Snapshot gcc-13-20250626 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13-20250626/
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
Peter Bergner
libc-al...@sourceware.org
dilfri...@gentoo.org
binut...@sourceware.org
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
g...@sourceware.org
View all guest info
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=MjVqczBqZ2x2aWFkZ2QyczNzYTJoMmdwb2VfUjIwMjUwNzMxVDE1MDAwM
e.l...@linaro.org
berg...@linux.ibm.com
Peter Bergner
libc-al...@sourceware.org
dilfri...@gentoo.org
binut...@sourceware.org
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
g...@sourceware.org
~~//~~
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this email because you are an attendee on
Snapshot gcc-12-20250625 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/12-20250625/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 12 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
up of volunteers in
cooperation with the Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto
(FEUP).
This announcement is being sent to the main mailing list of the
following groups: GCC, GDB, binutils, CGEN, DejaGnu, newlib, glibc,
poke, libabigail and elfutils.
Please feel free to share with other grou
up of volunteers in
cooperation with the Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto
(FEUP).
This announcement is being sent to the main mailing list of the
following groups: GCC, GDB, binutils, CGEN, DejaGnu, newlib, glibc,
poke, libabigail and elfutils.
Please feel free to share with other grou
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Activate reporter with API Key 20799a27----XXxx4180
The X is ??
In Microsoft Learn.
Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
Hi James
> On 23 Jun 2025, at 17:08, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
>> Am 23.06.2025 um 17:56 schrieb James K. Lowden :
>> On Sat, 21 Jun 2025 11:03:19 +0200
>> Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>>>> A comparison of the mentions of "fixinclude" in confi
ces of fixinclude in config.log:
>
> $ grep fixi build/config.log | nl
> 1 build_configdirs=' libiberty libcpp fixincludes'
> 2 configdirs=' libiberty zlib libbacktrace libcpp libcody
> libdecnumber fixincludes gcc libcc1 c++tools'
>
> At Iain&
Florian Weimer via Gcc writes:
> * Andi Kleen via Gcc:
>
>> Joern Wolfgang Rennecke writes:
>>
>>> This has come up several time over the years:
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc/2006-07/msg00158.html
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc/
[gnu::aligned(alignment)]]
+ gcc X.X, clang 11, clang++ 2.8.0.
+
+ __attribute__((aligned(alignment)))
+ gcc Y.Y, clang 1.0, clang++ 1.0.
+
+ __declspec(align(alignment))
+ clang Z.Z, clang++ A.A.
* Andi Kleen via Gcc:
> Joern Wolfgang Rennecke writes:
>
>> This has come up several time over the years:
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc/2006-07/msg00158.html
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc/2006-07/msg00155.html
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2010
Joern Wolfgang Rennecke writes:
> This has come up several time over the years:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc/2006-07/msg00158.html
> https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc/2006-07/msg00155.html
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2010-March/190234.html
>
> , but maybe now (or
and the C23 syntax.
- In which GCC version was it introduced?
- If the linker doesn't support an alignment, is it silently ignored or
coerced? Can we specify some rules which can be relied upon?
- Is there any further rule? Can I specify alignment as 7? I suspect
not.
- &#x
Snapshot gcc-16-20250622 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/16-20250622/
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
Snapshot gcc-15-20250621 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/15-20250621/
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 21 Jun 2025, at 12:03, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
>
>
>
>> Am 21.06.2025 um 08:45 schrieb James K. Lowden :
>>
>> I guess I'm doing something wrong, or not enough. "make install" is
>> failing after a bootstrap build because t
d-boot/ V=1 install
> make: Entering directory '.../build-boot'
> make[1]: Entering directory '.../build-boot'
> /bin/bash ../mkinstalldirs /usr/local/gcc-cobol /usr/local/gcc-cobol
> make[2]: Entering directory '.../build-boot/fixincludes'
> make[2]: *** No r
Snapshot gcc-14-20250620 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/14-20250620/
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
Snapshot gcc-13-20250619 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13-20250619/
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
Snapshot gcc-12-20250618 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/12-20250618/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 12 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
; can not be fiefdoms. This is Good(tm).
