On 9/21/22 03:40, FX via Gcc-patches wrote:
ping*2
Le 9 sept. 2022 à 19:55, FX a écrit :
ping
Le 1 sept. 2022 à 23:02, FX a écrit :
Attached patch adds __builtin_iseqsig() to the middle-end and C family
front-ends.
Testing does not currently check whether the signaling part works,
On 10/20/22 13:01, Andrea Parri wrote:
On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 07:16:20PM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
+Andrea, in case he has time to look at the memory model / ABI
issues.
+Jeff, who was offering to help when the threads got crossed. I'd punted on
a lot of this in the hope Andrea
On 10/24/22 00:04, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote:
PING
I'd be a lot more comfortable if Jakub would chime in here.
Jeff
On 10/16/22 04:09, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
When working on libstdc++ extended float support in , I found that
we need various builtins for the _Float{16,32,64,128,32x,64x,128x} types.
Glibc 2.26 and later provides the underlying libm routines (except for
_Float16 and _Float128x for the time
On 10/15/22 06:08, A. Binzberger wrote:
Re: [PATCH] improved const shifts for AVR targets
On 12.10.22 19:57, Jeff Law wrote:
On 10/4/22 11:06, Alexander Binzberger via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hi,
recently I used some arduino uno for a project and realized some areas
which do not output optimal
On 10/28/22 06:34, Xiongchuan Tan via Gcc-patches wrote:
Reviewed-by: Palmer Dabbelt
Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt
libitm/ChangeLog:
* configure.tgt: Add riscv support.
* config/riscv/asm.h: New file.
* config/riscv/sjlj.S: New file.
* config/riscv/target.h:
On 10/20/22 19:52, Cui, Lili via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hi Honza,
Gentle ping
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-September/601934.html
gcc/ChangeLog
* ipa-inline-analysis.cc (do_estimate_edge_time): Add function attribute
judgement for INLINE_HINT_known_hot hint.
On 10/17/22 03:06, Florian Weimer via Gcc-patches wrote:
BFD ld (and the other linkers) only produce one encoding of these
values. It is not necessary to use the general
read_encoded_value_with_base decoding routine. This avoids the
data-dependent branches in its implementation.
libgcc/
On 10/25/22 13:59, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
Hi Jeff!
On Mon, 2022-10-17 17:47:16 -0600, Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
wrote:
--- a/gcc/config/h8300/h8300.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/h8300/h8300.cc
@@ -5531,6 +5531,32 @@ h8300_ok_for_sibcall_p (tree fndecl, tree)
return 1;
}
+
+/* Return TRUE
On 10/28/22 04:14, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hi!
This minor clean-up had fallen out of me working on something else in
GCC's options machinery, several months ago:
On 2019-03-12T18:14:04+0100, marxin wrote:
gcc/lto/ChangeLog:
* lang.opt: Add new language LTODump and options related
On 10/27/22 22:23, Xi Ruoyao via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Thu, 2022-10-27 at 17:44 -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
though I don't have an opinion on whether libitm should be taking ports
to new targets, I'd never even heard of it before.
I asked this question to myself when I reviewed LoongArch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107090
--- Comment #11 from vfdff ---
Created attachment 53787
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53787=edit
has different operand order base on different commit node
hi @Andrew Pinski
* Showed as the figure swap_order.jpg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107451
bartoldeman at users dot sourceforge.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #53785|0 |1
is
Tested powerpc64le-linux. Pushed to trunk. Worth backporting too.
-- >8 --
The new -Wdangling-reference warning noticed this.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* include/bits/fs_path.h (path::filename()): Fix dangling
reference.
---
libstdc++-v3/include/bits/fs_path.h | 6 +++---
1 file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103035
Bug 103035 depends on bug 98694, which changed state.
