Re: Proposed CHOST change for the 64bit time_t transition

2024-09-10 Thread Andreas K. Huettel via Gcc
Am Dienstag, 10. September 2024, 01:08:36 CEST schrieb Arsen Arsenović: > Jacob Bachmeyer writes: > > >> At that point, we should bump SONAME of libc and simply remove 32-bit > >> time support. This would probably be okay generally. > > > > This is probably the best solution to this problem at h

Re: Proposed CHOST change for the 64bit time_t transition

2024-09-10 Thread Todd Vierling via Gcc
> This is all nice and good, but I would actually like to focus on realistic > targets (ie., ones which could be achieved significantly before 2038... :o) Right — there are distro releases shipping over the next few years which will still be deployed in production in 2038, so the clock is actuall

Late combine & mode switch

2024-09-10 Thread Xi Ruoyao via Gcc
Hi Richard, When I hack the LoongArch backend I notice something like slli.d $r4, $r4, 2 add.w $r4, $r4, $r5 Or (set (reg:DI 4) (ashift:DI (reg:DI 4) (const_int 2)) (set (reg:DI 4) (sign_extend:DI (add:SI (reg:SI 4) (reg:SI 5 can appear after split. On LoongArch it can be done via an

Re: Proposed CHOST change for the 64bit time_t transition

2024-09-10 Thread Florian Weimer via Gcc
* Arsen Arsenović via Gcc: > Bruno Haible writes: > >> Paul Eggert wrote: >>> I'd rather just switch, as Debian has. >> >> I'd go one step further, and not only >> make the ABI transition without changing the canonical triplet, >> but also >> make gcc and clang define -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -

Revolutionize Your Software Sales with EngageBay 💻

2024-09-10 Thread Andy Roberts via Gcc
Is growth possible for a dollar a day?.. Hi there! I'm Andy Roberts, and I've been closely analyzing the dynamic needs of the software i