https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109310
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So perhaps for GCC13 emit some kind of deprecation message for it and suggest
using --enable-link-serialization instead and delete later?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109311
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109308
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
This code is very much undefined.
THe original code did:
opc = XNEWVEC (struct m68hc11_opcode_def, num_opcodes);
m68hc11_opcode_defs = opc--;
Which is definitely undefined. You cannot take the address
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109311
Bug ID: 109311
Summary: [13 Regression] bb_is_just_return miss to realize some
bb from r13-6873-g776a5bb5894315
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109308
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109308
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Doing:
--opc;
On an address which starts an array is undefined. Even for an a memory
allocated by malloc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108129
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
We may merge ATOMIC_XXX_N with SYNC_XXX_N if the "?" can be extent to optional
operand.
The only difference between them is ATOMIC_XXX_N has one more parameter, and
it's not used by the pattern match.
Hello,
I am writing to express my interest in the HIR dump project in GCC this
year. My name is Jiakun Fan, and I am a 3rd year undergraduate student
majoring in Computer Science.
I believe that this project presents an excellent opportunity for me to
make a contribution to the GCC community. I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109310
Bug ID: 109310
Summary: --enable-link-mutex is quite duplicate to
--enable-link-serialization
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109309
Bug ID: 109309
Summary: Untranslated text in diagnostic
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109308
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://sourceware.org/bugz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109308
Bug ID: 109308
Summary: False positive store to address 0x6260016c with
insufficient space for an object of type 'int' since
r12-6030-g422f9eb7011b76c1
Product: gcc
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 03:03:17PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> ... instead I suggested moving these three lines to below else arm for CCUNS,
> since the arm for CC already has those variables redefined, so it's something
> like:
I did those changes in the 3rd version of the patch.
| Date: Mon, 27
I posted a version of patch on March 21st and a second version on March 24th.
This patch makes some code changes suggested in the genfusion.pl code from the
last 2 patch submissions. The fusion.md that is produced by genfusion.pl is
the same in all 3 versions.
I changed the genfusion.pl to match
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109256
James Hilliard changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109274
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #54743|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84402
--- Comment #59 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Andrew Carlotti from comment #58)
> Since November 2021, there's been a significant regression in the compile
> time for gimple-match.cc during a bootstrap build (+100% in Stage 2, +73% in
>
This patch has no effect on builds using reload of libgcc, newlib libc, my
own at-a-glance-testsuite and coremark. That somewhat surprisingly
also goes for LRA builds, even with all CRIS reload_in_progress
augmented to include lra_in_progress. I just noticed it when checking
because another port
The test-case gcc.target/cris/rld-legit1.c is a reduced
test-case that required defining LEGITIMIZE_RELOAD_ADDRESS
to stop the address from being decomposed into several insns
by reload. Valid but suboptimal code was generated.
(Before implementing that hook for CRIS, the same test-case
also
This patch affects a post-reload define_split for CRIS that transforms
a condition-code-clobbering addition into a non-clobbering addition.
(A "two-operand" addition between registers is the only insn that has
both a condition-code-clobbering and a non-clobbering variant for
CRIS.) Many more
gcc:
* config/cris/constraints.md ("R"): Remove unused constraint.
---
gcc/config/cris/constraints.md | 10 --
1 file changed, 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/config/cris/constraints.md b/gcc/config/cris/constraints.md
index 05a1d24ef5a1..5efb61364f46 100644
---
Hi,
Martin Jambor writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Mar 18 2023, Arsen Arsenović wrote:
>> Martin Jambor writes:
>
> [...]
