On Mon, 28 Dec 2020, 23:55 Gerald Pfeifer, wrote:
> Having spent a bit more time with GCC sources (as opposed to wwwdocs)
> recently and looking for prior art to guide me, I noticed there's a
> lot of options to specific the ChangeLog file(s) to use.
>
> And correspondingly a lot of inconsistency
On Tue, 29 Dec 2020, 05:23 sotrdg sotrdg via Gcc, wrote:
> That would be fun.
>
First you'd need to patch GCC to understand all the MSVC intrinsics or
patch MS STL to use GCC intrinsics.
Both are open source so it is probably possible, but you should be prepared
do the work yourself, since you'
Any thoughts on what f should return in the following testcase, given the
usual GNU behaviour of treating signed >> as arithmetic shift right?
typedef int vs4 __attribute__((vector_size(16)));
typedef unsigned int vu4 __attribute__((vector_size(16)));
int
f (void)
{
vs4 x
On Tue, 29 Dec 2020, Richard Sandiford via Gcc wrote:
Any thoughts on what f should return in the following testcase, given the
usual GNU behaviour of treating signed >> as arithmetic shift right?
typedef int vs4 __attribute__((vector_size(16)));
typedef unsigned int vu4 __attribute__((ve
On December 29, 2020 6:42:30 PM GMT+01:00, Marc Glisse
wrote:
>On Tue, 29 Dec 2020, Richard Sandiford via Gcc wrote:
>
>> Any thoughts on what f should return in the following testcase, given
>the
>> usual GNU behaviour of treating signed >> as arithmetic shift right?
>>
>>typedef int vs4 __a
On Tue, 29 Dec 2020, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> >I think clang follows gcc and uses the type of the first operand.
>
> The desired behavior is the one that OpenCL specifies. If it is implementation
> defined we should document behavior. I agree symmetry is nice but eventually
> the current C
unlvsur unlvsur wrote:
<3E6B1CF4201340D8BCCB373AE127FCC7.png>
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
The -stdlib= option is an “enabling” change;
As things stand, the packaging of the libc++ headers (and libc++ itself)
needs intervention by the distribution (e.g. to add a coroutine header or
to
