Re: patches pending review November-January

["Manuel López-Ibáñez" <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>]

Maybe is it better to ping individual patches?

I don't want to flood the mailing list. On the other hand a large
message is less likely to be read.

Ideas?

Manuel.



On 01/02/07, Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nobody likes my patches? :'-(
>
> Older patches first.
>
> [4.3] making a few real functions work with dfp (middle-end / dfp)
> Two versions of this patch:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg01508.html
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg02018.html
>
> This is blocking dfp support for Wconversion. Not essential but I
> thought people were interested in that.
>
>
> [PING^2] [4.3] Wconversion: fixes for C++ front-end
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-12/msg00799.html
>
> This is blocking any further Wconversion patches since November 2006.
>
>
> Waddress-of-register (PR7651 Define -Wextra strictly in terms of other
> warning flags)
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-12/msg01676.html
>
> This patch is in accordance with the discussion about fixing PR7651.
> See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-01/msg00391.html
>
>
> Wunused-value and Wextra interaction (PR7651 Define -Wextra strictly
> in terms of other warning flags)
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg00440.html
>
> This patch is in accordance with the discussion about fixing PR7651.
> See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-01/msg00391.html
>
>
> PR middle-end/18071 -Winline does not respect -fno-default-inline
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg01367.html
>
>
> PR30465 duplicated overflow warning
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg01440.html
>
>
> PR 29521 Confusing warning for return with expression in function returning void
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg01533.html
>
>
> PR 23572 warnings for out of range floating-point constants
> The patch was rejected, as it is here
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg01730.html
> However, the conversation ended abruptly here
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg01752.html
> without specifying what the correct fix (if any) would be.
> If no fix is possible, we should close the PR.
>
>
> Wcomparison-fixed (try 2) (PR7651 Define -Wextra strictly in terms of
> other warning flags)
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg01933.html
>
>
> PR 26494 -pedantic-errors can be overridden by -W*
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg02068.html
>
>
> PR24924 front-end and preprocessor pedantic_errors settings should agree
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg02234.html
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Manuel.