On Mon, 2025-09-22 at 09:29 +0300, Yair Lenga via Gcc wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've inherited an old code base of "C" code, which was maintained by
> relatively inexperience team. One of the common pattern that I've
> seen was:
>
> for (int i=0 ; i < s
On 22/09/2025 16:31, Jeff Law via Gcc wrote:
>
>
> On 9/22/25 9:25 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) via Gcc wrote:
>> On 20/09/2025 15:15, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe someone else has other/older releases? Or maybe they can be
>>> reconstructed from gi
W), and
then the developer can annotate the few cases where it's valid with
#pragama GCC diagnostic To some extent this is similar to the current
approach toward "fallthru", where by default, it's assumed to be potential
issue.
#pragma GCC diagnostic ignore "slow-condition
On 9/22/25 9:25 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) via Gcc wrote:
On 20/09/2025 15:15, Mark Wielaard wrote:
Maybe someone else has other/older releases? Or maybe they can be
reconstructed from git, svn, cvs or rcs files?
I don't think so. The git history that far back is very incomplete
On 20/09/2025 15:15, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Maybe someone else has other/older releases? Or maybe they can be
> reconstructed from git, svn, cvs or rcs files?
I don't think so. The git history that far back is very incomplete. In the
early days of gcc development, I think history
On Mon, 22 Sept 2025 at 10:49, U.Mutlu wrote:
>
> Yair Lenga via Gcc wrote on 09/22/25 08:29:
> >
> > I've inherited an old code base of "C" code, which was maintained by
> > relatively inexperience team. One of the common pattern that I've seen w
On Mon, 2025-09-22 at 10:41 +, waffl3x via Gcc wrote:
> On Monday, September 22nd, 2025 at 2:48 AM, David Brown via Gcc
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 22/09/2025 08:29, Yair Lenga via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I
On Monday, September 22nd, 2025 at 2:48 AM, David Brown via Gcc
wrote:
>
>
> On 22/09/2025 08:29, Yair Lenga via Gcc wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've inherited an old code base of "C" code, which was maintained by
> > relatively inexperience
Hi,
I've inherited an old code base of "C" code, which was maintained by
relatively inexperience team. One of the common pattern that I've seen was:
for (int i=0 ; i < strlen(s) ; i++) { ... }
Which has O(n^2) performance, given O(n) performance on s. Acceptable on
strings up to 400-500 characte
e.org/binutils/20250914234026.ga13...@gnu.wildebeest.org/T/#t
GCC discussion:
* How to test for errors without line? -
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc/d1b8af9a-bb1c-4c82-b397-3c998e803...@netcologne.de/T/#t
* Regenerating *.opt.urls doesn't do anything -
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc/a8400546
Snapshot gcc-16-20250921 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/16-20250921/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 16 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
Am 21.09.25 um 11:34 schrieb Andreas Schwab:
On Sep 21 2025, Thomas Koenig wrote:
FAIL: gfortran.dg/matmul_blas_4.f90 -O compilation terminated at line 5
(test for errors, line )
That's a failure of dg-error, not dg-messsage (which would have said
"test for warnings").
Hm, that's as may
quot;compilation terminated" {
target *-*-* } 0 }
! PR 121161 - do not use -fexternal-blas64 with a 32-bit system.
subroutine foo(a,b,c,n)
implicit none
integer(kind=8) :: n
real, dimension(n,n) :: a, b, c
c = matmul(a,b)
end subroutine foo
and always got the same result:
Running /h
Am 20.09.25 um 23:41 schrieb H.J. Lu:
"matmul_blas_4.f90" { target *-*-* } 0 }
! { dg-error "compilation terminated" "compilation terminated" { target
*-*-* } 0 }
Is this line required?
It doesn't work, but it is an attempt to get rid of
FAIL: gfortran.dg/matmul_blas_4.f90 -O (test for exc
Hi all,
do we have systems a contributor can access for testing?
