[Bug c/63326] whether a #pragma is a statement depends on the type of pragma

["manu at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63326

--- Comment #12 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to steveren from comment #11)
> So assuming it's not actually beyond somebody completely unfamiliar with the
> innards of gcc, what would be the response to a patch which changed #pragma
> message from 'statement' to 'not-a-statement'?

I think that even if not a definitive solution, it would be a positive step
towards understanding what would it take to change the behavior for specific
#pragmas (since we cannot change how OMP #pragmas behave).
>From gcc-bugs-return-464658-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Wed Oct 22 14:11:58 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-464658-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 18570 invoked by alias); 22 Oct 2014 14:11:58 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 18527 invoked by uid 48); 22 Oct 2014 14:11:53 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/63600] [5 Regression] ice in ix86_expand_sse2_abs
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:14:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-63600-4-J3ZwSzD3VO@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-63600-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-63600-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-10/txt/msg01679.txt.bz2
Content-length: 286

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idc600

--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I would have expected VI instead of IV in the iterator name, but I never
understood the rules for i?86 iterator names.
And, you want the testcase in the testsuite too.