On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 20:36, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
>
>
>
> Am 15.01.25 um 20:41 schrieb Jonathan Wakely:
> > On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 17:17, Georg-Johann Lay via Gcc
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> What's the recommended way to built-in define types like _
On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 20:57, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 09:36:51PM +0100, Georg-Johann Lay via Gcc wrote:
> > > This pedwarn is correct, so I'm not sure why it's a problem. If you
> > > don't want warnings about non-standard extensions, don't use
> > > -pedantic-errors.
> >
On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 17:17, Georg-Johann Lay via Gcc wrote:
>
> What's the recommended way to built-in define types like __uint24 ?
>
> Since v4.8, the avr backend has:
>
> avr-modes.def:
>FRACTIONAL_INT_MODE (PSI, 24, 3);
>
> avr.cc:
>tree int24_type = make_signed_type (GET_MODE_BITSIZ
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 at 12:17, Ben Boeckel via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 01:27:17 +, Hao Liu via Gcc wrote:
> > I'm new to GCC community, and try to contribute some patches.
> > I am having trouble setting git send-email with Outlook on Linux. Does
> > anyone have any successful ex
N.B. your question belongs on the gcc-help list, or a general C programming
forum. This mailing list is for discussing development of GCC, and the
alignment is decided by the platform ABI not by GCC, so the question
doesn't belong here.
On Tue, 7 Jan 2025, 07:42 Jonathan Wakely, wrote:
>
On Tue, 7 Jan 2025, 03:09 M Chhapgar via Gcc, wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am learning about memory alignment and noticed that on my x86-64 machine
> with GCC 14, a `complex double` has a size of 16 bytes, but an alignment of
> only 8 bytes. I am curious as to why this is.
Because it's roughly equival
On Sat, 28 Dec 2024, 16:17 Jonathan Wakely, wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 28 Dec 2024, 15:26 Paul Smith via Gcc, wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 2024-12-28 at 09:00 -0600, Paul Markfort via Gcc wrote:
>> > I realize that C is not a line oriented language and usually
>> >
On Sat, 28 Dec 2024, 15:26 Paul Smith via Gcc, wrote:
> On Sat, 2024-12-28 at 09:00 -0600, Paul Markfort via Gcc wrote:
> > I realize that C is not a line oriented language and usually
> > completely ignores line termination characters (so yes this is
> > probably not a simple thing to do).
>
> Y
On Sat, 30 Nov 2024 at 10:10, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 30, 2024 at 09:54:02AM +, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> > On Sat, 30 Nov 2024, 09:01 David H. Lynch Jr. via Gcc,
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Is it possible to build gcc 13 with gcc 14 ?
> >
On Sat, 30 Nov 2024, 09:54 Jonathan Wakely, wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 30 Nov 2024, 09:01 David H. Lynch Jr. via Gcc,
> wrote:
>
>> Is it possible to build gcc 13 with gcc 14 ?
>>
>
> Yes
>
>
>> My system updated to gcc 14 and I am doing some private
On Sat, 30 Nov 2024, 09:01 David H. Lynch Jr. via Gcc,
wrote:
> Is it possible to build gcc 13 with gcc 14 ?
>
Yes
> My system updated to gcc 14 and I am doing some private development for
> hardware stesting of a new memory addressing paradigm using the GCC 13
> code base.
> Now I can't compi
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:42, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > All these directories should have been removed two years ago:
>
> Agreed. Thank you for digging into this and raising it, Jonathan!
>
> > $ ls -1 -d htdocs/o
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:22, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:14, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >
> > Hi Gerald,
> >
> > The HTML pages from Martin Liska's Sphinx doc experiment are still
> > online, and Google thinks they are the cano
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:14, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> Hi Gerald,
>
> The HTML pages from Martin Liska's Sphinx doc experiment are still
> online, and Google thinks they are the canonical locatiosn for GCC
> docs.