Bug 98694 Summary: GCC produces incorrect code for loops with -O3 for
skylake-avx512 and icelake-server
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98694
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98694
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102786
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.4.0, 12.1.0, 9.5.0
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101176
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101008
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.4
Snapshot gcc-11-20221028 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11-20221028/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 11 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 2:34 PM Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 11:58:57AM -0700, H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > In i386.md, neg patterns which set MODE_CC register like
> >
> > (set (reg:CCC FLAGS_REG)
> > (ne:CCC (match_operand:SWI48 1 "general_reg_operand")
> You mean in CCV? That works yes, but only because (or if) the setter
> and getter of the CC reg both use CCV (so never use any other flag at
> the same time; CCV has an empty intersection with all other CC modes).
We're talking about CCC here AFAIK, i.e. the carry, not CCV.
--
Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107397
--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #5)
> No. I have no idea how to add a testcase to git.
> Every time I've tried, I end up deleting my git
> repository and grabbing a new clone. Not a
Hi!
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 10:35:03AM +0200, Eric Botcazou via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > (set (reg:SI 93)
> > (neg:SI (ltu:SI (reg:CCC 17 flags) (const_int 0 [0]
> >
> > as
> >
> > (set (reg:SI 93)
> > (neg:SI (ltu:SI (const_int 1) (const_int 0 [0]
> >
> > which leads to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107397
--- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl ---
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 08:31:58PM +, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107397
>
> --- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> (In reply to kargl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107453
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>From https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-October/604152.html:
It's possible further
target-specific fixes will be needed; target maintainers should watch
out for failures of c2x-stdarg-4.c, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107453
Bug ID: 107453
Summary: New stdarg tests in r13-3549-g4fe34cdcc80ac2 fail
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 11:58:57AM -0700, H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches wrote:
> In i386.md, neg patterns which set MODE_CC register like
>
> (set (reg:CCC FLAGS_REG)
> (ne:CCC (match_operand:SWI48 1 "general_reg_operand") (const_int 0)))
>
> can lead to errors when operand 1 is a constant value.
On Linux/x86_64,
0607307768b66a90e27c5bc91a247acc938f070e is the first bad commit
commit 0607307768b66a90e27c5bc91a247acc938f070e
Author: Thomas Schwinge
Date: Tue Oct 25 13:10:52 2022 +0200
Fix target selector syntax in 'gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-cond-1.c'
caused
FAIL:
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 10:07:41PM +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-10-28 14:19:10 -0500, Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> > Why do you use powerpc64-linux_altivec? This things (normally spelled
> > with a dash, not and underscore, btw) was made for 32-bit targets. It
> > never has
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103413
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103413
--- Comment #19 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3b4c9e0658b13b8db6c7f38242ed270cdb8fc932
commit r10-11063-g3b4c9e0658b13b8db6c7f38242ed270cdb8fc932
Author: Harald
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #22 from Sergey Fedorov ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #19)
> Created attachment 53779 [details]
> introduce ppc_intrinsics.h for powerpc*-darwin.
>
> This takes the header from the GCC-4.x apple debt branch (as present
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103413
--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f2298bd50109e5460e8949290b5337ec28310e91
commit r11-10343-gf2298bd50109e5460e8949290b5337ec28310e91
Author: Harald
Two things here:
1) when we're pointing out that std::move on a constant object is
redundant, don't say "in return statement" when we aren't in a
return statement;
2) suppress the warning when the std::move call was dependent, because
removing the std::move may not be correct for a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102989
--- Comment #32 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Fri, 28 Oct 2022, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs wrote:
> > That said, if C allows us to limit to 128bits then let's do that for now.
> > 32bit targets will still see all the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103413
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9831a5f4843b573bbdb2688bbf2de864b4e8be8b
commit r12-8875-g9831a5f4843b573bbdb2688bbf2de864b4e8be8b
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107397
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #3)
> This patch fixes the ICE and issues an error. It has passed
> regression testing.
Great!
Do you plan to submit your patch? (Hint: git gcc-commit-mklog).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102989
--- Comment #31 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Fri, 28 Oct 2022, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs wrote:
> I wouldn't go with a new tree code, given semantics are INTEGER_TYPE it should
> be an INTEGER_TYPE.
