Thanks for the update.
On Mon, Jul 9, 2018, 10:28 AM Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> There is good news bad news on the GCC repository conversion.
>
> The good news is that I have solved the only known remaining technical
> problem in reposurgeon blocking the conversion. I've fixed the bug
> that prev
There is good news bad news on the GCC repository conversion.
The good news is that I have solved the only known remaining technical
problem in reposurgeon blocking the conversion. I've fixed the bug
that prevented execute permissions from being carried by branch
copies.
The bad news is that my
Snapshot gcc-9-20180708 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/9-20180708/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 9 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk revision
On Sun, 8 Jul 2018, Jason Merrill wrote:
On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 6:40 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jul 2018, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 07/05/2018 05:14 PM, Soul Studios wrote:
Simply because a struct has a constructor does not mean it isn't a
viable target/source for use with memcpy/memmove
On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 6:40 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2018, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> On 07/05/2018 05:14 PM, Soul Studios wrote:
>>>
>>> Simply because a struct has a constructor does not mean it isn't a
>>> viable target/source for use with memcpy/memmove/memset.
>>
>>
>> As the docume
On Fri, 6 Jul 2018, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 07/05/2018 05:14 PM, Soul Studios wrote:
Simply because a struct has a constructor does not mean it isn't a
viable target/source for use with memcpy/memmove/memset.
As the documentation that Segher quoted explains, it does
mean exactly that.
Some cl
