This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs

From: "Andrew Pinski" <pinskia at gmail dot com>
To: "Richard Guenther" <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
Cc: "Daniel Berlin" <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, "David Daney" <ddaney at avtrex dot com>, "Richard Guenther" <rguenther at suse dot de>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, dnovillo at google dot com
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 12:31:15 -0800
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711141714440.4153@zhemvz.fhfr.qr> <4aca3dc20711140918x6f45812ayd0348f2a68ece6dc@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711142052460.4153@zhemvz.fhfr.qr> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711151143240.4148@zhemvz.fhfr.qr> <474C65C3.9060000@avtrex.com> <4aca3dc20711271103i317799d4vb6bf251529b404fa@mail.gmail.com> <84fc9c000711271230m51ece2e5v6cde69751e396086@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/27/07, Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
> But then we ICE due to the assert.  Which is of course disabled with
> --disable-checking.  /me thinks that we should just remove the capability
> of disabling gcc_assert()s.

Or disable (or change them into warnings rather than errors)
unitialized warnings for --disable-checking case.

-- Pinski

References:
- [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
  - From: Daniel Berlin
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
  - From: David Daney
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
  - From: Daniel Berlin
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PTA with lots of SFTs
  - From: Richard Guenther

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]