This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: [PATCH] Cilk Plus Array Notation for C++
- From: "Iyer, Balaji V" <balaji dot v dot iyer at intel dot com>
- To: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 18:36:36 +0000
- Subject: RE: [PATCH] Cilk Plus Array Notation for C++
- References: <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D4099330003A42D85F at FMSMSX101 dot amr dot corp dot intel dot com> <51B8A2FA dot 2020404 at redhat dot com> <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D4099330003A42E4B8 at FMSMSX101 dot amr dot corp dot intel dot com> <51B9EF1D dot 9060505 at redhat dot com> <51B9F0EA dot 50709 at redhat dot com> <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D4099330003A439163 at FMSMSX101 dot amr dot corp dot intel dot com> <51BF4222 dot 3050107 at redhat dot com> <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D4099330003A4391EA at FMSMSX101 dot amr dot corp dot intel dot com> <51C0F06E dot 3080507 at redhat dot com> <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D4099330003A439A73 at FMSMSX101 dot amr dot corp dot intel dot com> <51C341D2 dot 8020707 at redhat dot com> <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D4099330003A43A479 at FMSMSX101 dot amr dot corp dot intel dot com> <51C5CEC9 dot 8050309 at redhat dot com> <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D4099330003A43B25B at FMSMSX101 dot amr dot corp dot intel dot com> <51C9AB76 dot 606 at redhat dot com> <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D4099330003A43B459 at FMSMSX101 dot amr dot corp dot intel dot com> <51CA03C7 dot 7050208 at redhat dot com> <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D4099330003A43B836 at FMSMSX101 dot amr dot corp dot intel dot com> <51CB4B3C dot 90704 at redhat dot com> <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D4099330003A43BC6E at FMSMSX101 dot amr dot corp dot intel dot com> <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D4099330003A43BC96 at FMSMSX101 dot amr dot corp dot intel dot com>
> > > Hmm, I seem to have been unclear. I was expecting that the call to
> > > cp_parser_array_notation could come after the braced list case, so
> > > we don't need to duplicate the offsetof or braced list code inside
> > > cp_parser_array_notation.
> > >
> > > And then if you'd like we could check for ':' before the ']' and
> > > give a helpful diagnostic.
> >
> > I Think I have fixed this as you requested.
> >
Hi Jason,
I looked through the patch again. I was able to get rid of the first if-statement in cp_parser_postfix_open_square_expression function. I think now it looks exactly as you requested.
Here is the fixed patch again. I am very sorry for sending so much regressions.
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
Attachment:
diff.txt
Description: diff.txt
Attachment:
CL.txt
Description: CL.txt