(My patch caused a regression on aarch64)
Martin
Snapshot gcc-15-20250920 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/15-20250920/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 15 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
On Sun, Sep 21, 2025 at 5:28 AM Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi Andreas,
>
> > On Sep 20 2025, Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
> >
> >> I can live with that, but it seems a little strange - is there a
> >> way to check for an error message that is not
Hi Andreas,
On Sep 20 2025, Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
I can live with that, but it seems a little strange - is there a
way to check for an error message that is not associated with
a particular line number?
Use zero as the line number (like gcc.dg/Wfatal-2.c).
I tried to do that, but
On Sat, 20 Sept 2025 at 17:34, Ben Wu wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I recently submitted a patch to GCC (libstdc++) which requires a copyright
> assignment form or DCO certification. I
> included a sign-off line in my patch, but I am not sure this will work since
> my name is
Hi,
I want to add a test test case for an error I want to emit for an
option for an ilp32 system. My current attempt is
! { dg-do compile }
! { dg-options "-ffrontend-optimize -fexternal-blas64" }
! { dg-require-effective-target ilp32 }
! { dg-excess-errors "-ffrontend-optimize required for -fe
Probably the closest you will get is the 0.9 release
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/old-releases/gcc-1/
Joe
On Sat, Sep 20, 2025 at 8:16 AM Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi Carlos,
>
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2025 at 03:31:44AM +0100, Carlos Jorge Sebastião Moreira
> via Gcc wrote:
> > I ne
Hi,
I recently submitted a patch to GCC (libstdc++) which requires a copyright
assignment form or DCO certification. I
included a sign-off line in my patch, but I am not sure this will work
since my name is not recorded anywhere
(though I have a couple insignificant patches which included my
Am 11.09.25 um 19:03 schrieb Martin Uecker via Gcc:
do we have systems a contributor can access for testing?
(My patch caused a regression on aarch64)
See https://portal.cfarm.net/machines/list/ .
For gcc (or other open source) work, you can ask them for an account.
Best regards
Hello.
My name os Carlos Moreira.
I need the source code of GCC 1.0, seem to be not available from gcc
website.
Thanks
Snapshot gcc-14-20250919 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/14-20250919/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 14 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
NVM, it fixed it, the file was just not being included b/c I didn't read
the config.host file correctly.
On Thu, 18 Sept 2025 at 21:25, connor horman wrote:
> Setting a t- file with that flag doesn't fix it, same error.
> Also, as far as I can tell, that flag is a no-op other than undoing the
>
Snapshot gcc-16-20250914 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/16-20250914/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 16 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
Setting a t- file with that flag doesn't fix it, same error.
Also, as far as I can tell, that flag is a no-op other than undoing the
other CLI flags.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 15:00 H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 11:51 AM connor horman
> wrote:
> >
> > FTR, using __float80 directly work
Snapshot gcc-13-20250918 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13-20250918/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 13 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
Hello. I'm currently trying to port gcc to a new OS on x86-64. When
building libgcc I get
In file included from ../../../libgcc/soft-fp/extendhfxf2.c:32:
../../../libgcc/soft-fp/extended.h:68:1: error: unable to emulate ‘XF’
68 | typedef float XFtype __attribute__ ((mod
On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 1:57 PM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Mon, 8 Sept 2025 at 12:02, Manoj Tiwari via Gcc-help
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Team,
>
> Please don't cross-post to both gcc@gcc.gnu.org and
> gcc-h...@gcc.gnu.org, pick one.
>
> > I
So, I have asked this question on Stack Overflow (and provided a
possible solution). But it seems like there might be a bug in g++
involved here, so I wanted to reach out and see if anyone knows a
better way to solve this problem or if this is some kind of bug. For
additional context, take a look
Hello,
On Thu, 11 Sep 2025, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> > For SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED targets, the shift count is certainly
> > modulo the bitsize, though it is fuzzy what happens when the bitsize is not
> > a power of two and the count is negative (whether it is treated as u
On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 5:12 PM Christophe Lyon via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I am looking for clarification about the permitted shift amount in RTL
> (ashift, lshiftrt, ashiftrt).