> > >
> > > This case is Richard's proposal and I think it will lead to having
> > > more active maintainers and reviewers precisely because currently the
> > > SC is a bit stale and mostly not very active. IMHO the act
C as intended, or what we're
> > doing is tripping up the code generator. Possibly both.
> >
> > The working VM is
> >
> > hostname = gcc-cobol
> > uname -m = aarch64
> > uname -r = 5.15.0-122-generic
> > uname -s = Linux
> > uname -v
> eventually exhausting the stack. The observed assembler code does or
> does not refer to the GOT and ends up not going where it should.
>
> We think either we're not using GENERIC as intended, or what we're
> doing is tripping up the code generator. Possibly both.
>
> The wor
t; > SC is a bit stale and mostly not very active. IMHO the active
> > maintainers know best here and we don't need the SC for these kind of
> > decisions.
>
> I don't agree. If you want to topple the power structure we have for
> GCC you can try to do th
On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 11:34:42AM +0200, Pierrick Philippe wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I am currently reading the C23 standard along the pre-release GCC 16
> documentations (users and internals), and I noticed that there is no
> mention on how to create new attributes using the n
Hi,
Following the discussions in [1], I am updating the GNU gettext
support for 'gcc-internal-format' strings to the current state,
with the goal of having it completed and released in time for GCC 16.
There's a problem, though: The directive %C is defined in an incompatible
way i
Snapshot gcc-16-20250615 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/16-20250615/
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
Snapshot gcc-15-20250614 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/15-20250614/
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
t; int main () {
> f < 1 >();
> f < '!' >();
> f < "!!" >(); // error
> return 0 ;
> }
Hello, this is a general C++ question, so is off topic on this mailing
list which is for discussing the development of GCC. Somewhere like
stackoverflow.co
Snapshot gcc-14-20250613 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/14-20250613/
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
Snapshot gcc-13-20250612 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13-20250612/
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
Snapshot gcc-12-20250611 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/12-20250611/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 12 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
x27;t know where GCC will be run from.
Just as ELF RPATHs have $ORIGIN, which is relative the executable itself, I
wonder if we could introduce a variable to spec files which would be the
directory where the spec file is located.
I am not too familiar with spec files, so I wanted to ask here i
On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 11:46 AM Segher Boessenkool <
seg...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 04, 2025 at 05:53:18PM -0600, Jeff Law via Gcc wrote:
> > On 6/3/25 1:41 PM, David Edelsohn via Gcc wrote:
> > >What is not working with the current system? What is th
On 10/06/2025 18:43, Christopher Bazley wrote:
Hi David,
On 10/06/2025 14:19, David Brown wrote:
On 10/06/2025 10:43, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 09:52:42AM +0200, David Brown via Gcc wrote:
So while correcting the mistakes of the past is either very slow or
impossible, we
Hi David,
On 10/06/2025 14:19, David Brown wrote:
On 10/06/2025 10:43, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 09:52:42AM +0200, David Brown via Gcc wrote:
So while correcting the mistakes of the past is either very slow or
impossible, we can avoid them in the future. Consistent
On 10/06/2025 10:43, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 09:52:42AM +0200, David Brown via Gcc wrote:
So while correcting the mistakes of the past is either very slow or
impossible, we can avoid them in the future. Consistent parameter order
makes code clearer and neater, and should
On 10/06/2025 10:17, LIU Hao wrote:
在 2025-6-10 15:52, David Brown via Gcc 写道:
On 09/06/2025 12:13, Andreas Schwab wrote:
On Jun 09 2025, Chris Bazley via Gcc wrote:
C is a language that allows considerable latitude in where things
are placed:
static int volatile p;
volatile int
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 09:52:42AM +0200, David Brown via Gcc wrote:
> So while correcting the mistakes of the past is either very slow or
> impossible, we can avoid them in the future. Consistent parameter order
> makes code clearer and neater, and should be encouraged.
