This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Add UNARY_PLUS_EXPR to C++ front-end (take 2)
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- To: Roger Sayle <roger at eyesopen dot com>
- Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: 28 May 2005 00:46:30 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add UNARY_PLUS_EXPR to C++ front-end (take 2)
- References: <Pine.LNX.firstname.lastname@example.org>
Roger Sayle <email@example.com> writes:
| On Thu, 26 May 2005, Mark Mitchell wrote:
| > Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > > Roger Sayle <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
| > > Sorry for not having commented earlier, but I think you need to add
| > > the pretty printing of UNARY_PLUS_EXPR in cxx-pretty-print.c too.
| > Yes, this is OK.
| Rather than repost the entire patch, I thought it easier on the
| reviewers to just post the additional hunk to provide support for
| UNARY_PLUS_EXPR in cxx-pretty-print.c. Whilst current mainline
| won't ever display a unary plus via the C++ pretty printer, I
| agree with Gabriel that the introduction of a new front-end
| tree code, with unknown side-effects in the pretty printer logic,
| makes handling UNARY_PLUS_EXPR more than just a feature request.
| The following hunk together with the previous version of the
| UNARY_PLUS_EXPR patch have been tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
| with a full "make bootstrap", all default languages, and regression
| tested with a top-level "make -k check" with no new failures.
| Unfortunately, I've absolutely no idea how to actually test this
| new functionality. Hopefully, anyone that feels strongly enough
| to require a new testcase, can suggest/commit one themselves.
| Ok to commit both patches simultaneously?
Thanks for doind this. The addition of the code should be in
pp_cxx_unary_expression, which has the following comments:
sizeof ( type-id )
unary-operator: one of
* & + - !
__alignof__ ( type-id ) */
The patch is OK with that change. Thanks!