Re: About gsoc

On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 09:32:26 + Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 at 09:31, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > > On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 at 01:59, Dave Blanchard wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 10:06:34 + > > > Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wro

Re: About gsoc

On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 10:06:34 + Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote: > On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 at 06:58, mokshagnareddyc--- via Gcc > wrote: > > > > Hello sir/mam > > I am mokshagna reddy from Mahindra university and i am currently in my > > second year of under graduation in Btech artificial

Re: 'posix_spawnp' error in build

On Mon, 25 Dec 2023 10:28:14 -0600 Segher Boessenkool wrote: > That is wrong. Build dir as a subdir of the source dir is not > supported. It might work in many cases, but that does not mean it is > okay to do. Works perfectly fine on every version of GCC I've used, from 5 to 12, and I've

Re: issue: unexpected results in optimizations

Hi Jingwen, This is the same GCC which in recent versions produces something like two dozen extraneous, useless, no-op instructions when doing a simple 64-bit math operation on 32-bit systems, and does not use SSE properly either. In each major release these problems get worse. The code

Re: GNAT on GCC 10.x has build problems

Did you know it's possible to read my post and ruminate upon its meaning without responding this way? I bet you didn't know that. I'm not asking for any of your 'help', in case it wasn't obvious. I'm quite used to solving the GCC project's problems myself by now, since the GCC project seems

GNAT on GCC 10.x has build problems

Hello all, while bootstrapping GNAT onto my cross compiled system with GCC 10.x I found that the make script leaves something to be desired. First off it doesn't add the host prefix to the cross compiler binaries; it calls gnatmake, gnatlink, gnatbind, gnatls, and gcc without the

Re: Last call for bikeshedding on attribute sym/exalias/reverse_alias

On Fri, 08 Sep 2023 02:25:38 -0300 Alexandre Oliva via Gcc wrote: > Attribute sym, named after symver, is the one in the latest version of > the patch. mnemonic_alias, convenience_alias and asm_alias are other > possibilities that comes to mind. The 2020-August thread has many more. Sounds

Re: Network Services Alert#489707

On Thu, 13 Jul 2023 12:10:32 +0200 Mark Wielaard wrote: > Hi Dave, > > On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 09:34:31AM -0500, Dave Blanchard wrote: > > You know, if you useless cocksuckers [...] > > Please stop using this kind of language on this list. I know it is > annoying if

Re: Network Services Alert#489707

You know, if you useless cocksuckers would spend half as much energy and cleverness figuring out some kind of morally upright way to generate income instead of scamming retards on the internet, you'd be billionaires by now. This is what "civilization" has devolved to; a world of grifters

Re: Expert Engagement

On Mon, 3 Jul 2023 19:24:23 + Richard Nardi via Gcc wrote: > > Hello, > I hope you are having a wonderful day. I would like to engage your firm to > prepare my tax return for the current tax year. [...] Sounds legit. I have a feeling you'll be asking me for my credit card number and bank

Re: New version of gnu assembler

On Sat, 01 Jul 2023 13:33:07 +0100 Sam James via Gcc wrote: > If you've taken files from Binutils BFD, please make sure you preserve > the copyright headers too. Why? How is that important? That's all you have to say about this? Copyright is an abomination, and especially so the GPL;

Re: Will GCC eventually learn to use BSR or even TZCNT on AMD/Intel processors?

On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 01:59:42 +0200 Gabriel Ravier wrote: > [nothing of value] If this guy's threads are such a terrible waste of your time, how about employing your email client's filters to ignore his posts (and mine too) and fuck off? Now YOU'RE wasting everyone's time, as your type is so

Re: Will GCC eventually learn to use BSR or even TZCNT on AMD/Intel processors?

On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 13:35:22 +0200 Gabriel Ravier via Gcc wrote: > [pages of bullshit deleted] > > 2. Are you aware that these emails are not only pretty useless, but > potentially actively counterproductive ? I'd personally expect GCC > developers, who are rightfully not particularly happy at

Re: Another epic optimiser failure

On Sun, 28 May 2023 15:50:41 +0800 Julian Waters via Gcc wrote: > Man, these clang fanboys sure are getting out of hand Strange reasoning you've used here. Is this sort of like how if I'm against Donald Trump, then I must be for Hillary Clinton, or vice versa? That's called a "false

Will GCC eventually support correct code compilation?

