On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 08:36:44AM +0100, Tim van Deurzen wrote:
> I've received a lot of good advice from Nathan, but haven't had an
> opportunity to apply it yet. I'm happy, however, to show / commit what I
> have so far (which covers the parsing of the operator). I've been working
> from the git
Hi Jason,
I've received a lot of good advice from Nathan, but haven't had an
opportunity to apply it yet. I'm happy, however, to show / commit what I
have so far (which covers the parsing of the operator). I've been
working from the git repository until now, but from the mailing list I
gather
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 11:00 AM Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 5:04 PM, Tim van Deurzen wrote:
> > I must confess that in the last months I've not been able to find much time
> > (I do this in my spare time) to work on this. Part of the problem is also
> > that my new employer h
--
Thierry Lavoie, B.Ing., M.Sc.A.,Ph.D.
thierrylav...@fastmail.com
On Sun, Nov 4, 2018, at 4:16 PM, gcc-h...@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
> Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the
> gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list.
>
> To confirm that you would like
>
>thierry-m.lav...@polymtl.ca
>
> re
Snapshot gcc-9-20181104 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/9-20181104/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 9 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk revision
(resent because of mail issues on my end)
On Mon, 22 Oct 2018, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
I had a quick look at the difference, and a[j][i] remains in this form
throughout optimization. If I write instead *((*(a+j))+i) = 0; I get
j_10 = tmp_17 / 1025;
i_11 = tmp_17 % 1025;
_1 = (long unsi