> e.g. try
> https://www.google.com/search?c
Hi Gerald,
The HTML pages from Martin Liska's Sphinx doc experiment are still
online, and Google thinks they are the canonical locatiosn for GCC
docs.
e.g. try
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=%22inline+function+is+as+fast+as+a+macro%22++gcc
The only hit from gcc.gnu.org is a s
On Tue, 12 Nov 2024 at 03:19, 王皓冉 via Gcc wrote:
>
> Dear GCC
>
> I am running docker to build a GCC image for C++ compile. But the image
> call the ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gcc, may I know the reason for this?
Building GCC does not require network access, but maybe you're using
somebody else's scri
On Sun, 10 Nov 2024, 11:13 Alexander Monakov, wrote:
>
> On Sun, 10 Nov 2024, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
>
> > But 1 - (10 * 0.1) won't, and so the warning is pointing out that any
> exact
> > equality comparisons can be affected by this kind of problem. If you
On Sun, 10 Nov 2024, 08:26 Sad Clouds via Gcc, wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Nov 2024 11:49:56 -0800
> Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> > You can use the diagnostic pragma to disable it directly for the
> statement.
>
> Thanks for the tip. After a quick search, I came across this page,
> which explains it:
> https
On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 at 12:12, quic_zijuhu via Gcc wrote:
>
> i am not sure if this is the good way to report gcc issue. (^^)
Please see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs (or the "Bugs" section of the
sidebar on the https://gcc.gnu.org homepage).
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 at 16:29, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-10-21 at 03:22 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > As an experiment Sourceware is now running an forgejo v9 instance at
> > https://forge.sourceware.org
> >
> > Everybody with an @sourceware.org, @cygwin.com or @gcc.gnu.org
> > address
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 at 16:06, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 4:35 PM Jonathan Wakely
> wrote:
> >> For illustrative purposes, I don't care about the name:
> >> -align-object-data-section=64
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >
> >
&
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 at 15:00, Mateusz Guzik via Gcc wrote:
> I understand the stock behavior of pilling variables on may happen to
> improve cache usage.
>
> However, in a multicore setting it is a never-ending source of
> unintentionally showing up and disappearing false-sharing depending on
> u
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 at 20:44, Eric Gallager wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2024 at 9:27 PM Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >
> > As an experiment Sourceware is now running an forgejo v9 instance at
> > https://forge.sourceware.org
> >
> > Everybody with an @sourceware.org, @cygwin.com or @gcc.gnu.org address
>
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 at 16:42, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 at 16:29, David Malcolm wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2024-10-21 at 03:22 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>> > As an experiment Sourceware is now running an forgejo v9 instance at
>&g
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 at 17:30, yxj-github-437 via Gcc
wrote:
> This is a patch to fix target android
Thanks for the patch. Patches need to be sent to the gcc-patches mailing
list, and there are other requirements for all contributors, please see
https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 at 17:02, Dennis Luehring via Gcc
wrote:
> latest SUSE Tumbleweed/gcc 14.2
>
> c99 -O2 test.c
>
> returns:
> c99: invalid option -- '2'
>
> cc -O2 test.c
>
> returns successfull
>
>
> according to https://linux.die.net/man/1/c99 the -O2 option should work
> c99 is used in an o
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 at 10:14, Roosh Fourtytwo via Gcc
wrote:
> Hi, Thanks for the clear and concise instructions. I'm building gcc-14,
> and have a small suggestion.
>
> Kind regards,
> Roosh42
>
> *Webpage to update:*
> https://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html
>
> *Suggestion:*
> Add curl
On Fri, 27 Sept 2024 at 09:13, Dennis Luehring wrote:
>
> Am 27.09.2024 um 09:56 schrieb Jonathan Wakely:
> > On Fri, 27 Sept 2024, 08:39 Dennis Luehring, wrote:
> >
> > > Am 27.09.2024 um 09:34 schrieb Jonathan Wakely:
> > >
> > >
> > > >
On Fri, 27 Sept 2024, 08:39 Dennis Luehring, wrote:
> Am 27.09.2024 um 09:34 schrieb Jonathan Wakely:
>
>
> > They might not have
> > been using the original gcc-3.4.0 sources.
