For the record, I am not a GNU contributor--I am only chiming in as a
FOSS sympathizer. I will not pretend to be unbiased, or to have any sort
of personal experience with, or extensive knowledge of, RMS's behavior
apropos of GCC, or any other GNU project.
> (For the last point, I don't think th
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021, 08:48 mfriley via Gcc, wrote:
> For the record, I am not a GNU contributor--I am only chiming in as a
>
> FOSS sympathizer. I will not pretend to be unbiased, or to have any sort
>
> of personal experience with, or extensive knowledge of, RMS's behavior
>
> apropos of GCC, or
Hello,
just trying again to increase visibility of this question. Many thanks
in advance!
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 at 13:49, Erick Ochoa wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I already have some experience developing SIMPLE_IPA_PASSes, but I am
> looking to understand IPA_PASSes better. I have made a hello world ip
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021, 02:34 Christopher Dimech via Gcc,
wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Insofar as Stallman is the foundation of all authority, He exercises that
> foundation because He is the founder of His own work. He is the foundation
> upon which all other authority stands or falls. We use the term foundat
On Mon, 29 Mar 2021, 11:13 Richard Biener via Gcc, wrote:
>
> I do think that the request at hand puts specific pressure on the SC
> members that
> is unwarranted - you ask for them to respond but they are likely powerless
> as to
> the actual request.
I don't think they are powerless, but it d
Hi,
I am looking at the points-to analysis in GCC and I found the
following comment in tree-ssa-structalias.c:
/* Collect field information. */
if (use_field_sensitive
&& var_can_have_subvars (decl)
/* ??? Force us to not use subfields for globals in IPA mode.
Else we'd
A good reason why Richard should be on the SC is to that he does
demonstrates the values of the GNU project, that of the free software
movement and the FSF. GCC is a important project, and having the head
of the GNU project involved -- even if mostly uninvolved in daily
topics, is a ultimately a g
Hi Richard,
On Mon, 2021-03-29 at 08:18 -0400, Richard Kenner via Gcc wrote:
> I mostly want to stay out of this and will leave much of this discussion to
> others (though I have met RMS personally on a number of occaisions), but I
> want to mostly say that I agree with Jeff that it's important th
Le 30/03/2021 à 10:25, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc a écrit :
> I've been asking myself what benefit GCC gets from being linked to GNU and
> all I can think of is the DNS records for gcc.gnu.org.
Can you remind the meaning of GCC. Isn't it "*GNU* Compiler
Collection" ?
If this is still true, i
On Mon, 29 Mar 2021, Gabriele Serra wrote:
I have written a very basic article on GCC Plugins (how to build a plugin
from the ground, some info on APIs, and how to instrument code). The material
is based on GCC 9. The code is fully documented and working.
https://gabrieleserra.ml/blog/2020-
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 at 10:48, Didier Kryn wrote:
>
> Le 30/03/2021 à 10:25, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc a écrit :
> > I've been asking myself what benefit GCC gets from being linked to GNU and
> > all I can think of is the DNS records for gcc.gnu.org.
>
> Can you remind the meaning of GCC. Isn't it
Le 30/03/2021 à 11:47, Didier Kryn a écrit :
Sorry it wasn't Jonathan Wakely but Richard Biener
> Le 30/03/2021 à 10:25, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc a écrit :
>> I've been asking myself what benefit GCC gets from being linked to GNU and
>> all I can think of is the DNS records for gcc.gnu.org.
>
Hi Alexandre,
On Mon, 2021-03-29 at 23:08 -0300, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc wrote:
> I request that, if you found anything that holds up to your high
> standards of evidence-checking, you submit it to the voting members
> of the FSF, so that we can look into it and take appropriate action.
If you ar
On 3/30/21 10:47 AM, Didier Kryn wrote:
> Le 30/03/2021 à 10:25, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc a écrit :
>> I've been asking myself what benefit GCC gets from being linked to GNU and
>> all I can think of is the DNS records for gcc.gnu.org.