If the cl
在 2025-6-10 15:52, David Brown via Gcc 写道:
On 09/06/2025 12:13, Andreas Schwab wrote:
On Jun 09 2025, Chris Bazley via Gcc wrote:
C is a language that allows considerable latitude in where things are placed:
static int volatile p;
volatile int static q;
C23 says (6.11.5 Storage
On 09/06/2025 12:13, Andreas Schwab wrote:
On Jun 09 2025, Chris Bazley via Gcc wrote:
C is a language that allows considerable latitude in where things are placed:
static int volatile p;
volatile int static q;
C23 says (6.11.5 Storage-class specifiers):
The placement of a
ired in this case.
HTH,
Chris
____
From: Gcc on behalf of JeanHeyd
Meneide via Gcc
Sent: 05 June 2025 20:25
To: GCC Development
Cc: Jakub Jelinek; Joseph Myers
Subject: [ C Frontend / Preprocessor ] Embed Preprocessor Parameter Order
Hi Everyone,
The C and
JeanHeyd Meneide via Gcc writes:
[...]
> While the following 2 invocation of `#embed` are identical and produce
> exactly the same data:
>
> -
> #embed clang::offset(1) limit(3) /* ONE */
> #embed limit(3) clang::offset(1) /* TWO */
> -
>
> some people qu
Snapshot gcc-16-20250608 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/16-20250608/
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
Snapshot gcc-15-20250607 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/15-20250607/
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
Snapshot gcc-14-20250606 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/14-20250606/
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
Status
==
The gcc-12 branch open for regression and documentation fixes.
We plan to close the branch with the release of GCC 12.5 where
a release candidate is planned at Jul 4th and the release a
week after, Jul 11th. Note that since this is going to be
the last release from the branch it&#
Snapshot gcc-13-20250605 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13-20250605/
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, Jun 05, 2025 at 09:25:11PM +0200, JeanHeyd Meneide wrote:
> The C and C++ Compatibility Study Group, when working on the new
> standard `#embed` preprocessor parameter that mirrors the
> `clang::offset(...)` and `gnu::offset(...)` parameters, had someone
> raise a concern that the order of
he first place. This is, again, in the face of the fact
that the order of the parameters does on all the implementations and
that nobody has asked me both in the run-up to standardization and
after if this should be a thing.
The Questions
Therefore, we'd like to poll the GCC dev
Status
==
The GCC 13.4 release tarballs have been created, the releases/gcc-13
branch is open again for regression and documentation bugfixing.
GCC 13.5 can be expected in a year and a few months unless something
serious changes the plans.
Quality Data
Priority
The GNU Compiler Collection version 13.4 has been released.
GCC 13.4 is a bug-fix release from the GCC 13 branch
containing important fixes for regressions and serious bugs in
GCC 13.3 with more than 129 bugs fixed since the previous release.
This release is available from the FTP servers listed
On 6/3/25 1:41 PM, David Edelsohn via Gcc wrote:
What is not working with the current system? What is this fixing?
It relies on the someone to shepherd the process and it's something that
often gets pushed down on my daily todo list. As a result nominations
don't happen or are
On 6/3/25 4:16 AM, Richard Sandiford via Gcc wrote:
Hi,
At the moment, all reviewers and maintainers have to be appointed by the
Steering Committee. I wonder if we could add a second, more community-based
route: someone can be appointed as a reviewer or maintainer with the agreement
of a
Snapshot gcc-12-20250604 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/12-20250604/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 12 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
On Wed, 4 Jun 2025 at 16:43, Frank Ch. Eigler via Gcc wrote:
>
> Jerry D writes:
>
> > I am getting this tonight.
> > [...]
