Hi,
Gentle ping https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-May/595208.html
I think this is a reasonable fix, the behavior is consistent with what we have
in
the previous built-in framework, I'm going to push this a week later if no
objections. :)
BR,
Kewen
> Hi,
>
> As PR104
Hi,
Gentle ping https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-May/595208.html
BR,
Kewen
Hi,
As PR104482 shown, it's one regression about the handlings when
the argument number is more than the one of built-in function
prototype. The new bif support only catches the cas
Hi,
Gentle ping https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-May/595208.html
BR,
Kewen
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> As PR104482 shown, it's one regression about the handlings when
>>> the argument number is more than the one of built-in function
>>> prototype. The new bif support only catches the case tha
Hi,
Gentle ping https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-May/595208.html
BR,
Kewen
>> Hi,
>>
>> As PR104482 shown, it's one regression about the handlings when
>> the argument number is more than the one of built-in function
>> prototype. The new bif support only catches the case that the
Hi,
Gentle ping https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-May/595209.html
BR,
Kewen
on 2022/5/18 22:07, Kewen.Lin via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As PR104482 shown, it's one regression about the handlings when
> the argument number is more than the one of built-in function
> prototype. T
Hi,
As PR104482 shown, it's one regression about the handlings when
the argument number is more than the one of built-in function
prototype. The new bif support only catches the case that the
argument number is less than the one of function prototype, but
it misses the case that the argument numb
