public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: c++/6074 is a regression from 2.95
@ 2002-10-25 15:46 Jim Wilson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jim Wilson @ 2002-10-25 15:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: nobody; +Cc: gcc-prs
The following reply was made to PR c++/6074; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Jim Wilson <wilson@redhat.com>
To: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>,
Jan Vroonhof <jvlists@ntlworld.com>,
Nathan Sidwell <nathan@codesourcery.com>,
"gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
"gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>,
"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: c++/6074 is a regression from 2.95
Date: 25 Oct 2002 18:38:30 -0400
>Would you mind committing it there?
Done.
Jim
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: c++/6074 is a regression from 2.95
@ 2002-10-25 15:46 Mark Mitchell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Mark Mitchell @ 2002-10-25 15:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: nobody; +Cc: gcc-prs
The following reply was made to PR c++/6074; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
To: Jim Wilson <wilson@redhat.com>
Cc: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>,
Jan Vroonhof <jvlists@ntlworld.com>,
Nathan Sidwell <nathan@codesourcery.com>,
"gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
"gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>,
"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: c++/6074 is a regression from 2.95
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 15:37:59 -0700
--On Friday, October 25, 2002 06:38:30 PM -0400 Jim Wilson
<wilson@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Would you mind committing it there?
>
> Done.
Thanks!
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: c++/6074 is a regression from 2.95
@ 2002-10-25 13:26 Mark Mitchell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Mark Mitchell @ 2002-10-25 13:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: nobody; +Cc: gcc-prs
The following reply was made to PR c++/6074; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
To: Jim Wilson <wilson@redhat.com>,
Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
Cc: Jan Vroonhof <jvlists@ntlworld.com>,
Nathan Sidwell <nathan@codesourcery.com>,
"gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
"gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>,
"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: c++/6074 is a regression from 2.95
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 13:21:53 -0700
--On Friday, October 25, 2002 01:40:21 PM -0400 Jim Wilson
<wilson@redhat.com> wrote:
> As far as I know, this patch is safe for gcc-3.2.1, and would be useful
> there.
Jim --
Would you mind committing it there?
Thanks,
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: c++/6074 is a regression from 2.95
@ 2002-10-25 10:46 Jim Wilson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jim Wilson @ 2002-10-25 10:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: nobody; +Cc: gcc-prs
The following reply was made to PR c++/6074; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Jim Wilson <wilson@redhat.com>
To: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
Cc: Jan Vroonhof <jvlists@ntlworld.com>,
Nathan Sidwell <nathan@codesourcery.com>, <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
<gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>, <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: c++/6074 is a regression from 2.95
Date: 25 Oct 2002 13:40:21 -0400
As far as I know, this patch is safe for gcc-3.2.1, and would be useful there.
Jim
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: c++/6074 is a regression from 2.95
@ 2002-10-25 8:56 Wolfgang Bangerth
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Wolfgang Bangerth @ 2002-10-25 8:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: nobody; +Cc: gcc-prs
The following reply was made to PR c++/6074; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
To: Jan Vroonhof <jvlists@ntlworld.com>
Cc: Nathan Sidwell <nathan@codesourcery.com>, <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
<gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>, <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, <wilson@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: c++/6074 is a regression from 2.95
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 10:47:57 -0500 (CDT)
This patch (thanks, Jan, for the pointer)
revision 1.944
date: 2002/10/10 22:29:05; author: wilson; state: Exp; lines: +0 -1
Fix C++ FE attribute alias failure.
* decl.c (duplicate_decls): Don't call decl_attributes.
fixed c++/6074 and some duplicates on the mainline. I append it below. Can
someone consider moving it over to the 3.2 branch? I confirmed that it
fixes the regression there also, but I don't know whether it might have
some other adverse effects there.
Regards
Wolfgang
Index: decl.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/decl.c,v
retrieving revision 1.943
retrieving revision 1.944
diff -u -r1.943 -r1.944
--- decl.c 9 Oct 2002 21:27:37 -0000 1.943
+++ decl.c 10 Oct 2002 22:29:05 -0000 1.944
@@ -3422,7 +3422,6 @@
except for any that we copy here from the old type. */
DECL_ATTRIBUTES (newdecl)
= (*targetm.merge_decl_attributes) (olddecl, newdecl);
- decl_attributes (&newdecl, DECL_ATTRIBUTES (newdecl), 0);
if (TREE_CODE (newdecl) == TEMPLATE_DECL)
{
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu
www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-10-25 22:46 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-10-25 15:46 c++/6074 is a regression from 2.95 Jim Wilson
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-10-25 15:46 Mark Mitchell
2002-10-25 13:26 Mark Mitchell
2002-10-25 10:46 Jim Wilson
2002-10-25 8:56 Wolfgang Bangerth
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).