On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 6:30 PM David Malcolm via Gcc wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-04-15 at 16:26 -0400, Chris Punches wrote:
> > What I see here in sum is another high level tightly integrated Red
> > Hat
> > employee saying the gist of "I'm really not saying it out of my
> > employer's interest and it
Dear Alfred and Alexandre,
It seems that neither of you would like to offer any evidence
that counteracts what I have already been given by multiple
individuals. Furthermore,
Alexandre:
> A misguided person thought that reciprocating the doxxing against RMS
> was a good way to defend him.
Dear Alexandre,
As stated here, shortly after I sent my message
(https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-March/235197.html):
> Apologies, a correction here. I should have more carefully read
> it, but this paragraph:
>
> > My problem is Dr. Richard M. Stallman stands credibly and
> >
Dear Giacomo,
Apologies, a correction here. I should have more carefully read
it, but this paragraph:
> My problem is Dr. Richard M. Stallman stands credibly and
> factually accused of Doxxing and GCC contributor/participant and
> knowingly manipulating the project for his own personal
Dear Giacomo,
I want to reply specifically to you because you, like me, are a
new contributor, and I have a few questions and a few points that I
think are salient in this discussion.
> As an Italian I'm having a hard time trying to follow your reasoning
> about Stallman being a problem to
Dear GCC Community,
Hi. My name is JeanHeyd Meneide, my online moniker is "ThePhD"
(not an actual Doctor. Yet!). I spend a lot of my time hacking on C
and C++. Some of the things I've done include:
- Contributing (mostly) a Implementation [1]
- Doing a GSoC for GCC and writing up about
Dear Jeff,
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 3:02 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>
> You use a getter function to retrieve the value of ret.to, which is
> fine. Is there a specific reason why you're not using a setter function
> to save the value?
I did this because I have access to ret.to in the libcpp
(Very very gentle ping, just to make sure it's still on anyone's radar...!)
On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 8:39 AM JeanHeyd Meneide wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> > Typo: comple-time
> >
> > >2020-10-08 JeanHeyd "ThePhD" Meneide
> > >
> > >* gcc/c-family/c-cppbuiltin.c: Add predefined macro
> >
Hello,
> Typo: comple-time
>
> >2020-10-08 JeanHeyd "ThePhD" Meneide
> >
> >* gcc/c-family/c-cppbuiltin.c: Add predefined macro
> >definitions for charsets
>
> I think you should put the macro names in braces after the filename and drop
> the trailing "for charsets".
Can do!
>
Dear Joseph,
On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 1:36 PM Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> This documentation doesn't seem sufficient to use the macros. Do they
> expand to (narrow) string literals? To an unquoted sequence of
> characters? I think from the implementation that the answer is strings
> (so, in
Dear GCC,
This patch adds macros to the general preprocessor that allow
users to understand what the execution and wide execution charsets
are, which are used for "bark" and L"meow" literals in C-family
languages.
The goal of this is to enable individuals in capable languages
like C
On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 8:14 AM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches
wrote:
> I really wish WG14 would just fix the intmax_t mess so we can make
> them integral types unconditionally.
We're trying, but we're struggling to reach a good consensus. Almost
nobody's fully agreeing on one /particular/
12 matches
Mail list logo