>
>
> seems to be very possible
>
>
>
> > There should be no need to edit
On Fri, 27 Sept 2024, 08:24 Dennis Luehring via Gcc,
wrote:
> im currently trying to replicate a gcc-3.4.0 arm-elf build from an very
> old cross toolchain
> building with my script (https://pastebin.com/kAEK0S24) works
> but my -print-multi-lib returns only
>
> ---
> .;
> thumb;@mthumb
> ---
>
>
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 19:00, Eric Gallager via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 8:09 AM Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > [For the fortran people: Discussion on gcc@]
> >
> > Just a general remark.
> >
> > There are people, such as myself, who regularly mess up
> > their git repositori
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 16:20, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Jonathan Wakely:
>
> > The discussion is about how we do patch submission and patch review.
> > The GitHub pull request workflow is widely seen as simpler than our
> > current email-based workflow (not everyb
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 14:36, enh wrote:
>
> it doesn't make the patch _management_ problem better ("now i have two
> problems"), but https://github.com/landley/toybox takes the "why not both?"
> approach --- you can use pull requests if you grew up with/adapted to
> git/github, or you can use
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 13:09, Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
>
> [For the fortran people: Discussion on gcc@]
>
> Just a general remark.
>
> There are people, such as myself, who regularly mess up
> their git repositories because they have no mental model
> of what git is doing
I highly recommend
On Mon, 16 Sept 2024, 23:40 Alain Mosnier, wrote:
> On 2024-09-16 23:54, Alain Mosnier wrote:
> > On Sun Sep 15 22:38:20 GMT 2024, GCC Administrator wrote:
> >
> > > When a particular snapshot is ready for public consumption the
> > LATEST-15
> > > link is updated
> >
> > I'm new here. Where do I
On Mon, 16 Sept 2024 at 13:13, Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 1:37 PM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > Git supports signing commits with a GPG key, and more recently (since
> > Git 2.34) also started supporting signing with an SSH key.
--show-signature origin/master | head -6
commit eb67e2396f3ee834bf3a8299f5b6d93ba82d3950
Good "git" signature for jwak...@redhat.com with RSA key
SHA256:8rFaYhDWn09c3vjsYIg2JE9aSpcxzTnCqajoKevrUUo
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date: Mon Sep 16 10:04:40 2024
If a signature is not recognised
As a reminder, I added .b4-config to the top-level, so that using the
kernel's b4 tool inside a GCC source tree will automatically use
inbox.sourceware.org and will submit mail to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org
See https://b4.docs.kernel.org/en/latest/ for docs on how to use b4 to
work with patches in th
I've pushed .editorconfig files for the libstdc++-v3 sub-directory:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-September/663071.html
As mentioned there, I'll experiment with similar files for the rest of
the tree. I will share those files and it would be helpful if people
who work on the rest
On Fri, 13 Sept 2024 at 12:52, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Fri, 13 Sept 2024 at 10:30, Sunil Kumar Dora
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear GCC Community,
> > I am currently encountering an issue with the -Wrange-loop-construct
> > warning in GCC version 14, as well as in
On Fri, 13 Sept 2024 at 10:30, Sunil Kumar Dora
wrote:
>
> Dear GCC Community,
> I am currently encountering an issue with the -Wrange-loop-construct warning
> in GCC version 14, as well as in earlier versions. It appears that the
> warning is triggered incorrectly for certain loop constructs.
>
On Tue, 3 Sept 2024 at 12:30, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 3 Sept 2024, 10:15 Iain Sandoe, wrote:
>>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> When we build a C++ binary module (CMI/BMI), we obviously have access to its
>> source to produce diagnostics, all fine.
On Tue, 3 Sept 2024, 10:15 Iain Sandoe, wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> When we build a C++ binary module (CMI/BMI), we obviously have access to
> its source to produce diagnostics, all fine.
