Joseph Myers via Gcc writes:
> One issue that showed up as test failures with a default of -std=gnu23 is
> that -std=gnu23 -Wtraditional produces a "traditional C rejects ISO C
> style function definitions" warning for function definitions with empty
> parentheses, as they are treated like (vo
On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 4:29 PM Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Wed, 16 Oct 2024, Eric Gallager via Gcc wrote:
>
> > One thing about -Wtraditional is that it enables a lot of different
> > messages, so I always thought it would make more sense as an umbrella
> > warning that just enables a bunch of sub
On Wed, 16 Oct 2024, Eric Gallager via Gcc wrote:
> One thing about -Wtraditional is that it enables a lot of different
> messages, so I always thought it would make more sense as an umbrella
> warning that just enables a bunch of sub-warning flags. While many of
> the individual sub-warnings may
On Wed, 16 Oct 2024, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Jakub Jelinek via Gcc:
>
> > Are some of the papers/features known to be fully implemented (since which
> > version)? E.g. for __VA_OPT__ I remember doing (and Jason too) various
> > fixes
> > in the past few years, like PR89971, PR103415, PR101488
On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 2:52 PM Arsen Arsenović via Gcc wrote:
>
> Eli Zaretskii via Gcc writes:
>
> > Please don't remove the support for -Wtraditional if it's easy to fix.
> > Removing it runs risk of breaking someone's program, so unless keeping
> > it is a real dumper on GCC development, I ho
* Jakub Jelinek via Gcc:
> Are some of the papers/features known to be fully implemented (since which
> version)? E.g. for __VA_OPT__ I remember doing (and Jason too) various fixes
> in the past few years, like PR89971, PR103415, PR101488. Not really sure
> what exactly C23 requires.
Can we add
Eli Zaretskii via Gcc writes:
> Please don't remove the support for -Wtraditional if it's easy to fix.
> Removing it runs risk of breaking someone's program, so unless keeping
> it is a real dumper on GCC development, I hope you will keep it.
ISTM that it is proposed to ignore rather than reject
> Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 17:12:29 + (UTC)
> From: Joseph Myers via Gcc
>
> One issue that showed up as test failures with a default of -std=gnu23 is
> that -std=gnu23 -Wtraditional produces a "traditional C rejects ISO C
> style function definitions" warning for function definitions with em
One issue that showed up as test failures with a default of -std=gnu23 is
that -std=gnu23 -Wtraditional produces a "traditional C rejects ISO C
style function definitions" warning for function definitions with empty
parentheses, as they are treated like (void) in C23, so resulting in
failure of
Hi,
Following "popular request", we are happy to announce that users can
now request to skip Linaro CI precommit testing for some patches.
The current implementation skips testing in two cases:
1- there is [RFC] or [RFC v[0-9]] in the patch subject
2- the commit message contains a line starting w
Hello,
On Wed, Sep 11 2024, Prachi Godbole via Gcc wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to generate out-of-line clones of ipcp clones for an IPA
> pass that runs after IPA inline, where the new clone has same function
> body and same updated signature as the ipcp clone. This fails or
> asserts based on ho
Hello,
first and foremost, sorry for a late reply. I needed to take a larger
leave of absence for family reasons.
Comments inline:
On Thu, Aug 22 2024, Dhruv Chawla via Gcc wrote:
> * Table Of Contents *
>
> - Introduction
> - Motivating Test Cases
> - Proposed Solution
> - Other Options
> - Ex
On Wed, 16 Oct 2024, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
> The cppreference page mentions as unimplemented on the GCC side
> N2653 - Type change of u8 string literals
commit 703837b2cc8ac03c53ac7cc0fb1327055acaebd2
Author: Tom Honermann
Date: Tue Aug 2 14:36:01 2022 -0400
C: Implement C2X N2653
Am Mittwoch, dem 16.10.2024 um 13:27 +0200 schrieb Jakub Jelinek via Gcc:
> Hi!
>
> https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/compiler_support
> has a table with compiler support for C23.
> I've added #embed and [[unsequenced]]/[[reproducible]] in there
> yesterday, but am wondering about the accuracy of th
Hi!
https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/compiler_support
has a table with compiler support for C23.
I've added #embed and [[unsequenced]]/[[reproducible]] in there
yesterday, but am wondering about the accuracy of the rest.
Given the switch to -std=gnu23 preparation, I wonder what is still
unimplemen
On Tue, 15 Oct 2024, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> Hi,
> Testing libgomp with SVE enabled (-mcpu=generic+sve2), results in ~60
> UNRESOLVED errors with following error message:
>
> lto1: fatal error: degree of 'poly_int' exceeds 'NUM_POLY_INT_COEFFS'
> compilation terminated.
> nvptx mkoffload: f
16 matches
Mail list logo