>
> The doc in rtl.texi does not mention any constraints on the value of
> 'c'.
On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 11:02:26AM +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> > Does the doc need clarification on the semantics of RTL shift
> > operations when the shift amount is out of range?
>
> The SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED target macro is also relevant in
> this context. On
On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 10:05 AM Martin Uecker via Gcc wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> do we have systems a contributor can access for testing?
Compiler Farm has a few aarch64 machines:
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm . I have used cfarm185 to do some
testing earlier in the year.
Hello,
These comments are in ldrdstrd.md file.
;; TODO: Handle LDRD/STRD with writeback:
;; (a) memory operands can be POST_INC, POST_DEC, PRE_MODIFY, POST_MODIFY
;; (b) Patterns may be followed by an update of the base address.
Please let me know if you have LDRD/STRD with memory write back on
On Mon, 8 Sept 2025 at 12:02, Manoj Tiwari via Gcc-help
wrote:
>
> Hello Team,
Please don't cross-post to both gcc@gcc.gnu.org and
gcc-h...@gcc.gnu.org, pick one.
> I am currently working with gcc version 11.2.0 and would like to understand
> if there are any known issues o
targets have instructions
(e.g. asrl and lsll) which explicitly support negative shift amounts
in their "register" variant (if the shift amount is negative, the
shift direction is reversed).
We recently fixed the asrl and lsll Arm MVE intrinsics implementation
in GCC to use the builtins ins
On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 12:41 PM connor horman via Gcc wrote:
>
> Forgot to send to the ML
>
> -- Forwarded message -
> From: connor horman
> Date: Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 15:39
> Subject: Re: New OS Target: unable to emulate ‘XF’
> To: H.J. Lu
>
>
On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 9:26 AM connor horman via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello. I'm currently trying to port gcc to a new OS on x86-64. When
> building libgcc I get
> In file included from ../../../libgcc/soft-fp/extendhfxf2.c:32:
> ../../../libgcc/soft-fp/extended.h:68:1: error: u
I cannot find anything else that is controlled by the presence of bionic,
at least, that would affect x86-64.
On Tue, 16 Sept 2025 at 15:47, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 12:41 PM connor horman via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > Forgot to send to the ML
> >
> >
are set to what I expect for LDBL).
On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 15:24 H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 9:26 AM connor horman via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello. I'm currently trying to port gcc to a new OS on x86-64. When
> > building libgcc I get
> > In file in
Am 15.09.25 um 20:56 schrieb Arsen Arsenović via Gcc:
Thomas Koenig via Gcc writes:
Hi,
I am currently working on a patch which adds an option, and
failing in regenerating the gcc/fortran/lang.opt.urls file.
I tried
make -C gcc html fortran.html d.html
make -C gcc regenerate-opt-urls
as
On Mon, 15 Sept 2025 at 13:02, Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 11:55 AM Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 11 Sept 2025 at 19:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 07:14:51PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > Yes, RTL expansion inserts an AND ope
Thomas Koenig via Gcc writes:
> Hi,
>
> I am currently working on a patch which adds an option, and
> failing in regenerating the gcc/fortran/lang.opt.urls file.
>
> I tried
>
> make -C gcc html fortran.html d.html
> make -C gcc regenerate-opt-urls
>
> as a
On Thu, 11 Sept 2025 at 19:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 07:14:51PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > Yes, RTL expansion inserts an AND operation when !SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED.
> > What I was saying there's no way to get a negative shift count flip shift
> > direction to RTL -
Hi,
I am currently working on a patch which adds an option, and
failing in regenerating the gcc/fortran/lang.opt.urls file.