>
> However, when we consume that module we might also need access to the
> sources used to build it - since diagn
On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, 22:27 FX Coudert via Gcc, wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> You are right, thanks for reporting these issues in the libquadmath
> documentation. I am CC’ing the GCC mailing-list. Does the following patch
> seem right?
>
> diff --git a/libquadmath/libquadmath.texi b/libquadmath/libquadma
On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 at 17:25, Arsen Arsenović wrote:
>
> Jonathan Wakely via Overseers writes:
>
> > I don't care which account does the changes but I'd prefer to keep the
> > emails. There's always at least one that reminds me a bug is actually fixed
>
On Fri, 2 Aug 2024, 00:29 Sam James via Gcc, wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This came out of some discussion with Arsen and prompted by some other
> comments on IRC.
>
> At the moment, during release time, maintainer-scripts/branch_changer.py
> is run by release managers and causes a large amount of bugmail to
On Mon, 29 Jul 2024 at 10:20, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Mon, 29 Jul 2024 at 09:20, Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > for the fortran-unsigned branch, I would like to be able to run all
> > existing Fortran tests also with -funsigned, to mak
On Mon, 29 Jul 2024 at 09:20, Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> for the fortran-unsigned branch, I would like to be able to run all
> existing Fortran tests also with -funsigned, to make sure the option
> does not break anything on existing code.
>
> Question is: How?
>
> I came as far as
>
On Wed, 24 Jul 2024 at 11:38, Dennis Luehring via Gcc wrote:
>
> using latest gcc/STL
>
> -
> #include
>
> using int_set1 = std::set>;
> using int_set2 = std::set;
>
> static_assert(std::is_same());
> -
>
>
> the two iterators are equal when not using _GLIBCXX_DEBUG but become
> d
On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 at 19:26, M.C.A. (Marco) Devillers
wrote:
>
> All your proposals now boil down to: Do explicit memory management
> whereas the developer supposes that is handled for them.
There's no explicit memory management in the loop I showed. It's
explicit control of lifetime, which is w
On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 at 19:12, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 16 Jul 2024, 18:51 M.C.A. (Marco) Devillers via Gcc,
> wrote:
>>
>> Document number: SCF4C++00
>> Date: 2024-7-16
>> Audience: GCC email list
>> Reply-to: marco.devill...@gma
On Tue, 16 Jul 2024, 18:51 M.C.A. (Marco) Devillers via Gcc, <
gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> Document number: SCF4C++00
> Date: 2024-7-16
> Audience: GCC email list
> Reply-to: marco.devill...@gmail.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
>
> I. Introduction
>
> Because C++ smart pointers are based on RAII it is eas
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 at 14:16, U.Mutlu wrote:
>
> The below test code demonstrates that sscanf fails
> to parse the string "" (ie. an empty string inside "") in line2 (fErr=1).
> Is this a bug?
This mailing list is for discussing the development of GCC, and sscanf
is not part of GCC. The behaviour
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 at 20:08, Dalbey, Keith wrote:
>
> The means by which this FIX was implemented caused OTHER problems
>
> template
> std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, const std::pair& pr)
> {
> os << "(" << pr.first << ", " << pr.second << ")";
> return os;
> }
>
> Wil
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 at 20:08, Dalbey, Keith wrote:
>
> The means by which this FIX was implemented caused OTHER problems
>
> template
> std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, const std::pair& pr)
> {
> os << "(" << pr.first << ", " << pr.second << ")";
> return os;
> }
>
> Wil
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 at 17:58, Dalbey, Keith via Gcc wrote:
>
> I'm not going to argue about the change for CONCRETE operators, I'm going to
> argue about the loss of power/flexibility for TEMPLATED operators, because it
> defeats the whole purpose of TEMPLATED functions/operators otherwise
This
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 at 01:03, Dalbey, Keith via Gcc wrote:
>
> So I'm on redhat 7 and just got devtoolsset-12 and code (a system of
> overloaded<< operators) that was working with devtoolset-10 now break
> (because of ordering)
>
> To not bury the lead..