> > 257 | __gthread_cond_t _M_cond = __GTHREAD_COND_INIT;
>
> By the way, you can scan the sourceware.org buildbots, which
he builds and the bunsen-archived test
results. You can get an idea whether it's Just You or Everyone.
https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#/builders?tags=gcc
https://builder.sourceware.org/testruns/?has_keyvalue_op=glob&has_keyvalue_k=testrun.gitdescribe&has_keyvalue_v=buildbot/gcc-%2A
- FChE
On 04/06/2025 14:57, David Edelsohn wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2025 at 5:24 AM Richard Earnshaw (lists)
mailto:richard.earns...@arm.com>> wrote:
On 03/06/2025 20:41, David Edelsohn via Gcc wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 3:23 PM Richard Sandiford
mailto:richard.sandif..
I bootstrapped and tested on Power8 and Power9 BE in both 32-bit and
64-bit modes, and on Power8, Power9 & Power10 LE in 64-bit mode, and
everything looks good.
On 30/05/25 9:16 pm, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
> The second release candidate for GCC 13.4 is available from
>
On Wed, Jun 4, 2025 at 5:24 AM Richard Earnshaw (lists) <
richard.earns...@arm.com> wrote:
> On 03/06/2025 20:41, David Edelsohn via Gcc wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 3:23 PM Richard Sandiford <
> richard.sandif...@arm.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Davi
On 03/06/2025 20:41, David Edelsohn via Gcc wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 3:23 PM Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>
>> David Edelsohn writes:
>>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 6:22 AM Richard Sandiford via Gcc <
>> gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
>>> wrote:
>>&g
On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 10:46 PM Richard Sandiford via Gcc
wrote:
>
> David Edelsohn via Gcc writes:
> > On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 3:23 PM Richard Sandiford
> > wrote:
> >
> >> David Edelsohn writes:
> >> > On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 6:22 AM Ric
David Edelsohn via Gcc writes:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 3:23 PM Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>
>> David Edelsohn writes:
>> > On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 6:22 AM Richard Sandiford via Gcc <
>> gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi
On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 3:23 PM Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> David Edelsohn writes:
> > On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 6:22 AM Richard Sandiford via Gcc <
> gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> At the moment, all reviewers and mainta
David Edelsohn writes:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 6:22 AM Richard Sandiford via Gcc
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> At the moment, all reviewers and maintainers have to be appointed by the
>> Steering Committee. I wonder if we could add a second, more
>> community-b
On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 6:22 AM Richard Sandiford via Gcc
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At the moment, all reviewers and maintainers have to be appointed by the
> Steering Committee. I wonder if we could add a second, more
> community-based
> route: someone can be appointed as a reviewer
> Am 03.06.2025 um 12:22 schrieb Richard Sandiford via Gcc :
>
> Hi,
>
> At the moment, all reviewers and maintainers have to be appointed by the
> Steering Committee. I wonder if we could add a second, more community-based
> route: someone can be appointed as a review
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 at 11:21, Richard Sandiford via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> At the moment, all reviewers and maintainers have to be appointed by the
> Steering Committee. I wonder if we could add a second, more community-based
> route: someone can be appointed as a reviewer or m
Hi,
At the moment, all reviewers and maintainers have to be appointed by the
Steering Committee. I wonder if we could add a second, more community-based
route: someone can be appointed as a reviewer or maintainer with the agreement
of a given number of people who already have an equal or greater
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025, 03:19 Jerry D via Gcc, wrote:
> I am getting this tonight.
>
This is a glibc change to the definition of PTHREAD_COND_INITIALIZER. It
looks like you updated glibc. A clean build should fix it.
> Jerry
>
> In file included from
>
> /home/jerry/dev/u
I am getting this tonight.
Jerry
In file included from
/home/jerry/dev/usr/include/c++/16.0.0/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bits/gthr-default.h:35,
from
/home/jerry/dev/usr/include/c++/16.0.0/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bits/gthr.h:157,
from
/home/jerry/dev/usr/include/c++/16.
Snapshot gcc-16-20250601 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/16-20250601/
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 iPhoney
Snapshot gcc-15-20250531 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/15-20250531/
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
Hello,
I’m working on a new test tool for the eBPF backend under GSoC that
will integrate with the DejaGnu testsuite. I want to share my
implementation plan and get feedback from the community.