I tried
make -C gcc html fortran.html d.html
make -C gcc regenerate-opt-urls
as advised in
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2024-September/061030.html
but that
On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 11:55 AM Christophe Lyon
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 11 Sept 2025 at 19:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 07:14:51PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > Yes, RTL expansion inserts an AND operation when !SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED.
> > > What I was saying there's no
On Sun, Sep 14, 2025 at 2:17 PM Paul Edwards via Gcc
wrote:
> There is a 32-bit target of gcc, can't remember what it is
> called (x32?), that uses 32-bit instructions that work
> under x64.
>
x32 uses 32-bit pointers in x86-64, not 32-bit instructions.
For that to actua
August 2025 Monthly report:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc/1a8ba586-89c7-4a3a-b16e-4757fed46...@embecosm.com/T/#u
GCC discussion:
* Should the forge-bot send patches to the gcc-patches mailing list?
https://inbox.sourceware.org/overseers/20250909215535.go19...@gnu.wildebeest.org/T/
* Attribute for
There is a 32-bit target of gcc, can't remember what it is
called (x32?), that uses 32-bit instructions that work
under x64.
For that to actually work, the x64 system will need to be
cooperative, and map (using virtual memory) the 4 GiB
to 8 GiB region onto the 0-4 GiB region so that neg
Snapshot gcc-15-20250913 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/15-20250913/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 15 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
Hi Mark,
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2025 at 09:37:40PM +0200, Rainer Orth via Gcc wrote:
>> I've just tried to file a PR, but each time on submission I only get
>>
>> First, you must pick a product on which to enter a bug:
>>
>> and all my input is lost. I&#
Snapshot gcc-14-20250912 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/14-20250912/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 14 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
Hi Luke,
> In LLVM we have been carrying out nightly runs of SPEC CPU 2017 and
> llvm-test-suite[1] for Clang on RISC-V hardware. We’ve been using it to find
> areas of improvement and to track performance regressions.
>
> Recently we've also extended it to build and test G
> On 12 Sep 2025, at 22:41, Robin Dapp wrote:
>
> Can lnt also show an absolute best/"best ever" or does that require to set a
> specific baseline run? Also I'm getting
>
> InvalidRequestError("Can't determine which FROM clause to join from, there
> are
> multiple FROMS which can join to t
Hi GCC devs,
In LLVM we have been carrying out nightly runs of SPEC CPU 2017 and
llvm-test-suite[1] for Clang on RISC-V hardware. We’ve been using it to find
areas of improvement and to track performance regressions.
Recently we've also extended it to build and test GCC nightly, whi
Am Donnerstag, dem 11.09.2025 um 19:10 +0200 schrieb Thomas Koenig via Gcc:
> Am 11.09.25 um 19:03 schrieb Martin Uecker via Gcc:
>
> > do we have systems a contributor can access for testing?
> >
> > (My patch caused a regression on aarch64)
>
> See https://
On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 4:43 PM Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>
> Jakub Jelinek via Gcc writes:
> > On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 11:02:26AM +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> >> > Does the doc need clarification on the semantics of RTL shift
> >> > operations w
Snapshot gcc-13-20250911 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13-20250911/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 13 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 07:14:51PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> Yes, RTL expansion inserts an AND operation when !SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED.
> What I was saying there's no way to get a negative shift count flip shift
> direction to RTL - it would require a target specific intrinsic that's a
> builti
On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 11:14 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 11:02:26AM +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> > > Does the doc need clarification on the semantics of RTL shift
> > > operations when the shift amount is out of range?
> >
> &
On Wed, 10 Sept 2025, 07:23 Florian Weimer via Gcc, wrote:
> * Chris Packham via Gcc:
>
> > Is there any attribute I can set on the memset like functions that will
> let
> > gcc know to perform the same kinds of checks as the standard memset
> > function?