>
> My code relies on the version 11 or o
On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 21:55, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 05, 2024 at 09:28:46PM GMT, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > If we marked endptr as "write_only" (which it might already
> > > be) then a future warning mechanism for -Wrestrict could
&
On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 21:26, Martin Uecker wrote:
>
> Am Freitag, dem 05.07.2024 um 21:28 +0200 schrieb Alejandro Colomar:
>
> ...
> >
> > > > Showing that you can contrive a case where a const char* restrict and
> > > > char** restrict can alias doesn't mean there's a problem with strtol.
> > >
>
On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 20:47, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> On Fri, Jul 05, 2024 at 08:38:15PM GMT, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 20:28, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 05, 2
On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 20:28, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jul 05, 2024 at 06:30:50PM GMT, Martin Uecker wrote:
> > Am Freitag, dem 05.07.2024 um 17:24 +0100 schrieb Jonathan Wakely:
> > > On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 17:02, Xi Ruoyao via Gcc wrote:
> >
On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 17:02, Xi Ruoyao via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2024-07-05 at 17:53 +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > At least, I hope there's consensus that while current GCC doesn't warn
> > about this, ideally it should, which means it should warn for valid uses
> > of strtol(3), which mean
On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 16:54, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc wrote:
> At least, I hope there's consensus that while current GCC doesn't warn
> about this, ideally it should, which means it should warn for valid uses
> of strtol(3), which means strtol(3) should be fixed, in all of ISO,
> POSIX, and glibc
On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 10:49, Dinesh M via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi Gcc Team,
>
> I am trying to download gcc compiler but didn't download the compiler
Please note this quyestion belongs on the gcc-help list, not the gcc list.
Why didn't you download it? What did you try? What didn't work?
> please giv
On Thu, 27 Jun 2024 at 20:07, Andrew Pinski via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 11:57 AM Jason Merrill via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 2:38 PM Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> > > > Am 27.06.2024 um 19:04 schrieb Jason Merrill via Gcc :
> > > >
> > > > https://www.open-std.o
On Thu, 27 Jun 2024 at 13:26, Richard Earnshaw (lists) via Gcc
wrote:
>
> On 24/06/2024 22:34, Sam James via Gcc wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > This comes up in #gcc on IRC every so often, so finally
> > writing an RFC.
> >
> > What?
> > ---
> >
> > I propose that MAINTAINERS be modified to be of the form
On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 at 10:06, Arsen Arsenović via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Andrew Stubbs writes:
>
> > On 24/06/2024 23:34, Arsen Arsenović via Gcc wrote:
> >> I was also proposing (and would like to re-air that here) enforcing that
> >> the committer field of each commit is a (valid) @gcc.gnu.org
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 at 22:35, Sam James via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> This comes up in #gcc on IRC every so often, so finally
> writing an RFC.
>
> What?
> ---
>
> I propose that MAINTAINERS be modified to be of the form,
> adding an extra field for their GCC/sourceware account:
>
On Sat, 22 Jun 2024, 20:41 Liviu Ionescu, wrote:
>
>
> > On 22 Jun 2024, at 22:02, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >
> >> GCC 12.4 was released two days ago, but I could not yet find the
> release archive at https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gcc/.
> >>
> >> Could you upload it?
> >
> > It is located at https://gcc
On Fri, 21 Jun 2024, 02:28 CH HC via Gcc, wrote:
> Hi there,
> In libstdc++/ext/pb_ds , I noticed that the (automatic) resize function
> for gp_hash_table does copy-and-destruct operations on old key-value pair
> (from the line resize_no_store_hash_fn_imps.hpp:58). Meanwhile,
> cc_hash_table simp
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 at 11:57, Alexander Monakov wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I vaguely remember there was a recent, maybe within last two months,
> discussion
> about semantics of union initialization where sizeof(first member) is less
> than
> sizeof(union). The question was whether it's okay to initi
On Mon, 17 Jun 2024 at 07:02, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2024, Martin Uecker wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I am trying to understand what check_qualified_type
> > does exactly. The direct comparison of TYPE_NAMES seems incorrect
> > for C and its use is c_update_type_canonical then ca
On Mon, 17 Jun 2024 at 07:17, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Fri, 14 Jun 2024, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 at 09:14, Richard Biener via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > The first release candidate for GCC 12.4 is availa
On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 at 09:14, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
>
>
> The first release candidate for GCC 12.4 is available from
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/12.4.0-RC-20240613/
>
> and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from git commit
> r12-10557-g6693b1f3929771.