>
> Can you remind the meaning of GCC. Isn't it "*GNU* Comp
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 at 11:14, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
> On 3/30/21 10:47 AM, Didier Kryn wrote:
> > Le 30/03/2021 à 10:25, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc a écrit :
> >> I've been asking myself what benefit GCC gets from being linked to GNU and
> >> all I can think of is the DNS records for gcc.gnu.org.
> >
On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 8:03 PM David Malcolm wrote:
> On Sun, 2021-03-28 at 18:06 +0530, Saloni Garg wrote:
> > Hi, I have tried the following examples with the fanalyzer option in
> > g++.
> >
> > 1 (a)
> > void myFunction()
> > {
> > char *p =new char;
> > }
> > int main()
> > {
> >fun
hello sir
in my quest of finding a bug ( which ended up being a feature ) along with it’s
source in the analyzer, I tested the code on these 2 code snippets and here’s
how I went towards it
(1)
int main()
{
int *ptr = (int *)malloc(sizeof(int));
return 0;
}
link to running example (h
Not quoting anyone here. As a long time user of GCC, I am just worried
about the project. Hence my few comments and reasons for being part of
this movement called free-software.
RMS paid a visit to our premise in year 2000 or may be 2001. The
institute where I started working as a Visiting Softwar
On 3/30/21 11:34 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 at 11:14, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> We could just rename it to "GCC", in much the same way that Acorn Risc
>> Machine became Advanced Risc Machines, then just "Arm". But I'd much
>> prefer that the FSF got its house in order.
>
> whyn
I hereby announce my intent to offer online tutoring with the goal of
helping reduce democraphic imbalances in the GCC development community.
My planned focus is the implementation, in GCC, of the ISA extensions to
OpenPOWER in the upcoming Libre-SOC processor in GCC, but I may also
cover some n
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 10:52 AM Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am looking at the points-to analysis in GCC and I found the
> following comment in tree-ssa-structalias.c:
>
> /* Collect field information. */
> if (use_field_sensitive
> && var_can_have_subvars (decl)
> /*
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 at 12:13, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
> On 3/30/21 11:34 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 at 11:14, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
> >> We could just rename it to "GCC", in much the same way that Acorn Risc
> >> Machine became Advanced Risc Machines, then just "Arm". But I'd
> If the global is module local we should initialize it with NULL, yes. If it
> is
> not module local it should be initialized with NONLOCAL (that's both what
> should currently happen correctly - it's needed for non-field-sensitive init
> as well).
>
Awesome, thanks Richard! One more question:
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 1:39 PM Erick Ochoa wrote:
>
> > If the global is module local we should initialize it with NULL, yes. If
> > it is
> > not module local it should be initialized with NONLOCAL (that's both what
> > should currently happen correctly - it's needed for non-field-sensitive in
> For a leadership position, which serves as an example for
> the community and to some extent demonstrates the values shared by the
> community, I think it is reasonable that there is a decreased
> expectation of privacy.
.. and libel and defamation laws in the US reflect that, for example.
Alexandre Oliva via Gcc writes:
> I hereby announce my intent to offer online tutoring with the goal of
> helping reduce democraphic imbalances in the GCC development community.
>
> My planned focus is the implementation, in GCC, of the ISA extensions to
> OpenPOWER in the upcoming Libre-SOC proc
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2021 at 11:55 PM
> From: "Richard Kenner"
> To: dim...@gmx.com
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, m...@klomp.org, m...@soulstudios.co.nz, nat...@acm.org
> Subject: Re: Remove RMS from the GCC Steering Committee
>
> > Here is something close to the fundamental issue: Believing in
> I respect that you want stay out of the discussion, but I think that to
> present this as some larger societal issue which is somewhat academic
> is wrong.
