[Bug c/114042] diagnostics about __builtin_stdc_bit_ceil() mentions __builtin_clzg()

2024-02-26 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114042 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c/114042] diagnostics about __builtin_stdc_bit_ceil() mentions __builtin_clzg()

2024-02-26 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114042 --- Comment #5 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:77576915cfd26e603aba5295dfdac54a5545f5f2 commit r14-9184-g77576915cfd26e603aba5295dfdac54a5545f5f2 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date:

[Bug c/114042] diagnostics about __builtin_stdc_bit_ceil() mentions __builtin_clzg()

2024-02-22 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114042 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c/114042] diagnostics about __builtin_stdc_bit_ceil() mentions __builtin_clzg()

2024-02-22 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114042 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Sure, we could repeat some of the checks we do for __builtin_clzg etc. before we lower __builtin_stdc_*, but wouldn't that be a maintainance nightmare?

[Bug c/114042] diagnostics about __builtin_stdc_bit_ceil() mentions __builtin_clzg()

2024-02-22 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114042 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c/114042] diagnostics about __builtin_stdc_bit_ceil() mentions __builtin_clzg()

2024-02-21 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114042 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-02-22