The tool executes compiled eBPF programs in a virtual machine and
validates them against the kernel veri
Snapshot gcc-14-20250530 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/14-20250530/
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 Heiko,
Thanks for the patch! I've pushed everything except for:
Heiko Eißfeldt writes:
> @@ -832,8 +832,8 @@
> (aarch64-w64-mingw32). At present, this target
> supports C and C++ for base Armv8-A, but with some caveats:
>
> - Although most variadic functions work, the i
The second release candidate for GCC 13.4 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13.4.0-RC-20250530/
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13.4.0-RC-20250530/
and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from git commit
r13-9730-gec78a0d9962f144.
I have so far bootstrapped
Snapshot gcc-13-20250529 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13-20250529/
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
Status
==
The GCC 13 branch is now frozen for the GCC 13.4 release, a release
candidate is being prepared.
All changes to the branch require release manager approval.
Quality Data
Priority # Change from last report
--- ---
P1
The first release candidate for GCC 13.4 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13.4.0-RC-20250529/
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13.4.0-RC-20250529/
and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from git commit
r13-9726-gaf73c8bf5168848.
I have so far bootstrapped
gt;
> > Surely our __unqual_scalar_typeof() cries for a better solution.
>
> Yeah, and those macros bloat the hell out of our compile times, for
> both compilers. I think it's reasonable to provide variants of
> typeof() that strip qualifiers.
GCC 14+ and clang 19+ provide __typeof_
Snapshot gcc-12-20250528 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/12-20250528/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 12 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
I checked: the mystery of fast JIT sorting is solved.
It's not about memory access — C++ handles that very well.
The key is function inlining. C++ does inline functions, but not recursive ones.
JIT inlines recursive functions for specific cases — e.g., for 5
million elements.
As an example: Java co
Office Hours for the GNU Toolchain on 2024-05-29 at 11am EST5EDT.
Agenda:
* https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/OfficeHours#Next
Meeting Link:
* https://bbb.linuxfoundation.org/room/adm-xcb-for-sk6
--
Cheers,
Carlos.
Snapshot gcc-16-20250525 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/16-20250525/
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
On 24/05/2025 19:56, Andy via Gcc wrote:
Dear GCC developers,
I would like to ask whether there might be room for improvement in memory
access optimization in GCC.
I've prepared a simple benchmark in both C++ (using -std=c++20 for digit
separators like 5'000'000) and Java
Snapshot gcc-15-20250524 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/15-20250524/
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 Sat, 24 May 2025, 18:58 Andy via Gcc, wrote:
> Dear GCC developers,
>
> I would like to ask whether there might be room for improvement in memory
> access optimization in GCC.
>
> I've prepared a simple benchmark in both C++ (using -std=c++20 for digit
> separator
Dear GCC developers,
I would like to ask whether there might be room for improvement in memory
access optimization in GCC.
I've prepared a simple benchmark in both C++ (using -std=c++20 for digit
separators like 5'000'000) and Java. The benchmark allocates a large array of
Heiko Eißfeldt writes:
> Hi,
>
> here is a patch for some mostly minor typos in
> https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-15/changes.html.
> My fixes might be wrong of course, so they are just suggestions.
>
> Also, the linked page https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-15/porting_to.html
> contains
Snapshot gcc-14-20250523 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/14-20250523/
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
On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 12:33 PM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
>
> Am 23.05.2025 um 18:32 schrieb Joel Sherrill :
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 10:12 AM Richard Biener <
> richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> > Am 23.05.20
On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 10:12 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
>
> > Am 23.05.2025 um 17:06 schrieb Joel Sherrill via Gcc :
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > In the SPARC port of RTEMS, there is a global variable assigned to a
> > register for performance reasons.
在 2025-5-23 23:03, Joel Sherrill via Gcc 写道:
Hi
In the SPARC port of RTEMS, there is a global variable assigned to a
register for performance reasons. This is the near decade old line of code:
register struct Per_CPU_Control *_SPARC_Per_CPU_current __asm__( "g6" );
+1 for this.
1 - 100 of 10188 matches
Mail list logo