>
> I have so
On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 at 14:23, Mikael Morin wrote:
>
> Le 12/06/2024 à 14:58, Jonathan Wakely a écrit :
> > On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 at 13:57, Mikael Morin via Gcc wrote:
> >>
> >> Le 12/06/2024 à 13:48, Jakub Jelinek a écrit :
> >>> Hi!
> >>>
&
On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 at 13:57, Mikael Morin via Gcc wrote:
>
> Le 12/06/2024 à 13:48, Jakub Jelinek a écrit :
> > Hi!
> >
> > Yesterday the gcc git repository was locked for 3 hours
> > locked by user mikael at 2024-06-11 13:27:44.301067 (pid = 974167)
> > 78:06 python hooks/update.py
> > refs/use
On Tue, 4 Jun 2024, 21:42 FX Coudert via Gcc, wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to reduce the number of unneeded fixincludes that are used on
> darwin (because fixincluded headers make it impossible to change SDK once
> the compiler is built, which is common practice in the macOS world, and
> quite us
On Fri, 31 May 2024 at 15:53, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
>
>
>
> Am 31.05.24 um 15:56 schrieb Jonathan Wakely:
> > On Fri, 31 May 2024 at 14:52, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> >>
> >> What's the recommended way to stop built-in expansions in gcc?
> >&g
On Fri, 31 May 2024 at 14:52, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
>
> What's the recommended way to stop built-in expansions in gcc?
>
> For example, avr-gcc expands isinff() to a bloated version of an
> isinff() implementation that's written in asm (PR115307).
Did you try -fno-builtin-isinff ?
On Wed, 29 May 2024 at 09:15, Sad Clouds via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Wed, 29 May 2024 09:05:50 +0200
> Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > If you build an executable to pick up libstdc++ via a RUNPATH that apps
> > RUNPATH
> > should apply to libgcc as well. If you use LD_LIBRARY_PATH the story
> > is the sa
On Tue, 28 May 2024, 02:51 Paul Eggert, wrote:
> On 2024-05-27 12:18, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > Maybe respect the carefully chosen compiler default (unless explicitly
> > overridden in configure.ac)?
>
> Autoconf gave up on that idea long ago, as we had bad experiences with
> compiler defaults bei
On Tue, 28 May 2024, 07:24 Florian Weimer via Gcc, wrote:
> * Paul Eggert:
>
> > On 2024-05-27 03:35, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> Does this turn on experimental language modes by default? That's
> >> probably not what we want.
> >
> > What do C++ developers want these days? Autoconf should have a
On Wed, 1 May 2024 at 20:19, Jeff Law via Gcc wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/22/24 9:24 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > Jason> Someone mentioned earlier that gerrit was previously tried
> > Jason> unsuccessfully.
> >
> > We tried it and gdb and then abandoned it. We tried to integrate it
> > into the traditional
On Sun, 28 Apr 2024, 11:24 Gerald Pfeifer, wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2024, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > How are you testing on FreeBSD?
> >
> > When I build GCC trunk on FreeBSD 14.0 and try to run the libstdc++
> > testsuite it fails due to lot
Hi Gerald, Andreas,
How are you testing on FreeBSD?
