): Likewise.
* error.c (maybe_warn_cpp0x): Likewise.
* pt.c (maybe_process_partial_specialization): Likewise.
(convert_template_argument): Likewise.
(do_decl_instantiation): Likewise.
(do_type_instantiation): Likewise.
* parser.c (cp_parser_primary_expression): Likewise.
(cp_parser_postfix_expression): Likewise.
(cp_parser_unary_expression): Likewise.
(cp_parser_question_colon_clause): Likewise.
(cp_parser_lambda_introducer): Likewise.
(cp_parser_lambda_declarator_opt): Likewise.
(cp_parser_compound_statement): Likewise.
(cp_parser_jump_statement): Likewise.
(cp_parser_declaration_seq_opt): Likewise.
(cp_parser_enum_specifier): Likewise.
(cp_parser_enumerator_list): Likewise.
(cp_parser_initializer_list): Likewise.
(cp_parser_member_declaration): Likewise.
* call.c (build_conditional_expr_1): Likewise.
* friend.c (make_friend_class): Likewise.
* name-lookup.c (pushdecl_maybe_friend_1): Likewise.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/c-decl.c
trunk/gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
trunk/gcc/c-family/c-format.c
trunk/gcc/c-family/c-lex.c
trunk/gcc/c-family/c-opts.c
trunk/gcc/c-family/c-pragma.c
trunk/gcc/c-family/c.opt
trunk/gcc/c-parser.c
trunk/gcc/c-typeck.c
trunk/gcc/common.opt
trunk/gcc/cp/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/cp/call.c
trunk/gcc/cp/decl.c
trunk/gcc/cp/error.c
trunk/gcc/cp/friend.c
trunk/gcc/cp/name-lookup.c
trunk/gcc/cp/parser.c
trunk/gcc/cp/pt.c
trunk/gcc/cp/typeck.c
trunk/gcc/diagnostic.c
trunk/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
[not found] <bug-44774-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2012-04-22 19:18 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-04-22 19:58 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-04-22 19:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #17 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-04-22 19:57:47 UTC ---
So the testcase here works, and -Werror=pedantic is accepted and printed
correctly. However, -pedantic-errors still prints just -Wpedantic when it
should print -Werror=pedantic. This is tracked in PR53075.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
2010-07-01 21:40 [Bug c/44774] New: -Werror=edantic manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-07-01 21:42 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-01 21:54 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-07-01 21:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #1 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-01 21:42 -------
I will propose to introduce -Wpedantic as the canonical name of pedantic. This
will also make -Werror=pedantic work. I don't see any reason why -pedantic has
to be special except historical. We can keep the old forms as aliases
indefinitely.
Joseph, Gabriel, what is your opinion? Should I prepare a patch to add
-Wpedantic?
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |manu at gcc dot gnu dot org,
| |gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org,
| |jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-07-01 21:42:35
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
2010-07-01 21:40 [Bug c/44774] New: -Werror=edantic manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-01 21:42 ` [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-07-01 21:54 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-02 1:23 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
` (9 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-07-01 21:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-01 21:53 -------
manuel@gcc11:~$ ~/test2/161617M/build/gcc/cc1 empty2.c -pedantic-errors
empty2.c:1:1: error: struct has no members [-pedantic]
empty2.c:2:1: error: unnamed struct/union that defines no instances
manuel@gcc11:~$ ~/test2/161617M/build/gcc/cc1 empty2.c -pedantic -Werror
empty2.c:1:1: error: struct has no members [-Werror=edantic]
empty2.c:2:1: error: unnamed struct/union that defines no instances [-Werror]
We also should add a -Wpedantic-default (or -Wpedantic-required) for pedwarns
enabled by default (not by -pedantic).
OK?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
2010-07-01 21:40 [Bug c/44774] New: -Werror=edantic manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-01 21:42 ` [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-01 21:54 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-07-02 1:23 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2010-07-02 6:59 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: joseph at codesourcery dot com @ 2010-07-02 1:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2010-07-02 01:22 -------
Subject: Re: -Werror=edantic
On Thu, 1 Jul 2010, manu at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> We also should add a -Wpedantic-default (or -Wpedantic-required) for pedwarns
> enabled by default (not by -pedantic).
