User account creation filtered due to spam.

Bug 44665 - typo in comment, incorrect/out-of-date comment
Summary: typo in comment, incorrect/out-of-date comment
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: gcc
Classification: Unclassified
Component: middle-end (show other bugs)
Version: 4.5.0
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Not yet assigned to anyone
Depends on:
Reported: 2010-06-25 12:26 UTC by Jay
Modified: 2010-06-25 13:14 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Known to work:
Known to fail:
Last reconfirmed: 2010-06-25 13:14:05


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jay 2010-06-25 12:26:44 UTC
in gcc-4.5 and trunk:


/* Return true if T is a CALL_EXPR or an expression that can be
-  assignmed to a temporary.  Note that this predicate should only be
+  assigned to a temporary.  Note that this predicate should only be
   used during gimplification.  See the rationale for this in
   gimplify_modify_expr.  */

static bool
is_gimple_reg_rhs_or_call (tree t)

-      caller.  The GIMPLE predicates are in tree-gimple.c.
+      caller.  The GIMPLE predicates are in gimple.c.

There is no tree-gimple.c file.

I also saw a ChangeLog entry where function foo_bar was
written foo-bar or file foo-bar.c was written foo_bar.c
but I can't find it now.
You had mistyped a function that way, grepped
for it, found it only in the ChangeLog. Hard to find from
this information alone..

 - Jay
Comment 1 Manuel López-Ibáñez 2010-06-25 13:09:43 UTC
Subject: Bug 44665

Author: manu
Date: Fri Jun 25 13:09:28 2010
New Revision: 161380

2010-06-25  Manuel López-Ibáñez  <>

       PR 44665
       * tree-inline.c (gimple_expand_calls_inline): Fix typo in comment.
       * gimplify.c (is_gimple_reg_rhs_or_call): Likewise.
       (gimplify_expr): Likewise.


Comment 2 Manuel López-Ibáñez 2010-06-25 13:14:05 UTC
FIXED in trunk.

Such fixes are considered obvious, so feel free to commit patches to fix them. Fixing changelogs and svn logs for typos falls also into the obvious category. If you do not have write access, just send a patch to gcc-patches and ask for someone to commit it.

I am not going to fix it in GCC 4.5, but anyone should feel free to backport my patch.