On Fri, 26 May 2023 18:44:41 +0200 David Brown via Gcc wrote: > On 26/05/2023 17:49, Stefan Kanthak wrote: > > > I don't like to argue with idiots: they beat me with experience! > > > > Stefan > > > > Stefan, you are clearly not happy about the /free/ compiler you are > using, and its

Will GCC eventually support correct code compilation?

On Fri, 26 May 2023 18:44:41 +0200 David Brown via Gcc wrote: > On 26/05/2023 17:49, Stefan Kanthak wrote: > > > I don't like to argue with idiots: they beat me with experience! > > > > Stefan > > > > Stefan, you are clearly not happy about the /free/ compiler you are > using, and its

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

actual alternative to the "bondage and discipline" approach, and continue keeping their old code working just fine when there are literally NO PROBLEMS with the status quo. -- Dave Blanchard

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

ad. The default ALREADY IS to tell users their code is doing something bad. It's called a "warning." Hello? -- Dave Blanchard

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

this work in a reasonable time > frame. > > I have no data how big the compatibility impact of turning > incompatible-pointer-types into errors will be. For now, int-conversion > has higher priority. However, it looks like another change that could > benefit developers (the first group). > > I do not plan to work specifically on C2X compatibility fixes for now > (to support bool-as-keyword, for example), but I could imagine a similar > project a few years from now, fewer than 25 hopefully, that would enable > GCC to make the switch to C2X by default. > > Thanks, > Florian > -- Dave Blanchard

Re: Good grief Charlie Brown

On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 14:20:39 -0500 Paul Koning wrote: > I'm puzzled. What is your purpose? What result do you expect from your > messages? What action would you like to see? GCC is a "mailing list." This is a recent innovation in which people post comments about subjects they are

Re: Good grief Charlie Brown

Since my response did not get posted (maybe one of the words wasn't allowed? or because I attached binaries?) here it is again: Begin forwarded message: Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2022 11:35:39 -0600 From: Dave Blanchard To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Cc: p...@mad-scientist.net Subject: Re: Good grief Charlie

Re: GDC environment variable - solved, but new problem

> Re GCC 9.1, however beware of > "stage1 d21 fails to link with GDC 9.1". Thanks for all who replied. Thanks especially for mentioning this problem, as my build did indeed fail with this error on GCC 9.3. I applied the fix and that's now resolved. Now I have

GDC environment variable

Is there an environment variable like 'CC' or 'CXX', which specifies the name of the D compiler to use, which I might need to set when bootstrapping GCC? Thanks. -- Dave Blanchard

GNU = Junkware

deeper into the quagmire. Seemingly the only way that will ever finally get this junk working is to just sit there randomly trying different stuff in the hope that it somehow moves one closer toward getting something that works right. /rant -- Dave Blanchard

Re: Please, really, make `-masm=intel` the default for x86

hus requiring a number of patches. Usually not a big deal in and of itself (though it can be if the build system for that package is particularly junky), but when you consider there are so many packages including GCC always deprecating and changing things, it adds up to a lot of work to keep up with it all. -- Dave Blanchard

Re: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender

>host gcc.gnu.org [2620:52:3:1:0:246e:9693:128c] >SMTP error from remote mail server after end of data: >550 5.7.1 Blocked by SpamAssassin Naughty GCC mailing list, trying to spam itself, perhaps in an endless loop. Fortunately SpamAssassin stepped in to prevent this attempt at self-harm. -- Dave Blanchard

Re: FW: Redesigning the GCC website

ink so too, and I would like to > lend a hand in redesigning it. We're just fine, thanks. -- Dave Blanchard

Re: Inquiry: Country of Origin for gfortran

less than clear. If these bureaucratic parasites (but I repeat myself) don't want to use GCC, or Clang, then they can write their own compiler suite from scratch. Doubt that's going to happen, so this "investigation" is simply yet another frivilous waste of taxpayer dollars. -- Dave Blanchard

Re: Change in preprocessor behavior

On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 09:28:00 +0200 Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 2:34 AM Dave Blanchard wrote: > > > > At some point between GCC 9 and GCC 12, the preprocessor started behaving > > differently. Before if GCC were launched as /lib/cpp or /usr/bin/cpp (I

Change in preprocessor behavior

and it just acts as the normal compiler. Can someone kindly point me to the patch or commit where this feature was changed, and the rationale for doing so? Thank you. -- Dave Blanchard