Searched hist:11888 (Results 1 - 2 of 2) sorted by relevance
| /gem5/ | ||
| H A D | COPYING | diff 11888:d89dc575c7cb Sun Feb 05 15:47:00 EST 2017 Lena Olson <leolson@google.com> ruby: fix and/or precedence in slicc The slicc compiler currently treats && and || with the same precedence. This is highly non-intuitive to people used to C, and was probably an error. This patch makes && bind tighter than ||. For example, previously: if (A || B && C) compiled to: if ((A || B) && C) With this patch, it compiles to: if (A || (B && C)) Change-Id: Idbbd5b50cc86a8d6601045adc14a253284d7b791 Signed-off-by: Lena Olson (leolson@google.com) Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/2168 Reviewed-by: Jason Lowe-Power <jason@lowepower.com> Reviewed-by: Joe Gross <criusx@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Sooraj Puthoor <puthoorsooraj@gmail.com> Maintainer: Jason Lowe-Power <jason@lowepower.com> [ Rebased onto master ] Signed-off-by: Andreas Sandberg <andreas.sandberg@arm.com> |
| /gem5/src/mem/slicc/ | ||
| H A D | parser.py | diff 11888:d89dc575c7cb Sun Feb 05 15:47:00 EST 2017 Lena Olson <leolson@google.com> ruby: fix and/or precedence in slicc The slicc compiler currently treats && and || with the same precedence. This is highly non-intuitive to people used to C, and was probably an error. This patch makes && bind tighter than ||. For example, previously: if (A || B && C) compiled to: if ((A || B) && C) With this patch, it compiles to: if (A || (B && C)) Change-Id: Idbbd5b50cc86a8d6601045adc14a253284d7b791 Signed-off-by: Lena Olson (leolson@google.com) Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/2168 Reviewed-by: Jason Lowe-Power <jason@lowepower.com> Reviewed-by: Joe Gross <criusx@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Sooraj Puthoor <puthoorsooraj@gmail.com> Maintainer: Jason Lowe-Power <jason@lowepower.com> [ Rebased onto master ] Signed-off-by: Andreas Sandberg <andreas.sandberg@arm.com> |
Completed in 15 milliseconds