>
For the test case in the PR, in ipa.cc:remove_unreachable_nodes, GCC
seems to try to remove an unreachable function that was already inlined
into a different
From: Juzhe-Zhong
void f (int8_t* base1,int8_t* base2,int8_t* out,int n)
{
vint8mf4_t v = __riscv_vle8_v_i8mf4 (base1, 32);
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++){
v = __riscv_vor_vx_i8mf4 (v, 101, 32);
v = __riscv_vle8_v_i8mf4_tu (v, base2, 32);
}
From: Juzhe-Zhong
void f (int8_t* base1,int8_t* base2,int8_t* out,int n)
{
vint8mf4_t v = __riscv_vle8_v_i8mf4 (base1, 32);
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++){
v = __riscv_vor_vx_i8mf4 (v, 101, 32);
v = __riscv_vle8_v_i8mf4_tu (v, base2, 32);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92340
lixiaoyi13691419520 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109300
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
Dear all,
I am an undergraduate student of computer science and I am interested in
GCC projects for Google Summer of Code 2023.
>From selected topics you are interested in, several grabbed my attention:
1. Bypass assembler when generating LTO object file
2. Rust Front-End: HIR Dump
3. Rust
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109266
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3)
> (In reply to Jonny Grant from comment #2)
[...]
> >
> > I wondered if you know how to turn on that "cc1plus: note: source object is
> > likely at address zero?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109266
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Jonny Grant from comment #2)
> Thank you for your reply David. Your analyzer is very good already.
>
> I played around a bit, a base of nullptr doesn't give a warning. But
> changing to 0x10
Jacobson's email was treated as spam somehow. Sorry for missing your email.
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 2:59 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2023 at 12:23, Roy Jacobson via Libstdc++
> wrote:
> >
> > Clang has been providing __is_void for a very long time now, and is
> > definitely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109247
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109307
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109307
Bug ID: 109307
Summary: [13 Regression] constructors fails typecheck on
initializer list assignment
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
Hi,
I am Ken, an undergraduate student majoring in Computer Science and
minoring in Linguistics (because of my interest in syntax from both
natural and programming languages prospectives) at University of
Washington, Seattle. I am interested in the GSoC project: C++:
Implement compiler built-in
On Fri, 24 Mar 2023, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Prior to the removal of STABS support the gdwarf, gstabs, ... options
> formed a cycle with their Negative(..) option attribute. But that
> didn't actually have any effect since most of the options also
> are Joined or JoinedOrMissing
On Fri, 24 Mar 2023, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> The following adds RejectNegative to the gdwarf, gdwarf-, ggdb and gvms
> options since the current behavior is to treat the negative variant
> the same as the positive variant. In particular -ggdb -gno-gdb
> do not cancel, and plain
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 2:30 AM Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 01:54:16AM -0700, Dan Li wrote:
>
> > In the compiler part[4], most of the content is the same as Sami's
> > implementation[3], except for some minor differences, mainly including:
> >
> > 1. The function typeid is
On Sat, 25 Mar 2023 at 12:23, Roy Jacobson via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
> Clang has been providing __is_void for a very long time now, and is
> definitely compatible with libstdc++. Does defining this builtin cause a
> problem? Might be that the lookup rules for builtins are different or
> something.
>
Oh! Thank you!
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 2:49 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 at 22:43, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 at 21:17, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 10:33 AM François Dumont
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
>
On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 at 22:43, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 at 21:17, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 10:33 AM François Dumont
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 26/03/2023 04:01, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++ wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at
On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 at 21:17, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 10:33 AM François Dumont wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 26/03/2023 04:01, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++ wrote:
> > > On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 5:38 AM Marc Glisse wrote:
> > >> On Sat, 25 Mar 2023, Ken Matsui via Gcc
Dear all,
Here follows a patch that removes implicit type casts in std::complex.
*Description:* The current implementation of `complex<_Tp>` assumes that
`int, double, long double` are explicitly convertible to `_Tp`. Moreover,
it also assumes that:
1. `int` is implicitly convertible to `_Tp`,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109299
Benjamin Buch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|12.0|12.1.0
--- Comment #3 from Benjamin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109305
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109299
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Are you really using GCC 12.0? If not, please fix the Version field.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109300
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107822
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> I don't see us realistically fixing this for GCC 13, so postponing to GCC 14
> and downgrading from P1 to P2.
