On 2019-04-08 9:42 a.m., Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, nick wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 2019-04-08 3:29 a.m., Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, nick wrote:
>>>
On 2019-04-07 5:31 a.m., Richard Biener wrote:
> On April 5, 2019 6:11:15 PM GMT+02:00, nick wro
On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 02:24:09PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > I know my first email is vague. I wanted to throw it out there since
> > the April 9th deadline is coming up.
>
> I was hoping Jakub Jelinek, who would be the mentor, would chime in
> earlier. But unfortunately he has probably not
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, nick wrote:
>
>
> On 2019-04-08 3:29 a.m., Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, nick wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2019-04-07 5:31 a.m., Richard Biener wrote:
> >>> On April 5, 2019 6:11:15 PM GMT+02:00, nick wrote:
>
>
> On 2019-04-05 6:25 a.m., Rich
On 2019-04-08 3:29 a.m., Richard Biener wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, nick wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 2019-04-07 5:31 a.m., Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On April 5, 2019 6:11:15 PM GMT+02:00, nick wrote:
On 2019-04-05 6:25 a.m., Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, nick wrote:
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 14:45:17 +0200
Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 2:31 PM Michael Matz wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > > Not sure if in this case we run into an RTL optimization that breaks
> > > things
> > > (PRE / scheduling / inva
On 4/8/19 3:19 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 1:09 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
>>
>> On 4/5/19 4:02 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> On 4/5/19 3:37 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 4/5/19 3:29 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 4/5/19 2:50 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>>> Say if the first bootstrap
On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 2:31 PM Michael Matz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > Not sure if in this case we run into an RTL optimization that breaks things
> > (PRE / scheduling / invariant motion are candidates).
>
> That's true, what Josef sees might point to a gen
Hi,
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
> Not sure if in this case we run into an RTL optimization that breaks things
> (PRE / scheduling / invariant motion are candidates).
That's true, what Josef sees might point to a genuine bug in the
middle-end observed only on msp430; but we do want
Hello,
On Sun, Apr 07 2019, ashwina kumar wrote:
> Hi ,
>
> While working I just figured out that -Wconversion is buggy. Please see the
> below code- -
>
> $ cat b.c
> #include
>
> void main (void)
> {
> //contains build errors
> uint16_t x = 1;
> uint16_t y = 2;
>
On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 11:33 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 10:38 AM Andrew Haley wrote:
> >
> > On 4/7/19 5:03 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> > > Hi Richard,
> > >
> > >> I don't know without looking, but I'd start at assemble_variable in
> > >> varasm.c.
> > >
> > > Thanks. I
On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 10:38 AM Andrew Haley wrote:
>
> On 4/7/19 5:03 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> > Hi Richard,
> >
> >> I don't know without looking, but I'd start at assemble_variable in
> >> varasm.c.
> >
> > Thanks. I've done that, and this is what a patch could look like.
> > However, I wil
On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 11:10 AM ashwina kumar wrote:
>
> Hi ,
>
> While working I just figured out that -Wconversion is buggy. Please see the
> below code- -
>
> $ cat b.c
> #include
>
> void main (void)
> {
> //contains build errors
> uint16_t x = 1;
> uint16_t y = 2;
>
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 1:09 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 4/5/19 4:02 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> > On 4/5/19 3:37 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> >> On 4/5/19 3:29 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> >>> On 4/5/19 2:50 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > Say if the first bootstrap succeeds and I then change a single
> >
On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 6:25 PM Michael Matz wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, 5 Apr 2019, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote:
>
> > Some setjmp/longjmp tests[1] depend on the value of an auto set before
> > setjmp
> > to to be retained after returning from the longjmp. As I understand, this
> > behaviour is act
On 4/7/19 5:03 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
>> I don't know without looking, but I'd start at assemble_variable in varasm.c.
>
> Thanks. I've done that, and this is what a patch could look like.
> However, I will not have time to formally submit this until next
> weekend.
>
> In the
NB2r31v84�7AN30�1F�D0[A2b37�1A
NB2 gcc@gcc.gnu.org
a1F�22`A8�09bE9�7AN30�1F�D0cD0O9Bv84�01�27g0DRA1002`A8u33�F7v84u35[50SD1y68]F2b10R9FSD1QFA�01SD1y68�E6`C5Y82N0B�1A
1,44811594346; 2,44811504355; 3,44811504364; 4,81029652812; 5,811436742647;
`A8SEFNE5pB9QFBNE5N0B�FEcA5N0B�7Du35[
On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, nick wrote:
>
>
> On 2019-04-07 5:31 a.m., Richard Biener wrote:
> > On April 5, 2019 6:11:15 PM GMT+02:00, nick wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2019-04-05 6:25 a.m., Richard Biener wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, nick wrote:
> >>>
>
>
> On 2019-04-03 7:30 a.m., Ric
17 matches
Mail list logo
