On 24/01/18 20:20, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> I've added a new feature to jamais-vu (as of
> 77849e2809ca9a049d5683571e27ebe190977fa8): it can now ignore test
> results that merely changed line number.
>
> For example, if the old .sum file has a:
>
> PASS: g++.dg/diagnostic/param-type-mismat
Snapshot gcc-6-20180124 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/6-20180124/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 6 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-6
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 4:02 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I observed that gfortran 7.2 and 8.0 generate different debug info for
> dynamical array.
> Attributes DW_AT_data_location and DW_AT_allocated are different. There
> is an extra "DW_OP_plus_uconst: 8" generated by gcc 8.0. Is it
> intende
I added some documentation to fortran/intrinsic.texi. In
processing the gfortran.f90, I discovered this warning.
makeinfo --split-size=500 --split-size=500 --split-size=500 \
-I ../../gcc/gcc/doc/include -I ../../gcc/gcc/fortran \
-o doc/gfortran.info ../../gcc/gcc/fortran/gfo
On Sat, 2017-12-16 at 12:06 +0100, Paulo Matos wrote:
>
> On 15/12/17 15:29, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Fri, 2017-12-15 at 10:16 +0100, Paulo Matos wrote:
> > >
> > > On 14/12/17 12:39, David Malcolm wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > It looks like you're capturing the textual output from "jv
>
* Jakub Jelinek:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 03:04:55PM +0100, Manuel Rigger wrote:
>> In a second step, we also considered internal builtins and found that the
>> vararg handling builtins (__builtin_va_start, __builtin_va_end,
>> __builtin_va_arg, and __builtin_va_copy) are relied upon by many proj
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 03:04:55PM +0100, Manuel Rigger wrote:
> In a second step, we also considered internal builtins and found that the
> vararg handling builtins (__builtin_va_start, __builtin_va_end,
> __builtin_va_arg, and __builtin_va_copy) are relied upon by many projects,
> even though the
Thank you for all answers, which are very useful for us!
As you pointed out, we only considered GitHub projects. If I understood
correctly, builtins would still not be deprecated even if we considered all
other open-source hosting sites because closed-source projects could still
rely on them, righ
