Hi Joseph,
I have updated the patch based on your review comments. I added the newly
introduced builtin to extend.texi and mentioned the PR in the commit message.
Could you please take another look when you have a moment?
Yuao
From: Joseph Myers
Sent: Thursday,
Hi Paul,
Same remark as for PR120107! LGTM for both branches.
Committed both patches. Thanks for the reviews!
Best regards
Thomas
The testcase was found when looking at mapping fails with
SPEC HPC's 619.clvleaf_s; however, the variant fixed by the
attached patch only showed up when experimenting and not
in the SPEC testcase itself.
Before the included fix, to be added testcase failed with
an ICE.
I intent to commit the atta
On Wed, 14 May 2025, Yuao Ma wrote:
> Hi Joseph,
>
> I have updated the patch based on your review comments. I added the
> newly introduced builtin to extend.texi and mentioned the PR in the
> commit message. Could you please take another look when you have a
> moment?
This version is OK in t
On Wed, 14 May 2025, Yuao Ma wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This patch adds trigonometric pi-based functions as gcc builtins: acospi,
> asinpi, atan2pi,
> atanpi, cospi, sinpi, and tanpi. Latest glibc already provides support for
> these functions, which we plan to leverage in future gfortran implementati
Hi all,
This patch adds trigonometric pi-based functions as gcc builtins: acospi,
asinpi, atan2pi,
atanpi, cospi, sinpi, and tanpi. Latest glibc already provides support for
these functions, which we plan to leverage in future gfortran implementations.
The patch includes two test cases to verify
Am 14.05.25 um 08:42 schrieb FX Coudert:
[…] more trigonometric
functions changes are coming, I think it would be useful to agree
that this is a good approach.
Patch is OK to push.
Thanks for the review.
However, I messed up with 'git add' at some point and committed now a
version that didn't