>
&
* Chris Packham via Gcc:
> Is there any attribute I can set on the memset like functions that will let
> gcc know to perform the same kinds of checks as the standard memset
> function?
There's the “access” function attribute. It covers at least some
aspects.
Thanks,
Florian
On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 12:47 AM Chris Packham via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi GCC,
>
> For various reasons I find myself working with a few code bases that define
> their own wrappers for memset(). Unfortunately these wrappers defeat gccs
> ability to detect when the size of the pointer
On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 1:16 PM NightStrike wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 8, 2025, 03:47 Chris Packham via Gcc wrote:
>>
>> Hi GCC,
>>
>> For various reasons I find myself working with a few code bases that define
>> their own wrappers for memset()
On Mon, Sep 8, 2025, 03:47 Chris Packham via Gcc wrote:
> Hi GCC,
>
> For various reasons I find myself working with a few code bases that define
> their own wrappers for memset(). Unfortunately these wrappers defeat gccs
> ability to detect when the size of the pointer is passed
Hi Jakub, Jonathan,
On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 10:01:13PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 08:59:21PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Sept 2025 at 20:53, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi!
> > >
Hi!
I'm trying to test some patch I've written, and found some build error
that seems entirely unrelated to my patch. git-blame(1) points to:
52d754a1a620 (2025-09-09; "Fortran: make STAT/LSTAT/FSTAT intrinsics
generic [PR82480]")
The build error is:
/
On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 08:59:21PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Sept 2025 at 20:53, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > I'm trying to test some patch I've written, and found some build error
> > that seem
On Tue, 9 Sept 2025 at 20:53, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I'm trying to test some patch I've written, and found some build error
> that seems entirely unrelated to my patch. git-blame(1) points to:
>
> 52d754a1a620 (2025-09-09; "Fortr
I was going to correct the fact that this list of options enabled by
-Wextra doesn't mention that -Wunterminated-string-initialization is
only valid for C and ObjC:
@gccoptlist{-Wabsolute-value @r{(only for C/ObjC)}
-Walloc-size
-Wcalloc-transposed-args
-Wcast-function-type
-Wclobbered
-Wdangling-
Sent from my iPhonel ok
I've just tried to file a PR, but each time on submission I only get
First, you must pick a product on which to enter a bug:
and all my input is lost. I've triple-checked that I *had* selected the
product first
Rainer
--
Hello Team,
I am currently working with gcc version 11.2.0 and would like to understand
if there are any known issues or defects in this release excluding security
vulnerabilities.
Specially, I am interested in
1. Functional Bugs
2. Performance related concerns
3. Compatibility Issues
4
Hi GCC,
For various reasons I find myself working with a few code bases that define
their own wrappers for memset(). Unfortunately these wrappers defeat gccs
ability to detect when the size of the pointer is passed instead of the
size of the pointed to object.
Is there any attribute I can set on
GNU Weekly New Update Week 2 (September 7, 2025)
General/big GNU toolchain news (including sourceware news):
GDB 17 branched off of trunk: September 6th
Hourly snapshots of gcc documentation:
https://fosstodon.org/@sourceware/115164400639261923
Anubis upgraded to v1.22.0 on sourceware.org
Snapshot gcc-16-20250907 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/16-20250907/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 16 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
Sent from my if j
Snapshot gcc-15-20250906 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/15-20250906/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 15 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
On 9/3/25 8:40 PM, Qing Zhao wrote:
I have one question (might be a stupid question):
Should we consider a call to C++’s constructor as the initialization to that
variable?
For example:
S::S (&s);
Should we consider the above as an initialization to the variable s?
then -ftrivial-auto-var-i
Snapshot gcc-14-20250905 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/14-20250905/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 14 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
opportunities are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119588#c2).
Background is that we've seen some significant performance benefits of
clang over GCC when performing a many small pieces of work with a large
thread count. In a program which has both some work that can be
handled with
Snapshot gcc-13-20250904 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13-20250904/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 13 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
.
