On 11/07/2018 02:36 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 11/5/18 7:00 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/01/2018 07:45 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 11/1/18 1:15 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 01:09:16PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
-range 0.0 to 1.0, inclusive.
+range 0.0 to 1.0, inclusive.
On 11/7/18 2:36 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 11/5/18 7:00 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> On 11/01/2018 07:45 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> On 11/1/18 1:15 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 01:09:16PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> -range 0.0 to 1.0, inclusive.
> +range 0.0 to
On 11/5/18 7:00 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 11/01/2018 07:45 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 11/1/18 1:15 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 01:09:16PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
-range 0.0 to 1.0, inclusive.
+range 0.0 to 1.0, inclusive. The @var{probability} argument
On 11/01/2018 07:45 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 11/1/18 1:15 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 01:09:16PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
-range 0.0 to 1.0, inclusive.
+range 0.0 to 1.0, inclusive. The @var{probability} argument must be
+a compiler time constant.
When you say must,
On 11/1/18 7:45 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 11/1/18 1:15 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 01:09:16PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> -range 0.0 to 1.0, inclusive.
>>> +range 0.0 to 1.0, inclusive. The @var{probability} argument must be
>>> +a compiler time constant.
>> When you
On 11/1/18 1:15 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 01:09:16PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>> -range 0.0 to 1.0, inclusive.
>> +range 0.0 to 1.0, inclusive. The @var{probability} argument must be
>> +a compiler time constant.
>
> When you say must, I think error_at should be used
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 01:09:16PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> -range 0.0 to 1.0, inclusive.
> +range 0.0 to 1.0, inclusive. The @var{probability} argument must be
> +a compiler time constant.
When you say must, I think error_at should be used rather than warning_at.
If others disagree I'm open
On 10/31/18 11:17 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 11:04:32AM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> As Jakub pointed out we should not ICE when last argument
>> of __builtin_expect_with_probability is not a real cst.
>> Plus I documented the behavior.
>
> That is not what
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 11:04:32AM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> Hi.
>
> As Jakub pointed out we should not ICE when last argument
> of __builtin_expect_with_probability is not a real cst.
> Plus I documented the behavior.
That is not what you've implemented. The documentation says that
it must