Sorry, I didn't mean to say or imply that. What I meant to say is
that the very specific discussion we're having in this forum *mirrors*
t
On Tue, 2021-03-30 at 16:06 +0530, Saloni Garg wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 8:03 PM David Malcolm
> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2021-03-28 at 18:06 +0530, Saloni Garg wrote:
> > > Hi, I have tried the following examples with the fanalyzer option
> > > in
> > > g++.
> > >
> > > 1 (a)
> > > void myFu
Hi Nathan and hello everybody,
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 16:02:30 -0400 Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> The USA is not the world and the SC is not the US government. For
> those in the USA, the (inapplicable) first amendment provides 5
> rights, including showing an unwelcome guest the door. [...]
>
> If we f
> Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2021 at 1:16 AM
> From: "Giacomo Tesio"
> To: "Nathan Sidwell"
> Cc: "GCC Development"
> Subject: Re: Remove RMS from the GCC Steering Committee
>
> Hi Nathan and hello everybody,
>
> On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 16:02:30 -0400 Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>
> > The USA is not the
Dear GCC Community ,
I am planning to contribute in Rust-GCC project (
https://github.com/Rust-GCC) , so I think it will be good to have the
copyright assignment from now on .
Waiting for your reply ,
George Liakopoulos
Replied off-list.
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 9:49 AM George Liakopoulos via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Dear GCC Community ,
>
> I am planning to contribute in Rust-GCC project (
> https://github.com/Rust-GCC) , so I think it will be good to have the
> copyright assignment from now on .
>
> Waiting for your repl
On Tue, 2021-03-30 at 16:36 +0530, Ankur Saini wrote:
> hello sir
>
> in my quest of finding a bug ( which ended up being a feature ) along
> with it’s source in the analyzer, I tested the code on these 2 code
> snippets and here’s how I went towards it
>
> (1)
> int main()
> {
> int *ptr =
Hi, Saifi
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021, SAIFI wrote:
Gabriele thanks for sharing the detailed write up.
in the spirit of 'gcc-help', can you please share pointers as to how one can
profile C++ code using GCC plugins ?
in your example you mention 'f1 ()'; i'd like to replace that with a instance
of c
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Friday, 26 March 2021 г., 23:02, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> I would rather not have to write this email. Like many developers, I just want
> to write code. Right now we’re working towards the GCC 11 release. I thought
> about deferring this email. But there’s neve
> 3. Most of claims about Stallman are not true (to be more precise -
> they are deliberately misrepresent what Stallman said to make his
> views to look immoral).
I would like to suggest that this discussion will go better without
making accusations that people are "deliberately" doing something.
Dear Giacomo,
On Tue, Mar 30 2021, Giacomo Tesio wrote:
> Hi Nathan and hello everybody,
>
> On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 16:02:30 -0400 Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>
>> The USA is not the world and the SC is not the US government. For
>> those in the USA, the (inapplicable) first amendment provides 5
>> rights
Hello Giacomo and everyone else!
As a neighbour to your north (Austria), and another potential
newcomer, I would also like to point out that I do not believe the
views given by Nathan and others in support of him are very
US-centric. At least I would hope that most countries are in pursuit
or see
Dear Giacomo,
I want to reply specifically to you because you, like me, are a
new contributor, and I have a few questions and a few points that I
think are salient in this discussion.
