From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: Kai Tietz <ktietz70@googlemail.com>
Cc: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>,
Kai Tietz <ktietz@redhat.com>,
gcc-patches List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: C++ delayed folding branch review
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 16:52:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150731164638.GH1780@tucnak.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEwic4ZS-MafrM-OQaNOm-N1+kzUaLm-FUTp6s_90YE_7b6gAA@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 06:25:57PM +0200, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2015-07-31 18:14 GMT+02:00 Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>:
> > On 07/30/2015 10:48 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> >>
> >> Note, anything outside of the C/C++ front-ends depending on that
> >> canonicalization done by shorten_compare is, IMHO, broken.
> >
> >
> > I think the OMP code isn't relying on it being done by shorten_compare; it's
> > trying to do it itself in c_finish_omp_for but is somehow thwarted by
> > delayed folding.
> >
> > Jason
> >
>
> Well, this seems to be reasoned by finish_omp_for (), which gets
> invoked in parser.c cp_parser_omp_for_loop, and/or pt.c: tsubst_expr.
> In all those cases arguments aren't folded anymore. So
> c_finish_omp_for's patterns don't match anymore. I guess we might
> want to do this cannonical form in genericize-pass?
Or just fold in finish_omp_for before calling c_finish_omp_for, so that it
is in the expected form?
Jakub
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-31 16:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-12 5:41 Jason Merrill
2015-06-12 16:17 ` Kai Tietz
2015-06-13 7:58 ` Jason Merrill
2015-07-27 19:01 ` Jason Merrill
2015-07-28 2:40 ` Kai Tietz
2015-07-28 20:35 ` Kai Tietz
2015-07-29 18:48 ` Jason Merrill
2015-07-29 23:03 ` Kai Tietz
2015-07-30 14:40 ` Kai Tietz
2015-07-30 18:41 ` Jason Merrill
2015-07-30 21:33 ` Kai Tietz
2015-07-31 0:43 ` Jason Merrill
2015-07-31 7:08 ` Jeff Law
2015-07-31 23:00 ` Kai Tietz
2015-08-03 3:49 ` Jason Merrill
2015-08-03 9:42 ` Kai Tietz
2015-08-03 15:39 ` Jason Merrill
2015-08-24 7:20 ` Kai Tietz
2015-08-27 2:57 ` Jason Merrill
2015-08-27 10:54 ` Kai Tietz
2015-08-27 13:35 ` Jason Merrill
2015-08-27 13:44 ` Kai Tietz
2015-08-27 18:15 ` Kai Tietz
2015-08-28 3:03 ` Jason Merrill
2015-08-28 7:43 ` Kai Tietz
2015-08-28 11:18 ` Kai Tietz
2015-08-28 2:12 ` Jason Merrill
2015-07-31 4:00 ` Jeff Law
2015-07-31 16:26 ` Jason Merrill
2015-07-31 16:43 ` Kai Tietz
2015-07-31 16:52 ` Jakub Jelinek [this message]
2015-07-31 16:53 ` Jason Merrill
2015-07-31 21:31 ` Kai Tietz
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-04-24 4:23 Jason Merrill
2015-04-24 13:46 ` Kai Tietz
2015-04-24 18:25 ` Jason Merrill
2015-04-28 12:06 ` Kai Tietz
2015-04-28 13:57 ` Jason Merrill
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=20150731164638.GH1780@tucnak.redhat.com \
--to=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jason@redhat.com \
--cc=ktietz70@googlemail.com \
--cc=ktietz@redhat.com \
--cc=law@redhat.com \
/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).