Hi Joseph,
On Wed, Jan 17 2018, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Jan 2018, Martin Jambor wrote:
>
>> 3?) Joseph Myers brought up idea to do "built-in functions for TS 18661
>> floating-point functions - which has the feature that there are a
>> lot of similar built-in functions for C99/C11
On 13.01.2018 00:07, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018, Jeff Law wrote:
I was going to suggest deprecation for gcc-8 given how badly it was
broken in gcc-7 and the lack of maintenance on the target.
While we're considering deprecations, what happened to the idea of setting
a timescale b
Hi Joel,
On Wed, Jan 17 2018, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> On 1/17/2018 11:54 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> following a discussion at IRC about an upcoming deadline to register GCC
>> as an independent organization for Google Summer of Code 2018 (GSoC), I
>> have volunteered to serve as the org
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 18 2018, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 01/17/2018 06:54 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
>
...
>>
>> 2) Martin Liška is willing to mentor either:
>>2a) -fsanitize=type (He provided URL https://reviews.llvm.org/D32197
>>but it gives me a 404 error) or its prototype, or
>>2b) bas
On Fri, Jan 19 2018, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jan 18 2018, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 01/17/2018 06:54 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
>>
> ...
>>>
>>> 2) Martin Liška is willing to mentor either:
>>>2a) -fsanitize=type (He provided URL https://reviews.llvm.org/D32197
>>>but it g
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 18 2018, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, Eric Gallager wrote:
>
>> Would it make sense to recycle old GSoC projects that never got
>> completed?
in principle that is definitely possible, but...
>>I'm wondering about the "replace libiberty with gnulib" one
>
> I'd like
Hi Andi,
On Thu, Jan 18 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Martin Jambor writes:
>>
>> Therefore I would like to ask all seasoned GCC contributors who would
>> like to mentor a GSoC student to send a reply to this thread with their
>> idea for a project. If you have an idea but you do not want to be a
>>
On Fri, 19 Jan 2018, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi Joseph,
>
> On Wed, Jan 17 2018, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Jan 2018, Martin Jambor wrote:
> >
> >> 3?) Joseph Myers brought up idea to do "built-in functions for TS 18661
> >> floating-point functions - which has the feature that there a
On 01/19/2018 06:33 AM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> On 13.01.2018 00:07, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Jan 2018, Jeff Law wrote:
>>
>>> I was going to suggest deprecation for gcc-8 given how badly it was
>>> broken in gcc-7 and the lack of maintenance on the target.
>>
>> While we're considering
On January 19, 2018 5:34:35 PM GMT+01:00, Joseph Myers
wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Jan 2018, Martin Jambor wrote:
>
>> Hi Joseph,
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 17 2018, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> > On Wed, 17 Jan 2018, Martin Jambor wrote:
>> >
>> >> 3?) Joseph Myers brought up idea to do "built-in functions for TS
>186
> Yes, I know that CCmode can represent condition code. But just the fact
> that it can represent it doesn't make it superior or cc0 inferior or
> bad. Having different representations for the same thing has also its
> obvious upsides (think of different representations in maths or
> physics), an
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 07:58:02PM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > - cc0 does a good job and did always a good job in the past. In the
> > years I contributed to avr, there hasn't been a single cc0 flaw (all the
> > few, minor cc0-related issues were avr BE issues).
cc0 does not do a good job at a
On 01/19/2018 10:14 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
cc0 needs to die. That doesn't mean that any particular target needs to
be dropped -- it just means that someone has to step forward to do the
conversion.
Unifying two parallel threads: might this be a good project for GSoC?
-Sandra
13 matches
Mail list logo
