Re: [objc-improvements] Initial Check-In

[David Ayers]

Ziemowit Laski wrote:

>   (2) A merge from TOT (objc-improvements-merge-20030722 tag).  This 
> was done to
>       verify that there are no regressions between 
> objc-improvements-merge-20030722
>       and objc-improvements-branch

[snip]

> Many new test cases have been added into gcc/testsuite/objc.dg.  They 
> all fall into one of
> 3 categories:
>   (1) Test cases that succeed with the GNU as well as the NeXT runtime.
>   (2) Test cases marked with 'target *-*-darwin*', since they rely on 
> NeXT runtime features
>   (3) Test cases which _should_ work on GNU, but for some reason do 
> not.  (NB: They do work on Darwin.)
>       This must be investigated further.
>
> At this point, it would be very helpful if GNUStep developers could 
> check out the objc-improvements-branch,
> build the compiler, and identify any problems that arise.  


Sure, the compiler currently fails on the very first ObjC file of 
gnustep-base due to:

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11661

but the diff:

http://savannah.gnu.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/objc/objc-act.c.diff?r1=1.179&r2=1.179.2.1&diff_format=h&only_with_tag=objc-improvements-branch

is quite extensive and the effected chunk itself also non-trivial.  So 
I'm sorry that I can't offer a patch.

Cheers,
David