Implementation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105549
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|aarch64: Wrong va_arg |aarch64: Wrong va_arg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105597
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107441
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107452
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
>Is this a known GCC issue? If needed I could also try to write a minimal test
>that reproduces this issue.
Yes it is a known issue as shown by the duplicate bug report. The duplicate bug
report has a
Dear all,
the passing of procedure arguments in Fortran sometimes requires
ancillary parameters that are "hidden". Examples are string length
and the presence status of scalar variables with optional+value
attribute.
The gfortran ABI is actually documented:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107452
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106627
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kim.walisch at gmail dot com
---
Hi!
On Fri, 2022-10-28 14:19:10 -0500, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 07:34:24PM +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > While checking my bot build logs, I noticed that GCC configured for
> > --target=powerpc64-linux_altivec will pull in linux64.h and
> > linuxaltivec.h .
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107452
Bug ID: 107452
Summary: Failed to catch C++ exception thrown from
multiarch-function (x64 CPUs)
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
Hi!
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 07:34:24PM +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> While checking my bot build logs, I noticed that GCC configured for
> --target=powerpc64-linux_altivec will pull in linux64.h and
> linuxaltivec.h .
>
> linux64.h
> * Will "#define TARGET_USES_LINUX64_OPT 1" (to make
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107451
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.4.0
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107451
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107451
Bug ID: 107451
Summary: Segmentation fault with vectorized code.
Product: gcc
Version: 11.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 7:09 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> PR sanitizer/107298
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * doc/invoke.texi: Document sanitizers can trigger warnings.
> ---
> gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 4
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> COMPARE may also set CC register to a constant when both operands are
> known constants.
No, a COMPARE is never evaluated alone, only the CC user may be evaluated.
--
Eric Botcazou
> I get a clean testsuite run configured and bootstrapped with
>
> --enable-languages=c,c++,go,fortran,ada,obj-c++,jit --enable-host-shared
>
> Is there a PR or specific tests in either fortran or ada for those
> improvements? ie, something specific I should check for? Part of rangers
>
Hi!
While checking my bot build logs, I noticed that GCC configured for
--target=powerpc64-linux_altivec will pull in linux64.h and
linuxaltivec.h .
linux64.h
* Will "#define TARGET_USES_LINUX64_OPT 1" (to make static void
rs6000_linux64_override_options() available in rs6000.cc).
* Will
On 10/27/22 11:39, Marek Polacek wrote:
I got this testcase:
auto f() -> std::optional;
for (char c : f().value()) { }
which has a dangling reference: std::optional::value returns
a reference to the contained value, but here it's the f() temporary.
We warn, which is great, but only with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102989
--- Comment #30 from Andrew Pinski ---
I have an use case until 1k except I don't need division. It will in handy
while translating P4 language (https://p4.org/p4-spec/docs/P4-16-v-1.2.3.html)
to C. P4 supports any bit size you want and there
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 12:52:44PM -0400, Patrick Palka wrote:
> IIRC for hex formatting of denormals I opted to be consistent with how
> glibc printf formats them, instead of outputting the truly shortest
> form.
Note, it isn't just denormals,
1.18cp-4
2.318p-5
4.63p-6
8.c6p-7
463p-10
8c6p-11
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 19:16:44 -0400, Ben Boeckel wrote:
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/modules.exp
> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/modules.exp
> index afb323d0efd..7fe8825144f 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/modules.exp
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/modules.exp
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 19:16:44 -0400, Ben Boeckel wrote:
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/modules.exp
> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/modules.exp
> index afb323d0efd..7fe8825144f 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/modules.exp
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/modules.exp
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 08:59:16 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-10-27 at 19:16 -0400, Ben Boeckel wrote:
> > This simplifies the interface for other UTF-8 validity detections
> > when a
> > simple "yes" or "no" answer is sufficient.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ben Boeckel
> > ---
> >
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 08:59:16 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-10-27 at 19:16 -0400, Ben Boeckel wrote:
> > This simplifies the interface for other UTF-8 validity detections
> > when a
> > simple "yes" or "no" answer is sufficient.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ben Boeckel
> > ---
> >
On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 1:09 PM Kito Cheng via Gcc-patches <
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> LGTM with minor comments, it's time to move forward, thanks Patrick and
> Palmer.
