On 10/13/23 17:28, Lewis Hyatt wrote:
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 04:09:21PM -0400, Lewis Hyatt wrote:
On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 5:53 PM Jason Merrill wrote:
On 7/31/23 22:22, Lewis Hyatt via Gcc-patches wrote:
`#pragma GCC target' is not currently handled in preprocess-only mode (e.g.,
when
t does not set any libcpp macros
> > > when
> > > handling the pragma, so there is nothing to test, but I did verify
> > > that
> > > processing the pragma in preprocess-only mode does not cause any
> > > problems.
> > > The cro
On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 5:53 PM Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> On 7/31/23 22:22, Lewis Hyatt via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > `#pragma GCC target' is not currently handled in preprocess-only mode (e.g.,
> > when running gcc -E or gcc -save-temps). As noted in the PR, this means that
> > if the target pragma
On Tue, Aug 1, 2023 at 11:01 AM Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2023, Lewis Hyatt via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > I added some additional testcases from the PR for x86. The other targets
> > that support `#pragma GCC target' (aarch64, arm, nios2, powerpc, s390)
> > already had tests verifying
On 7/31/23 22:22, Lewis Hyatt via Gcc-patches wrote:
`#pragma GCC target' is not currently handled in preprocess-only mode (e.g.,
when running gcc -E or gcc -save-temps). As noted in the PR, this means that
if the target pragma defines any macros, those macros are not effective in
On Mon, 31 Jul 2023, Lewis Hyatt via Gcc-patches wrote:
> I added some additional testcases from the PR for x86. The other targets
> that support `#pragma GCC target' (aarch64, arm, nios2, powerpc, s390)
> already had tests verifying that the pragma sets macros as expected; here I
> have added
`#pragma GCC target' is not currently handled in preprocess-only mode (e.g.,
when running gcc -E or gcc -save-temps). As noted in the PR, this means that
if the target pragma defines any macros, those macros are not effective in
preprocess-only mode. Similarly, such macros are not effective when
