This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] Fixes to bootstrap from a C++ compiler (part 1)
- From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- To: mark at codesourcery dot com (Mark Mitchell)
- Cc: bernie at develer dot com (Bernardo Innocenti), gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 01:44:08 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Fixes to bootstrap from a C++ compiler (part 1)
>
> Bernardo Innocenti wrote:
>
> >On Friday 25 June 2004 07:09, Richard Kenner wrote:
> >
> >
> >>You are missing numerous blanks.
> >>
> >> + struct md_constant *def = (struct md_constant *)*slot;
> >>
> >>Such as after the ")" here and in many similar places.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I've just finished fixing these...
> >
> The revised patch is OK, so long as you test it. I agree that these
> changes actually make the code better, even in C; the C pointer-casting
> sloppiness was a deliberate concession to existing practice, not a feature.
>
> Further similar patches are pre-approved, so long as you test them as
> well and so long as your are not making structural changes. We should
> not expect that other people will necessarily refrain from checking in
> things that break the copmilation with C++, or blame them for doing
> that; it's not (yet?) part of our requirements that people worry about that.
>
> Gaby will be disappointed in me, since I opposed his attempt at doing
> something similar a while back. It's not that I like you better; it's
> just that I think I made a mistake then.
Didn't we just got rid of the casts when we removed to C89, why add them
back in now?
Andrew