>
Ping.
Any plans to finally land this one for GCC 13?
The hope is that this patch would make life significantly
On Thu, 27 Oct 2022, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The following patch on top of
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2022-October/054849.html
> adds std::{,b}float16_t support for std::to_chars.
> When precision is specified (or for std::bfloat16_t for hex mode even if not),
> I believe
On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 02:37:13 PDT (-0700), gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
I guess we don't really care about RV32E here, but in case you add a
guard for that?
#ifdef __riscv_e
#error "rv32e unsupported"
#endif
Ah, thanks. There's rv64e now too, but that's just an error message
problem so
Hi all,
please find attached the third iteration of this patch addresing review
comments.
Thanks
Andrea
>From e3001bd662b84dafeca200b52fc644b7bf81c4af Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Andrea Corallo
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2022 11:51:56 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] [PATCH 12/15] arm: implement bti
Hi all,
the third iteration of this patch is attached addresing review comments.
Thanks
Andrea
>From b42e28be75f374a4e1a5943c8c9002e07dbcc567 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Andrea Corallo
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:36:23 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] [PATCH 10/15] arm: Implement cortex-M return
On Fri, 2022-10-28 at 17:20 +0200, Arthur Cohen wrote:
>
>
> On 10/28/22 15:06, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Fri, 2022-10-28 at 13:48 +0200, Arthur Cohen wrote:
> > > Hi David,
> > >
> > > On 10/26/22 23:15, David Malcolm wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2022-10-26 at 10:17 +0200,
> > > >
On Fri, 2022-10-28 at 17:20 +0200, Arthur Cohen wrote:
>
>
> On 10/28/22 15:06, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Fri, 2022-10-28 at 13:48 +0200, Arthur Cohen wrote:
> > > Hi David,
> > >
> > > On 10/26/22 23:15, David Malcolm wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2022-10-26 at 10:17 +0200,
> > > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106806
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-linux-gnu |powerpc64le-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107073
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106806
--- Comment #1 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 107073 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107073
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107345
--- Comment #5 from Geoffrey ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3)
> Fixed on trunk for GCC 13 by the above patch.
>
> Keeping open for backporting to GCC 12.
That is really great! Thanks a lot!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107345
--- Comment #4 from Geoffrey ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3)
> Fixed on trunk for GCC 13 by the above patch.
>
> Keeping open for backporting to GCC 12.
That is really great! Thanks a lot!
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 1:35 AM Eric Botcazou wrote:
>
> > (set (reg:SI 93)
> > (neg:SI (ltu:SI (reg:CCC 17 flags) (const_int 0 [0]
> >
> > as
> >
> > (set (reg:SI 93)
> > (neg:SI (ltu:SI (const_int 1) (const_int 0 [0]
> >
> > which leads to incorrect results since LTU on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107172
--- Comment #48 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Roger Sayle from comment #47)
> I really don't believe that using UNSPEC here is the correct way to go, but
> it appears to be the (only?) approach that Segher is prepared to approve.
> Hohum.