Those would be extremely bad option names, since diagnostics enabled by
default have nothing to do with pedantry; "pedwarn" is simply a
GCC-internal function name for diagnosing constraint violations and should
not be allowed to influence command-line option names. -pedantic-errors
means something like -Werror=standard-required-diagnostics and a pedwarn
enabled by default is a standard-required diagnostic enabled by default
(as opposed to a warning enabled by default which is a
non-standard-required diagnostic enabled by default). There is no
particular reason to allow people to disable standard-required default
diagnostics as a group separately from non-standard-required ones; think
about more useful classifications of the existing enabled-by-default
diagnostics to work out suitable option names for disabling them.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
2010-07-01 21:40 [Bug c/44774] New: -Werror=edantic manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2010-07-02 1:23 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
@ 2010-07-02 6:59 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-02 8:08 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-07-02 6:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #4 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-02 06:58 -------
I knew this couldn't be easy ;-)
Let's restrict to -pedantic first. It is the only warning flag that doesn't
start with "-W". This breaks some code that expects that every warning flag
starts with -W. I want to introduce -Wpedantic as an alias. You do not like the
name. What is your suggestion?
Manuel.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
2010-07-01 21:40 [Bug c/44774] New: -Werror=edantic manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2010-07-02 6:59 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-07-02 8:08 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-02 9:22 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-07-02 8:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-02 08:07 -------
Related PR 37187
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO| |37187
nThis| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
2010-07-01 21:40 [Bug c/44774] New: -Werror=edantic manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2010-07-02 8:08 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-07-02 9:22 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-02 10:56 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-07-02 9:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-02 09:22 -------
Then the right fix would be not to assume that all such options start with -W,
no?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
2010-07-01 21:40 [Bug c/44774] New: -Werror=edantic manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2010-07-02 9:22 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-07-02 10:56 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-02 12:18 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
` (4 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-07-02 10:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #7 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-02 10:56 -------
Why? All of them do, except -pedantic. I don't see any reason for -pedantic
being exceptional. Or can I start proposing warnings options that do not start
with -W?
Should we introduce a special case for pedantic (code and documentation) for
-Werror= and for -Wno-error= and for -Wno-? I can start opening PRs for the
missing special cases.
We would also need to introduce (and handle specially) -no-pedantic and
-no-pedantic-errors.
All the above is free if we just make -Wpedantic an alias for -pedantic.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
2010-07-01 21:40 [Bug c/44774] New: -Werror=edantic manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2010-07-02 10:56 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-07-02 12:18 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
2010-07-02 14:24 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com @ 2010-07-02 12:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-07-02 12:18 -------
By the way, the subject should read -Werror=pedantic, right?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
2010-07-01 21:40 [Bug c/44774] New: -Werror=edantic manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2010-07-02 12:18 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2010-07-02 14:24 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-02 15:22 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
` (2 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-07-02 14:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #9 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-02 14:24 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> By the way, the subject should read -Werror=pedantic, right?
>
Well, it depends. We actually print -Werror=edantic. ;-)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
2010-07-01 21:40 [Bug c/44774] New: -Werror=edantic manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2010-07-02 14:24 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-07-02 15:22 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
2010-07-04 1:46 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2010-07-04 8:27 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com @ 2010-07-02 15:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #10 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-07-02 15:22 -------
I see, I had only a quick look to the audit trail and thought it was a less
trivial issue ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
2010-07-01 21:40 [Bug c/44774] New: -Werror=edantic manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2010-07-02 15:22 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2010-07-04 1:46 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2010-07-04 8:27 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: joseph at codesourcery dot com @ 2010-07-04 1:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #11 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2010-07-04 01:46 -------
Subject: Re: -Werror=edantic
On Fri, 2 Jul 2010, manu at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> Let's restrict to -pedantic first. It is the only warning flag that doesn't
> start with "-W". This breaks some code that expects that every warning flag
> starts with -W. I want to introduce -Wpedantic as an alias. You do not like the
> name. What is your suggestion?
I do not object to -Wpedantic. I object to -Wpedantic-default or other
variants involving "pedantic" for diagnostics currently enabled by
default.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug c/44774] -Werror=edantic
2010-07-01 21:40 [Bug c/44774] New: -Werror=edantic manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2010-07-04 1:46 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
@ 2010-07-04 8:27 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-07-04 8:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #12 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-04 08:27 -------
(In reply to comment #11)
>
> I do not object to -Wpedantic.
Ah, ok! Then, I will start with this and worry about the other warnings when
their time comes. Thanks!
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed|2010-07-01 21:42:35 |2010-07-04 08:27:00
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread