This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Patches pending review
"Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28@cam.ac.uk> writes:
> The following is my current list of those of my patches that are pending
> review (and that I'd like to get in before GCC 3.0):
Note that the approvals below mean that you can check the patch in
to the tree, but not necessarily right now (check the gcc list for
announcements by Mark about whether the tree is frozen).
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-10/msg00705.html (adding format
> attributes)
This is OK.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-11/msg00164.html (cleanup of
> MAINTAINERS)
This is OK.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-11/msg00177.html (designated
> initializers
> pedwarns)
This is OK.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-11/msg00289.html (inclusion of
> configure args in
> gccbug)
This is OK.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-11/msg00542.html (update languages
> in invoke.texi)
This is OK.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-11/msg00543.html (misc updates in
> invoke.texi)
I'm not sure it's right to say:
+Both numbers are in seconds. The preprocessor is (as of GCC 3.0) no
+longer a separate process from the compiler proper.
it might be better to just leave this out. The rest of the patch is OK.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-11/msg00199.html (C99 scopes)
This is OK.
> Complex:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-10/msg01127.html (_Bool)
This is OK.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-11/msg00212.html (mixed decls and
> code for C)
This is OK.
Didn't we decide to deprecate the 'Labels at end of compound
statements' extension? I'd appreciate you taking care of that if so.
Also, don't forget to submit a patch to the web pages which updates
them for the new C99 features.
--
- Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>