>
I am currently developing a phi analyzer for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109300
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
Ping for https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-March/613974.html
Thanks,
Eugene
-Original Message-
From: Eugene Rozenfeld
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 2:21 PM
To: Jeff Law ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Andi Kleen
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH] Fix autoprofiledbootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109304
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
A bit clean-up test-case:
int PyUnicode_FindChar_i;
int PyUnicode_FindChar() {
while (PyUnicode_FindChar_i)
if (PyUnicode_FindChar())
break;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109304
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 10:33 AM François Dumont wrote:
>
>
> On 26/03/2023 04:01, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++ wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 5:38 AM Marc Glisse wrote:
> >> On Sat, 25 Mar 2023, Ken Matsui via Gcc wrote:
> >>
> >>> Built-in trait naming simply adds two underscores (__) to the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109276
--- Comment #17 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #15)
> > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> > > asks for a DImode stack slot, ix86_local_alignment newly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109303
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106282
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||13.0
--- Comment #4 from Andreas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109306
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Or we could take strstr from gnulib, which is much larger (and faster).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109306
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109306
--- Comment #4 from pmorf at apple dot com ---
Ha got it. thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109306
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to pmorf from comment #2)
> Oh. Is there a different implementation I'll link against when telling gcc
> to use the c++11 standard ?
I am saying that implementation is only used if the host's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109306
--- Comment #2 from pmorf at apple dot com ---
Oh. Is there a different implementation I'll link against when telling gcc to
use the c++11 standard ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109291
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to ncm from comment #2)
> CWG 1430 is still marked Open, and is anyway only superficially
> analogous. Here, there is no need for an alias to be encoded
> into a type signature.
Right and yes PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109306
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|The strstr function might |The strstr implementation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109291
--- Comment #2 from ncm at cantrip dot org ---
CWG 1430 is still marked Open, and is anyway only superficially
analogous. Here, there is no need for an alias to be encoded
into a type signature.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109306
Bug ID: 109306
Summary: The strstr function might do undefined behavior (out
of bounds mem access)
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109301
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Tried -Ofast -mavx512f
#include
void
foo (double *a, double *b)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 1024; i++)
a[i] = pow (a[i], b[i]);
}
void
bar (double *a)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 1024; i++)
a[i] = cbrt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109276
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #15)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> > asks for a DImode stack slot, ix86_local_alignment newly doesn't lower the
> > alignment
> > which isn't good
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109276
--- Comment #15 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> asks for a DImode stack slot, ix86_local_alignment newly doesn't lower the
> alignment
> which isn't good for -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2.
IIRC, DImode
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109301
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 54774
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54774=edit
gcc13-pr109301.patch
Actually, I think just that single case might be enough, all the others involve
cbrt or pow in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109305
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#2579
This copy only happens with _S_propagate_on_copy_assign which is true even.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109305
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
LWG2579
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109305
Bug ID: 109305
Summary: Allocator copy in basic_string::operator=
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109301
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109304
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Good: 13.0.1 20230319
Bad: 13.0.1 20230326
I'll bisect now but someone is free to beat me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109301
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Started with r13-1763-g78d5e125c008d87cb2e1.
(for sqrts (SQRT)
cbrts (CBRT)
pows (POW)
/* sqrt(sqrt(x)) -> pow(x,1/4). */
(simplify
(sqrts (sqrts @0))
(pows @0 { build_real (type,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109304
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109300
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-03-27
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109304
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 54772
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54772=edit
reduced.i
```
$ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -c /tmp/reduced.i -fprofile-generate -O3
-fno-semantic-interposition -fPIC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109304
Bug ID: 109304
Summary: ICE when building Python 3.12.0_alpha6 (internal
compiler error: in get_vrange, at
value-range-storage.cc:87)
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
This patch adds support for running constructors and destructors for
static (file-scope) aggregates for C++ objects which are marked with
"declare target" directives on OpenMP offload targets.
