Snapshot gcc-10-20210716 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10-20210716/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 10 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
On Fri, 2021-07-16 at 21:04 +0530, Ankur Saini wrote:
>
>
> > On 15-Jul-2021, at 4:53 AM, David Malcolm
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2021-07-14 at 22:41 +0530, Ankur Saini wrote:
> >
> >
[...snip...]
> >
> > >
> > > 2. ( pr100546.c <
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
On 7/16/21 9:32 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
[much snipped]
Of course, we shall assume a certain level of quality in the XFAILed test
cases: I'm certainly not suggesting we put any random junk into the
testsuite, coarsely XFAILed. (I have not reviewed Sandra's test cases to
that effect, but know
On 7/16/21 9:32 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
[Also including for guidance.]
Hi!
(I'm not involved in or familiar with Sandra's Fortran TS29113 work, just
commenting generally here.)
On 2021-07-16T09:52:28+0200, Thomas Koenig via Gcc-patches
wrote:
It is my understanding that it is not gcc
> On 15-Jul-2021, at 4:53 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2021-07-14 at 22:41 +0530, Ankur Saini wrote:
>> CURRENT STATUS OF PROJECT:
>>
>> - The analyzer can now sucessfully detect and analyze function calls
>> that
>> doesn't have a callgraph edge ( like a call via function pointer
[Also including for guidance.]
Hi!
(I'm not involved in or familiar with Sandra's Fortran TS29113 work, just
commenting generally here.)
On 2021-07-16T09:52:28+0200, Thomas Koenig via Gcc-patches
wrote:
> It is my understanding that it is not gcc policy to add xfailed test
> cases for thing