> As an Italian I'm having a hard time trying to follow your reasoning
> about Stallman being a problem to a
> Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2021 at 4:50 AM
> From: "Martin Jambor"
> To: "Giacomo Tesio"
> Cc: "GCC Development"
> Subject: Re: Remove RMS from the GCC Steering Committee
>
> Dear Giacomo,
>
> On Tue, Mar 30 2021, Giacomo Tesio wrote:
> > Hi Nathan and hello everybody,
> >
> > On Fri, 26 Mar
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021, JeanHeyd Meneide via Gcc wrote:
> So, it boils down to this for me: either GCC is a place where all
> contributions are welcome, or GCC is a place of hypocrisy, where
> contributions are welcome except when Stallman (or someone else in a
> position of power) lobbies a non
Dear Giacomo,
Apologies, a correction here. I should have more carefully read
it, but this paragraph:
> My problem is Dr. Richard M. Stallman stands credibly and
> factually accused of Doxxing and GCC contributor/participant and
> knowingly manipulating the project for his own personal
> Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2021 at 5:45 AM
> From: "Joseph Myers"
> To: "JeanHeyd Meneide"
> Cc: "GCC Development" , "Nathan Sidwell"
> Subject: Re: Remove RMS from the GCC Steering Committee
>
> On Tue, 30 Mar 2021, JeanHeyd Meneide via Gcc wrote:
>
> > So, it boils down to this for m
On 3/30/21 7:10 PM, Christopher Dimech via Gcc wrote:
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2021 at 4:50 AM
From: "Martin Jambor"
To: "Giacomo Tesio"
Cc: "GCC Development"
Subject: Re: Remove RMS from the GCC Steering Committee
Dear Giacomo,
On Tue, Mar 30 2021, Giacomo Tesio wrote:
Hi Nathan and hell
I encourage everyone to please try to keep this discussion focused on GCC.
If there is a message that is completely unrelated to GCC, I encourage
not responding, or responding off-list.
Thanks.
Ian
I’m doing some final polishing on a gcc 8.3 upgrade and taking a look at the
unsupported tests. Most of them are completely sensible (my port doesn’t
support trampolines, for example). But gcc.c-torture/execute/pr78622.c is
marked as unsupported. That appears to be due to the line
{ dg-r
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 at 20:23, Alan Lehotsky wrote:
>
> I’m doing some final polishing on a gcc 8.3 upgrade and taking a look at the
> unsupported tests. Most of them are completely sensible (my port doesn’t
> support trampolines, for example). But gcc.c-torture/execute/pr78622.c is
> marked
Hi everybody, thanks for your feedbacks.
I've to say I'm a bit confused, but maybe we have different sources and
experience so we have different perspective on the matter.
Let's start with something I want to clarify:
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 13:07:07 -0400 JeanHeyd Meneide wrote:
> You state it he
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021, Giacomo Tesio wrote:
> That being said (and for full disclosure), I also consider his return to
> the FSF fair, because the shitstorm that caused his resign two years
> ago was built on top of a severe misrepresentation of his words, as
> described here https://jorgemorais.git
Giacomo wrote:
>Stallman cannot betray Free Software AND get away with it.
>So to me (and to many others) Stallman is a sort of a living warranty.
That's fine. He doesn't need to be in the GCC SC to do that.
He can continue to provide guidance on the spirit of Free Software
without having an SC p
Are you still responding to me? Your response reads like a thinly veiled
threat. Angry friends on a jihad? Sounds serious.
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021, 7:14 PM Christopher Dimech wrote:
>
> I have some friends in this movement who have been getting rather angry
> recently. There is a lot of anger in t
On Mar 30, 2021, JeanHeyd Meneide via Gcc wrote:
> My problem is Dr. Richard M. Stallman stands credibly and
> factually accused of Doxxing and GCC contributor/participant and
> knowingly manipulating the project for his own personal reasons.
This accusation is outright false, beyond any po
Dear Alexandre,
As stated here, shortly after I sent my message
(https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-March/235197.html):
> Apologies, a correction here. I should have more carefully read
> it, but this paragraph:
>
> > My problem is Dr. Richard M. Stallman stands credibly and
> > fact
On Mar 30, 2021, JeanHeyd Meneide wrote:
> Taking the correction into account
*nod*
> What you've presented here is your word ("This
> accusation is outright false, beyond any possible doubt."),
True, I didn't claim to be offering evidence, and that didn't seem
necessary since all the su
55 matches
Mail list logo
