On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 10:12:35PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Committed as obvious.
>
> Less obvious (to me) is whether it's correct to say "GCC V13" here. I
> don't think we refer to a version that way anywhere else, do we?
>
> Would "since GCC 13.1.0" be better?
x86_field_alignment uses
inform (input_location, "the alignment of %<_Atomic %T%> "
"fields changed in %{GCC 11.1%}",
so maybe the below should use %{GCC 13.1%}. "GCC V13" looks unusual
to me.
> -- >8 --
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * config/i386/i386.cc (ix86_invalid_conversion): Fix grammar.
> ---
> gcc/config/i386/i386.cc | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc b/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc
> index 50860050049..5d57726e22c 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc
> @@ -22890,7 +22890,7 @@ ix86_invalid_conversion (const_tree fromtype,
> const_tree totype)
> warning (0, "%<__bfloat16%> is redefined from typedef %<short%> "
> "to real %<__bf16%> since GCC V13, be careful of "
> "implicit conversion between %<__bf16%> and %<short%>; "
> - "a explicit bitcast may be needed here");
> + "an explicit bitcast may be needed here");
> }
>
> /* Conversion allowed. */
> --
> 2.41.0
>
Marek