>
> I started a few weeks back on doing this on my personal mastodon
> andlinkedin accounts but I decided to separate as the newsletter will
> be more public.
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew
Thanks for working on this Andrew, this is great. Do you plan to cover only
gcc or also related
.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Andrew
>
> Thanks for working on this Andrew, this is great. Do you plan to cover only
> gcc or also related GNU toolchain projects? I can help you cover the glibc
> work.
I am planning on covering all GNU toolchain projects; including but
not limi
On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 03:38:53PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
> But there is one thing the paper doesn't care about, which looks like a show
> stopper to me, in particular the stuff -Wtrivial-auto-var-init warning warns
> about. Consider:
I've filed https://githu
Week 1 (August 31, 2025)
* Today is the last day to submit proposals and last day to register to
GNU Tools Cauldron 2025 *
GCC update:
Mailing list update:
* discussion about `Providing more precise "excess errors" message in
DejaGnu`
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc/6e61
Week 1 (August 31, 2025)
* Today is the last day to submit proposals and last day to
register to GNU Tools Cauldron 2025 *
GCC update:
Mailing list update:
* discussion about `Providing more precise "excess errors" message in DejaGnu`
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc/6e6
On Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 3:24 PM Mark Wielaard wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 04:02:42PM -0700, Andrew Pinski via Gdb wrote:
> > To begin with it will be on mastodon:
> > https://hachyderm.io/@gnutoolsweekly
> >
> > But I might move it over to more blog like site instead of a soci
> On Sep 3, 2025, at 12:32, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 03:23:39PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Sep 3, 2025, at 09:38, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 09:35:04PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
> I think I've mentioned it earlier, but -ftrivial-
On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 03:23:39PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
>
>
> > On Sep 3, 2025, at 09:38, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 09:35:04PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
> >>> I think I've mentioned it earlier, but -ftrivial-auto-var-init= doesn't
> >>> work at all for C++.
> >> You
> On Sep 3, 2025, at 09:38, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 09:35:04PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
>>> I think I've mentioned it earlier, but -ftrivial-auto-var-init= doesn't
>>> work at all for C++.
>> You mean that -ftrivial-auto-var-init hasn’t work at all for C++’s auto
>> var
On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 09:35:04PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
> > I think I've mentioned it earlier, but -ftrivial-auto-var-init= doesn't
> > work at all for C++.
> You mean that -ftrivial-auto-var-init hasn’t work at all for C++’s auto
> variables with non-trivial ctors?
Yeah. Actually, it probab
> On 3 Jul 2025, at 11:31, Kyrylo Tkachov via Gcc wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 3 Jul 2025, at 05:35, David Edelsohn via Gcc wrote:
>>
>> I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has appointed
>> Tamar Christina as AArch64 maintainer. I am
On Tue, 2 Sept 2025 at 10:47, Andre Vehreschild via Gcc wrote:
>
> Er, well, I missed to tell what I did to the branch:
>
> - rebased to current master,
> - reverted a squashed commit, and
> - applied 8 separate commits.
>
> So nothing spectacular. Nothing I would expect
On Tue, 2 Sept 2025 at 11:00, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2 Sept 2025 at 10:47, Andre Vehreschild via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > Er, well, I missed to tell what I did to the branch:
> >
> > - rebased to current master,
> > - reverted a squashed commi
On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 11:01 AM Rainer Orth via Gcc wrote:
>
> I'm currently trying to push to the repo for an hour, but only get
>
> remote: -
> remote: -- Another user is currently pushing change
On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 11:39:18AM +0200, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
> Hi Jakub,
>
> I am pushing to gfortran-test. The process seems to be finished, but is not
> returning (sorry it's in German):
>
> Objekte aufzählen: 11679, fertig.
> Zähle Objekte: 100% (11679/11679), fertig.
> Delta-Kompression
1 - 100 of 10446 matches
Mail list logo