When I build GCC trunk on FreeBSD 14.0 and try to run the libstdc++
testsuite it fails due to lots of these errors:
Excess errors:
/usr/local/bin/ld: /tmp//ccev946q.o: relocation R_X86_64_32 against
symbol `_ZTIN10__cxxabiv115__forced_unwindE@@
On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 at 09:54, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 at 07:47, Gejoe Daniel via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > Hi team,
> > The following is my query posted but would need more inputs :
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114751
> >
&g
On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 at 07:47, Gejoe Daniel via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi team,
> The following is my query posted but would need more inputs :
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114751
>
> The gcov tool which was working so far seems to fail with our latest branch
> where gcc is 11.4.0 and he
On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 at 07:06, Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
>
> Am 18.04.24 um 01:27 schrieb Mark Wielaard:
> > We also should make sure that all generated files (either in git or in
> > the release/snapshot tar balls) can be reliably and reproducibly
> > regenerated. This also helps the (pre-commi
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024, 13:00 Matheus Afonso Martins Moreira via Gcc, <
gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
> Compiler support for system calls help by eliminating the need for the
> system call stub functions traditionally provided by these C libraries.
> There's no need to link against the C libraries just fo
Hello,
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 10:20, Matheus Afonso Martins Moreira via Gcc
wrote:
>
> I'd like to add GCC builtins for generating Linux system call
> code for all architectures supported by Linux.
>
> They would look like this:
>
> __builtin_linux_system_call(long n, ...)
> __builtin_linu
On Sun, 7 Apr 2024, 15:02 Mark Wielaard, wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2024 at 01:32:11PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gdb wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 Apr 2024, 22:36 Mark Wielaard, wrote:
> > > wrt to the mailinglists maybe getting larger patches, I think most
> &
On Thu, 4 Apr 2024, 22:36 Mark Wielaard, wrote:
> wrt to the mailinglists maybe getting larger patches, I think most
> will still be under 400K and I wouldn't raise the limit (because most
> such larger emails are really just spam). But we might want to get
> more mailinglist moderators.
>
> gcc-
On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 at 19:36, Toon Moene wrote:
>
> On 4/3/24 20:25, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> > Note that the attack really didn't have anything to do with
> > compressing data. The library used an IFUNC to change the PLT of a
> > different function, so it effectively took control of the code t
On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 at 15:34, Martin Uecker via Gcc wrote:
> I ask a very specific question: To what extend is testing
> for features instead of semantic versions and/or supported
> standards still necessary? This seems like a problematic approach
> that may have been necessary decades ago, but i
On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 at 09:46, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 10:22:24AM +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> > Any concerns/objections?
>
> I'm all for it, in fact I've been sending it like that myself for years
> even when the policy said not to. In most cases, the diff for t
Hello,
This mailing list is for discussion the development of GCC itself.
Please use the gcc-help mailing list for help questions. Please send
any replies to that list instead of this one, thanks.
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 at 09:35, shaoben zhu via Gcc wrote:
>
> I compile my program using g++ 4.8.5, I
On Sun, 24 Mar 2024, 23:07 Jeffrey Cliff via Gcc, wrote:
> i notice P2996R2 (
> https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2024/p2996r2.html
> ) isn't listed yet in
> https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx-status.html#cxx26
> i'm assuming it's not implemented yet but not sure where to suggest
On Sun, 24 Mar 2024, 18:01 Yuri Kanivetsky via Gcc, wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It looks like somewhere between gcc-5.3.0 and gcc-6.2.1 --as-needed
> became the default:
>
> https://gist.github.com/x-yuri/1b4c19891be50b2b8801689de1487009
>
> In other words it looks like on Alpine Linux 3.4 -lintl always add
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 at 09:01, David Brown wrote:
> Should it also include "uint8_t" (if it exists) ? "uint8_t" is often an
> alias for "unsigned char", but it could be something different, like an
> alias for __UINT8_TYPE__, or "unsigned int
> __attribute__((mode(QImode)))", which is used in the A
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 14:49, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2024-03-14 at 13:28 +, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 12:54, Pierrick Philippe
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
>
> Hi Pierrick! It was good to meet you at FOSDE
1 - 100 of 1877 matches
Mail list logo
