[PATCH] Avoid creating TREE_OVERFLOW constants in convert_to_integer (PR middle-end/26729)
Mon Apr 24 03:20:00 GMT 2006
On Thu, 20 Apr 2006, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > If you want to say "look, i've tested it against our internal tests,
> > and it causes a regression there, here's a testcase", that's fine.
> I've exactly done that for Kazu's patch. No reaction. I've suggested a
> possible fix. No reaction. I've posted a fix. No reaction.
My apologies if you're under the impression that your previous
e-mails have prompted no reaction. But as I'd hoped I'd explained
in my off-list reply to you, I'm frantically investigating a
better long-term solution to this problem, instead of the partial
workarounds proposed by Jakub and yourself. Fortunately, the current
stage of mainline allows us a little time to investigate options,
or, if necessary, to put band-aids into 4.1, and/or 4.2 once
Rather than reject your patches outright, I'd just prefer not to
approve them unless we have to. I hope this explains the apparent
limbo state, and why I'd asked for your patience.
More information about the Gcc-patches