Re: [PATCH] Port GCC documentation to Sphinx

Hans-Peter Nilsson writes: > I've read the discussion downthread, but I seem to miss (a recap > of) the benefits of moving to Sphinx. Maybe other have too and > it'd be a good idea to repeat them? Otherwise, the impression > is not so good, as all I see is bits here and there getting lost > in t

Re: ubsan built-in function types

On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 6:33 PM Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote: > > Most sanitizer built-in argument types are all of pointer types. > For example: > >BUILT_IN_UBSAN_HANDLE_SHIFT_OUT_OF_BOUNDS > as >BT_FN_VOID_PTR_PTR_PTR > > or > >BUILT_IN_UBSAN_HANDLE_VLA_BOUND_NOT_POSITIVE > as >BT_F

Re: [PATCH] Port GCC documentation to Sphinx

> From: Richard Sandiford > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org, > jos...@codesourcery.com > Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2021 10:17:38 +0100 > > Hans-Peter Nilsson writes: > > I've read the discussion downthread, but I seem to miss (a recap > > of) the benefits of moving to Sp

Re: [PATCH] Port GCC documentation to Sphinx

Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Hans-Peter Nilsson writes: >> > I've read the discussion downthread, but I seem to miss (a recap >> > of) the benefits of moving to Sphinx. Maybe other have too and >> > it'd be a good idea to repeat them? Otherwise, the impression >> > is not so good, as all I see is b

Re: daily report on extending static analyzer project [GSoC]

I forgot to send the daily report yesterday, so this one covers the work done on both days AIM : - make the analyzer call the function with the updated call-string representation ( even the ones that doesn’t have a superedge ) - make the analyzer figure out the point of return from the functio

Atomic operations on floating-point data types

Hi! Per we've found that GCC's nvptx back end doesn't make use of the PTX 32-bit floating-point add instruction, , as declared in 'gcc/config/nvptx/nv

Re: Atomic operations on floating-point data types

On Mon, 5 Jul 2021, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > But: why, what's the rationale? Are potential floating point exceptions > the problem, maybe? "Simply, because nobody bothered implementing it __atomic_* more or less correspond to some of the atomic_* operations in , which only include atomic_fetch