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: [RFH / Patch] PR 51222

From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
To: Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>
Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 18:40:26 -0400
Subject: Re: [RFH / Patch] PR 51222
References: <4F9B4B10.7090409@oracle.com> <4F9B62F0.5090202@redhat.com> <4F9BD0B8.4030005@oracle.com> <4F9CB2C9.3060700@redhat.com> <4F9D6180.4030408@oracle.com> <4F9EC605.2050703@redhat.com> <4F9F2243.7000802@oracle.com> <4F9F665D.2090806@redhat.com> <4F9FD050.7040700@oracle.com> <4FA02552.2060905@redhat.com> <4FA04229.3050407@oracle.com> <4FA04878.8050401@oracle.com>

On 05/01/2012 04:32 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:

In fact, the reason why I'm still a bit confused about some of the cases
of this switch, is that I'm not sure to understand what it could mean to
call walk_template_parms with fn NULL and check_types false.

It would mean to return non-null if there are any template arguments used directly in the expression.

Jason

References:
- Re: [RFH / Patch] PR 51222
  - From: Jason Merrill
- Re: [RFH / Patch] PR 51222
  - From: Paolo Carlini
- Re: [RFH / Patch] PR 51222
  - From: Jason Merrill
- Re: [RFH / Patch] PR 51222
  - From: Paolo Carlini
- Re: [RFH / Patch] PR 51222
  - From: Paolo Carlini

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