At present, space is allocated on the target for such aggregates, but
nothing ever constructs them
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109303
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109301
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |tree-optimization
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106856
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106856
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4f41c4ff250709219a7c3eba27a62f8a4689412b
commit r12-9322-g4f41c4ff250709219a7c3eba27a62f8a4689412b
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108025
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4b56945b1ae497580b542abb6d7ca41b6444c219
commit r12-9321-g4b56945b1ae497580b542abb6d7ca41b6444c219
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109303
Bug ID: 109303
Summary: [13 Regression] ICE in push_agg_values_from_plats, at
ipa-cp.cc:1458
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109302
Bug ID: 109302
Summary: [12/13 Regression] ICE in emit_move_insn, at
expr.cc:4225
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109301
Bug ID: 109301
Summary: [13 Regression] ICE in format_helper, at real.h:233
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109300
Bug ID: 109300
Summary: [13 Regression] ICE in cp_finish_decl, at
cp/decl.cc:8279
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
memmem is not POSIX so the system may lack it. Then libiberty will
provide an implementation, but it's a "supplemental function" and not
declared in libiberty.h. We need to declare the prototype to use it
then.
See libiberty doc at
On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 11:26 AM Patrick Palka wrote:
>
> Here we're crashing during satisfaction for the NTTP 'C auto' from
> do_auto_deduction ultimately because convert_template_argument / unify
> don't pass all outer template arguments to do_auto_deduction, and during
> satisfaction we need
On 26/03/2023 04:01, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++ wrote:
On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 5:38 AM Marc Glisse wrote:
On Sat, 25 Mar 2023, Ken Matsui via Gcc wrote:
Built-in trait naming simply adds two underscores (__) to the original
trait name. However, the same names are already in use for some
> On Mar 27, 2023, at 12:48 PM, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Mar 27, 2023, at 12:31 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 04:22:25PM +, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
The latter IMHO. Having a warning with completely nonsensical name will
Hello GCC developers,
I am Omkar Mohanty, currently an undergrad in CS. I have contributed to a
number of open Source organizations for the past one year and I have one
year experience programming in both Rust and C++. I have attached my
proposal for GSoC 2023, I hope it meets the standards of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109183
--- Comment #4 from Yann Droneaud ---
(In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #3)
> dump files now consistently take the base name from the output name, when
> not overridden
>
> since in this case gcc is called for (compiling and) linking,
The patch attached to this email extends the UTF-8 support of the
driver and compiler processes to the 32-bit mingw host.Initially,
only the 64-bit host got it.
About the changes in sym-mingw32.cc:
Even though the 64-bit host was building fine with the symbol being
simply declared as a char,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109154
--- Comment #21 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 54770
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54770=edit
gcc13-pr109154.patch
So what about this then?
It matches the x86 FTZ behavior, because FTZ is a masked reaction to
Jin Ma via Gcc-patches writes:
> Unrecog insns (such as CLOBBER, USE) does not represent real instructions,
> but in the
> process of pipeline optimization, they will wait for transmission in ready
> list like
> other insns, without considering resource conflicts and cycles. This results
>
> On Mar 27, 2023, at 12:31 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 04:22:25PM +, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>>> The latter IMHO. Having a warning with completely nonsensical name will
>>> just confuse users.
>>
>> Okay. -:)
>> How about "-Wstruct-with-fam-not-at-end”?
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 04:22:25PM +, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > The latter IMHO. Having a warning with completely nonsensical name will
> > just confuse users.
>
> Okay. -:)
> How about "-Wstruct-with-fam-not-at-end”? Or do you have any suggestion on
> the name?
Nobody will
> On Mar 27, 2023, at 12:06 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 03:57:58PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
+Please use warning option @option{-Wgnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end}
to
>>> This is certainly misnamed.
>>
>> The name “-Wgnu-variable-sized-type-not-at-end” was
1 - 100 of 266 matches
Mail list logo
