On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 5:50 PM enh wrote:
> plus testing for _equality_ can (as mentioned earlier) have slightly
> different properties from the three-way comparator behavior of
> bcmp()/memcmp().
>
Per spec, bcmp is not a three-way comparison, it is an equality comparison
with exactly the same
Snapshot gcc-10-20210917 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10-20210917/
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 9/4/21 1:10 PM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
Hi!
Running automated tests again, I found that when building current
(2fcfc03459a907c0237ea6e2c6e4ce4871034bed) GCC with a recent GCC, a
build (make all-gcc) when ./configure'ed for -target=nvptx-none
--enable-werror-always --enable-languages=all --di
On Fri, 17 Sep 2021, 16:52 Thomas Schwinge, wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 2021-09-17T15:03:18+0200, Richard Biener
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 2:39 PM Jonathan Wakely
> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 17 Sept 2021 at 13:08, Richard Biener
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 1:17 PM Thomas Schwinge <
On September 17, 2021 6:30:21 PM GMT+02:00, Martin Sebor
wrote:
>On 9/17/21 8:54 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 16/09/2021 16:44, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
>>> On 9/14/21 2:10 AM, Andrew Pinski via Gcc wrote:
Hi all,
I am doing some bugzilla cleanup. This includes disab
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 3:32 AM Richard Biener via Gcc
wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 10:08 AM Florian Weimer
> wrote:
> >
> > * Richard Biener via Gcc:
> >
> > > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 10:36 PM Joseph Myers
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, Chris Kennelly wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > In
On 9/17/21 3:12 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 10:08:34AM +0200, Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote:
So the compiler would emit a call to __memcmpeq and at the same time
emit a weak alias of __memcmpeq to memcmp so the program links
when the libc version targeted does not pro
On 9/17/21 8:54 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 16/09/2021 16:44, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
On 9/14/21 2:10 AM, Andrew Pinski via Gcc wrote:
Hi all,
I am doing some bugzilla cleanup. This includes disabling some
components and some versions for new bugs.
So far I have disabled versions b
Hi!
On 2021-09-17T15:03:18+0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 2:39 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Sept 2021 at 13:08, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 1:17 PM Thomas Schwinge
>> > wrote:
>> > > On 2021-09-10T10:00:25+0200, I wrote:
>> > > > On
On 16/09/2021 16:44, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
On 9/14/21 2:10 AM, Andrew Pinski via Gcc wrote:
Hi all,
I am doing some bugzilla cleanup. This includes disabling some
components and some versions for new bugs.
So far I have disabled versions before GCC 4 because we have not had a
report
* Joseph Myers:
> I was supposing a build-time decision (using GCC_GLIBC_VERSION_GTE_IFELSE
> to know if the glibc version on the target definitely has this function).
> But if we add a header declaration, you could check for __memcmpeq being
> declared (and so cover arbitrary C libraries, not
On Fri, 17 Sep 2021, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> when the libc version targeted does not provide __memcmpeq? Or would
> glibc through magically communicate the availability of the new ABI
> without actually declaring the function?
> (I'm not sure whether a GCC build-time decision via configu
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 17 2021, Sarthak Bhatnagar via Gcc wrote:
> Hello Mentors
>
> I am currently in my 3rd year of engineering . I have developed skills in
> c++ ,data structures and algorithms and web development too.I have been
> working on several projects.Now I am interested in contributing and ne
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 2:39 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Fri, 17 Sept 2021 at 13:08, Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 1:17 PM Thomas Schwinge
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > On 2021-09-10T10:00:25+0200, I wrote:
> > > > On 2021-09-01T19:31:19-0600, Martin Sebo
On Fri, 17 Sept 2021 at 13:08, Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 1:17 PM Thomas Schwinge
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > On 2021-09-10T10:00:25+0200, I wrote:
> > > On 2021-09-01T19:31:19-0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
> > > wrote:
> > >> On 8/30/21 4:46 AM, Thomas Schwinge wr
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 1:17 PM Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On 2021-09-10T10:00:25+0200, I wrote:
> > On 2021-09-01T19:31:19-0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> >> On 8/30/21 4:46 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> >>> Ping -- we still need to plug the memory leak; see patch attache
On 2021-09-17 07:52, unlvsur unlvsur via Libstdc++ wrote:
> I find that clang can build sanitizers correctly but libstdc++ does not work
> with sanitizers since it does not support related functionalities with
> sanitizers on windows.
>
> Can we start to add support for sanitizers for windows??
On 17/09/2021 11:23, Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote:
* Matthias Klose:
Starting with GCC 8, the configury allows to encode extra features into the
architecture string. Debian and Ubuntu's armhf (hard float) architecture is
configured with
--with-arch=armv7-a --with-fpu=vfpv3-d16
and now s
Hello Mentors
I am currently in my 3rd year of engineering . I have developed skills in
c++ ,data structures and algorithms and web development too.I have been
working on several projects.Now I am interested in contributing and need
guidance. Please guide me so that I can contribute to GSOC 2022.
I find that clang can build sanitizers correctly but libstdc++ does not work
with sanitizers since it does not support related functionalities with
sanitizers on windows.
Can we start to add support for sanitizers for windows?? I honestly do not
think that would take a huge amount of time.
Sen
Hi!
On 2021-09-10T10:00:25+0200, I wrote:
> On 2021-09-01T19:31:19-0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
>> On 8/30/21 4:46 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>>> Ping -- we still need to plug the memory leak; see patch attached, and/or
>>> long discussion here:
>>
>> Thanks for answering my quest
* Matthias Klose:
> Starting with GCC 8, the configury allows to encode extra features into the
> architecture string. Debian and Ubuntu's armhf (hard float) architecture is
> configured with
>
> --with-arch=armv7-a --with-fpu=vfpv3-d16
>
> and now should be configured with
>
> --with-arch=arm
Starting with GCC 8, the configury allows to encode extra features into the
architecture string. Debian and Ubuntu's armhf (hard float) architecture is
configured with
--with-arch=armv7-a --with-fpu=vfpv3-d16
and now should be configured with
--with-arch=armv7-a+fp
The --with-fpu configure
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 10:37 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Richard Biener:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 10:08 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
> >>
> >> * Richard Biener via Gcc:
> >>
> >> > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 10:36 PM Joseph Myers
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, Chris Kennel
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 10:08:34AM +0200, Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote:
> > So the compiler would emit a call to __memcmpeq and at the same time
> > emit a weak alias of __memcmpeq to memcmp so the program links
> > when the libc version targeted does not provide __memcmpeq? Or would
> > glibc thr
* Richard Biener:
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 10:08 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
>>
>> * Richard Biener via Gcc:
>>
>> > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 10:36 PM Joseph Myers
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, Chris Kennelly wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > In terms of relying on the feature: If __memcmpeq is
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 10:08 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Richard Biener via Gcc:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 10:36 PM Joseph Myers
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, Chris Kennelly wrote:
> >>
> >> > In terms of relying on the feature: If __memcmpeq is ever exposed as an
> >> > a
* Richard Biener via Gcc:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 10:36 PM Joseph Myers wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, Chris Kennelly wrote:
>>
>> > In terms of relying on the feature: If __memcmpeq is ever exposed as an a
>> > simple alias for memcmp (since the notes mention that it's a valid
>> > impleme
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 10:36 PM Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, Chris Kennelly wrote:
>
> > In terms of relying on the feature: If __memcmpeq is ever exposed as an a
> > simple alias for memcmp (since the notes mention that it's a valid
> > implementation), does that open up the pos
29 matches
Mail list logo