> On 21 Oct 2022, at 09:40, Florian Weimer via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
> What should we do about these when they are not relevant to what's being
> tested? For example, gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/mzero6.c
> has this:
>
> int main ()
> {
> if (__builtin_copysign (1.0, func (0.0 / -5.0, 10)) != -1.0)
> abort ();
> exit (0);
> }
>
> but no include files, so abort and exit are implicitly declared.
>
> Should we inject a header with -include with the most common
> declarations (which includes at least abort and exit)? Or add the
> missing #include directives? But the latter might not work for
> freestanding targets.
>
> Implicit ints and function declarations without prototypes are also
> common (not just for main).
>
> Other tests look like they might be intended to be built in C89 mode,
> e.g. gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/386.c, although it's not
> immediately obvious to me what they test.Would you be able to backport 6be2672e4ee41c566a9e072088cccca263bab5f7 and 885b6660c17fb91980b5682514ef54668e544b02 to the active <13 branches? Thanks, sam
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
