The patch below works for me. If you think it's good, please push it.
Feel free to modify it however you see fit.
The issue with your original patch was that __clang__ is only defined
when compiling the reference using clang, but not when compiling the
test using tcc.
In this patch, preprocessor
On 3/18/23 13:13, avih wrote:
On Saturday, March 18, 2023, 02:07:35 PM GMT+2, avih
wrote:
> If I use #if 0 instead of #if !defined(__clang__) || GCC_MAJOR >= 11
> then it does pass. Not quite sure what's going on.
Ah, I do get it. When it compiles the reference using clang then
these el
On Saturday, March 18, 2023, 02:07:35 PM GMT+2, avih wrote:
> If I use #if 0 instead of #if !defined(__clang__) || GCC_MAJOR >= 11
> then it does pass. Not quite sure what's going on.
Ah, I do get it. When it compiles the reference using clang then
these elements are 0, but when it compile
The patch does not work. The file compiles but there's a diff:
test3
--- test.ref 2023-03-18 14:01:39.0 +0200
+++ test.out3 2023-03-18 14:01:40.0 +0200
@@ -973,9 +973,9 @@
6 1490
7 3010
8 3010
-9 0
-10 0
-11 0
+9 2444
+10 3056
+11 3056
12 16149
13 32
On 3/18/23 11:34, avih wrote:
This is a second reply to the same email.
On Tuesday, March 14, 2023, 06:02:35 PM GMT+2, Herman ten Brugge
wrote:
> Can you change the code in 'tests/tcctest.c' on line 3865 to '#if
> GCC_MAJOR >= 40'.
This works. Specifically, only the __builtin_clrsb* are an
This is a second reply to the same email.
On Tuesday, March 14, 2023, 06:02:35 PM GMT+2, Herman ten Brugge
wrote:
> Can you change the code in 'tests/tcctest.c' on line 3865 to '#if
> GCC_MAJOR >= 40'.
This works. Specifically, only the __builtin_clrsb* are an issue,
while the others are fin
