This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH][C++] Make __java_boolean a true bool (PR 33887)


Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Andrew Haley wrote:

Andreas Tobler wrote:
Andreas Tobler wrote:
Richard Guenther wrote:
This makes the fix for PR33887 safer in that __java_boolean is treated
the same as C++ bool.  This is especially important for its special
semantics on increment.

Bootstrap and testing on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, ok if that passes?

Thanks,
Richard.

2008-01-21 Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de>

    PR c++/33887
    * decl.c (record_builtin_java_type): Make __java_boolean
    a variant of bool.
    * typeck.c (structural_comptypes): Move TYPE_FOR_JAVA check
    after TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT check.
This one causes these libjava regressions on ppc-darwin:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-01/msg01414.html

Unfortunately it took me some time to discover since bootstrap time is
growing.... I can only do a bootstrap every other day. The cycle increased
to 24h :(

ppc64-linux -m32/-m64 seem to be fine: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-01/msg01406.html

most other people seem to omit libjava from their regular tests :(

As I don't see how boolean type can be darwin specific, I need your
help in tracking it down.  Note that without this patch in you will now
get abort for

  jboolean x = 1;
  x++;
  if (!x)
    abort();

Out of interest, do we actually do this damn fool thing in libgcj somewhere?


Andrew.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]