On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 12:01 PM Jan Hubicka via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> > On 11/5/21 18:30, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > > every gcc source looks like bit of overkill given that is can be open
> > > coded in 3 statements?
> >
> > Why? It's a static inline function with few statements. I don't want to
>
> On 11/5/21 18:30, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > every gcc source looks like bit of overkill given that is can be open
> > coded in 3 statements?
>
> Why? It's a static inline function with few statements. I don't want to
> copy
> the same code at every location. I bet there must quite some open-coded
On 11/5/21 18:30, Jan Hubicka wrote:
every gcc source looks like bit of overkill given that is can be open
coded in 3 statements?
Why? It's a static inline function with few statements. I don't want to
copy
the same code at every location. I bet there must quite some open-coded
> Hello.
>
> This strips .gk from aux_base_name in coverage.c.
> Do you like the implementation of endswith, or do we have the functionality
> somewhere?
>
> Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests.
>
> Ready to be installed?
> Thanks,
> Martin
>
> PR
Hello.
This strips .gk from aux_base_name in coverage.c.
Do you like the implementation of endswith, or do we have the functionality
somewhere?
Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests.
Ready to be installed?
Thanks,
Martin
PR gcov-profile/100520
