On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 5:09 AM, Matthijs van Duin
wrote:
> On 4 October 2015 at 10:05, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> Do you have GCC copyright assignment
>
> No, but I hereby license it under the http://www.wtfpl.net/ (or, in
> any legal system which acknowledges such an act, place it in public
> domain
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015, Matthew Fernandez wrote:
> tl;dr: Is dividing by INT64_MIN in C undefined behaviour?
No, only dividing by 0 or dividing the minimum value of the type by -1
(and the latter should be defined for -fwrapv, see bug 30484).
> on x86 is emitted as a call to __divdi3. If the numera
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> To enable vectorization of loops w/ calls to math functions it is reasonable
> to enable parsing of attribute vector for functions unconditionally and
> change GlibC's header file not to use `omp declare simd', but use
> __attribute__((vector)) instead.
Hello,
Recently vector ABI was introduced into GCC
Vector versions of math functions were incorporated in to GlibC
starting from v2.22.
Unfortunately, to get this functions work `-fopenmp'
switch must be added to compiler invocation. This is due to the fact that
vector variant of math functions gen
Dear GCC community,
recently I have seen several questions like "Can I use GCC C++11 for
production if even it's own website says it is experimental?", based on
a C++11 support page https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html
Can you confirm that the statement is outdated? Shall the wording on
t