I
On 10/28/22 15:06, David Malcolm wrote:
On Fri, 2022-10-28 at 13:48 +0200, Arthur Cohen wrote:
Hi David,
On 10/26/22 23:15, David Malcolm wrote:
On Wed, 2022-10-26 at 10:17 +0200, arthur.co...@embecosm.com wrote:
This is the fixed version of our previous patch set for gccrs -
We've
On 10/28/22 15:06, David Malcolm wrote:
On Fri, 2022-10-28 at 13:48 +0200, Arthur Cohen wrote:
Hi David,
On 10/26/22 23:15, David Malcolm wrote:
On Wed, 2022-10-26 at 10:17 +0200, arthur.co...@embecosm.com wrote:
This is the fixed version of our previous patch set for gccrs -
We've
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
-- >8 --
Comparing attributes between declarations of a friend function has been
complicated by pushdecl happening before decl_attributes. I assumed there
was some complicated reason we weren't calling decl_attributes here, but it
doesn't break
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107450
--- Comment #1 from Jason Liam ---
Also if we remove one of the template parameter(say T3) then msvc starts
compiling this code as well. Demo: https://godbolt.org/z/qacMzoT3q
Additionally, this current bug is most probably a duplicate of:
On 20/10/22 16:58 +0200, Arsen Arsenović wrote:
This slightly lowers the dependency of generated code on libstdc++.so.
Looks good, I'll test and push, thanks.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* include/std/functional: Make placeholders inline, if possible.
---
On 20/10/22 16:20 +0200, Arsen Arsenović wrote:
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* configure.ac: Stop generating gstdint.h.
* src/c++11/compatibility-atomic-c++0x.cc: Stop using gstdint.h.
---
> +using guintptr_t = __UINTPTR_TYPE__;
I think this should be local in the only function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107376
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 21:07, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>
> Sorry for the slow response. I wanted to find some time to think
> about this a bit more.
>
> Prathamesh Kulkarni writes:
> > On Fri, 30 Sept 2022 at 21:38, Richard Sandiford
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches
On 10/28/22 10:14, Richard Biener wrote:
Am 28.10.2022 um 15:59 schrieb Andrew MacLeod :
On 10/28/22 09:46, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 3:43 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 10/28/22 03:17, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 4:24 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
Tested powerpc64le-linux. Pushed to trunk.
-- >8 --
The PR points out that we assume the match_results allocator is default
constuctible, which might not be true. We also have a related issue with
unwanted propagation from an object that might have an unequal
allocator.
Ideally we use the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107376
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:988dd22ec6665117e8587389ac85389f1c321c45
commit r13-3548-g988dd22ec6665117e8587389ac85389f1c321c45
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107439
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
So the question is if in C++20 mode we're allowed to reject ahead of time a
call to an unknown template-id with dependent template arguments and no
function arguments (as in the original testcase):
在 2022/10/28 17:38, WANG Xuerui 写道:
Hi,
The code change seems good but a few grammatical nits.
Patch subject should be a verb phrase, something like "libvtv: add
LoongArch support" could be better.
Ok, thank you. I'll make the changes.
On 2022/10/28 16:01, Lulu Cheng wrote:
After
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107436
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107411
qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org
> Am 28.10.2022 um 15:59 schrieb Andrew MacLeod :
>
>
>> On 10/28/22 09:46, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 3:43 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/28/22 03:17, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 4:24 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> Figured I would ask
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107346
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andre Simoes Dias Vieira
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:95decac3ce8c8c7c5302cd6fac005a10463de165
commit r13-3547-g95decac3ce8c8c7c5302cd6fac005a10463de165
Author: Andre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107439
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
On 10/28/22 09:46, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 3:43 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 10/28/22 03:17, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 4:24 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
Figured I would ask what you guys think of making ranger the default for
the VRP1 pass now.
With
On Fri, 28 Oct 2022, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>
> On 24/10/2022 14:29, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Oct 2022, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> >
> >> Changing if-convert would merely change this testcase but we could still
> >> trigger using a different structure type, changing the size
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 3:43 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>
>
> On 10/28/22 03:17, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 4:24 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> >> Figured I would ask what you guys think of making ranger the default for
> >> the VRP1 pass now.
> >>
> >> With partial equivalences
On 24/10/2022 14:29, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, 24 Oct 2022, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
Changing if-convert would merely change this testcase but we could still
trigger using a different structure type, changing the size of Int24 to 32
bits rather than 24:
package Loop_Optimization23_Pkg
1 - 100 of 198 matches
Mail list logo
