This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PING] C++ Re: [PATCH] C/C++: fix quoting of "aka" typedef information (PR 62170)
- From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- To: David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Volker Reichelt <v dot reichelt at netcologne dot de>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 15:11:56 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PING] C++ Re: [PATCH] C/C++: fix quoting of "aka" typedef information (PR 62170)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1496689294-11629-1-git-send-email-dmalcolm@redhat.com> <1497973859.7551.171.camel@redhat.com> <CADzB+2n-ofSz2yX7E2Di=BcuPvHz3FTzaxwATFFkMqMSyZPJ2Q@mail.gmail.com> <CADzB+2=80Xbnu7unkryHi=WZ9TzNb8zx9Mi+gtxBhxBG5M_2Gg@mail.gmail.com> <1497985575.7551.179.camel@redhat.com>
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 3:06 PM, David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com> wrote:
> It's not clear to me what the issue alluded to with negative
> obstack_blank is, but I chose to follow the above docs and use
> obstack_blank_fast; am testing an updated patch in which the above line
> now looks like:
>
> obstack_blank_fast (ob, -(type_start + type_len));
>
> Is the patch OK with that change? (assuming bootstrap®rtesting
> pass), or should I re-post?
OK with that change.
> On a related matter, this patch conflicts with Volker's patch here:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-04/msg01576.html
>
> in which he removes the trailing "{enum}" info (and hence all of our
> changes to the testsuite conflict between the two patches...)
>
> Do you have any thoughts on that other patch? [Ccing Volker]
That patch makes sense to me; I prefer "enum E" to "E {enum}".
Jason