This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PING: PATCH: PR objc/18408 (but really a gimplifier fix)
- From: Ziemowit Laski <zlaski at apple dot com>
- To: Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf <lars dot sonchocky-helldorf at hamburg dot de>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:12:23 -0800
- Subject: Re: PING: PATCH: PR objc/18408 (but really a gimplifier fix)
- References: <EF6745C3-6B47-11D9-A437-000393CBC4B6@hamburg.de>
On 20 Jan 2005, at 17.01, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf wrote:
Am Freitag, 21.01.05 um 01:30 Uhr schrieb Andrew Pinski:
On Jan 20, 2005, at 7:15 PM, Ziemowit Laski wrote:
On 20 Jan 2005, at 16.15, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Jan 20, 2005, at 6:39 PM, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf wrote:
This patch for http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18408
is unreviewed for more than two month now. Is there really nobody
who can approve it? Come on somebody with approval privileges
*must* be gimple literate.
It was reviewed and got rejected.
Lars should have remembered because he pinged it too.
Oh, my bad.
Ok, I seem to recall this also. :-( RTH is right in that the ObjC type
system representation is inconsistent, but that is really orthogonal to
whether the patch I proposed is safe or not. A rewrite of the type
representation (to bring it closer in line with C++/Java) is planned,
but in the gcc-4.1 time frame at the earliest.