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: RFA: Process '*' in '@'-output-template alternatives

From: amylaar at spamcop dot net
To: Georg-Johann Lay <gjl at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Cc: Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 18:35:54 -0400
Subject: Re: RFA: Process '*' in '@'-output-template alternatives
References: <20120918215123.xd8ig0fdus4g0c4c-nzlynne@webmail.spamcop.net> <CAFiYyc3bXLL3vLQESNUopZr5ANq7sYptobNtESwYhzAmQAqqMA@mail.gmail.com> <20120919080654.671afp1vtc8ok0g8-nzlynne@webmail.spamcop.net> <CAFiYyc0V1T0va8x4u+UUi87SRgexBxcT8qjr=qNUrpdqYHCuog@mail.gmail.com> <20120919112754.aj5o7ugam84gkg8g-nzlynne@webmail.spamcop.net> <505A297C.20903@gcc.gnu.org>

Quoting Georg-Johann Lay <gjl@gcc.gnu.org>:

+ * return stack_mem_p (operands[0]) ? \"push 0" : \"clrmem %0\";
---------------------------------------------------^

Isn't there a backslash missing?

Oops, yes, there is.

References:
- RFA: Process '*' in '@'-output-template alternatives
  - From: Joern Rennecke
- Re: RFA: Process '*' in '@'-output-template alternatives
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: RFA: Process '*' in '@'-output-template alternatives
  - From: Joern Rennecke
- Re: RFA: Process '*' in '@'-output-template alternatives
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: RFA: Process '*' in '@'-output-template alternatives
  - From: Joern Rennecke
- Re: RFA: Process '*' in '@'-output-template alternatives
  - From: Georg-Johann Lay

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