On 12/5/07, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As I said, maybe i'll look at git in another year or so.
> But i'm certainly going to ignore all the "git is so great, we should
> move gcc to it" people until it works better, while i am much more
> inclined to believe the "hg is so great, we
On 12/6/07, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2007, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> >
> > Actually, it turns out that git-gc --aggressive does this dumb thing
> > to pack files sometimes regardless of whether you converted from an
> > SVN repo or not.
> I'll send a patch to Junio
On 12/6/07, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2007, NightStrike wrote:
> >
> > No disrespect is meant by this reply. I am just curious (and I am
> > probably misunderstanding something).. Why remove all of the
> > documentation e
On 12/15/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 3, 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kenner) wrote:
>
> > In my view, ChangeLog is mostly "write-only" from a developer's
> > perspective. It's a document that the GNU project requires us to produce
> > for
>
> ... a good example of
On 12/16/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 16, 2007, NightStrike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 12/15/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> ... a good example of compliance with the GPL:
> >>
> >> 5.
On 12/19/07, Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let's take a bug as an example case: http://gcc.gnu.org/23835
>
> Here, there is a bug report about a huge compile time increase. The
> release manager decided that this was not a release blocker for GCC
> 4.2. So it was marked P4, and it
On 12/20/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> freetds.org> writes:
> >
> > Yes, I know beginners get confused by and/or precedence. But
> > *every* language that I know of that has operator precedence places
> > 'and' before 'or'.
>
> FWIW, Bourne shell doesn't, && and || have equal
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 10:25 AM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
> An -O? option is not just a set of suboptions it enables
Maybe it should be. I notice this come up often enough at least.
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021, 23:42 Iain Sandoe via Gcc wrote:
> it is essential (IMO) that review of code is carried out on a fair and
> technical basis without personal attack or harrassment (or
> unwelcome unrelated attention).
>
Is this not the case on gcc-patches?
>
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 7:23 AM Ville Voutilainen via Gcc
wrote:
> On the first part, other people have touched on it already,
> but the fear of a dreaded non-free software vendor co-opting
> GCC as a library to a non-free project has resulted in GCC
> being unsuitable to be used as a library in f
On Mon, Jun 7, 2021, 06:12 Giacomo Tesio wrote:
> The Steering Committee can avoid all of this, now.
> I cannot really understand why they shouldn't.
>
Likely because the primary contributor to c++ has said he will stop
contributing unless the change is made.
>
On Mon, Jun 7, 2021, 07:36 Giacomo Tesio wrote:
> Hi NightStrike,
>
> On June 7, 2021 5:18:13 PM UTC, NightStrike wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 7, 2021, 06:12 Giacomo Tesio wrote:
> >
> > > The Steering Committee can avoid all of this, now.
> > > I cann
When porting to GCC 11, care must be taken to adjust includes of GCC
intrinsic headers due to this change:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97148
That should be reflected in:
https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-11/porting_to.html
David,
Many of the analyzer tests fail on windows because they hardcode in the
typedef of size_t to be unsigned long. This is not a platform independent
definition, though, and is wrong for 64 bit windows. This causes extra
warnings that all of the functions using size_t arguments are wrong,
becau
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 4:09 PM David Malcolm wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2021-08-23 at 09:52 -1000, NightStrike wrote:
> > David,
> >
> > Many of the analyzer tests fail on windows because they hardcode in
> > the
> > typedef of size_t to be unsigned long. Th
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 8:16 PM NightStrike wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 4:09 PM David Malcolm wrote:
> > Which tests are failing, specifically?
Here's the full list of all 37 failures that fail for any reason:
FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/dot-output.c dg-check-dot dot-output.c.s
Should I make this a bugzilla? I guess I figured that wouldn't be
appropriate.
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021, 07:16 NightStrike wrote:
> When porting to GCC 11, care must be taken to adjust includes of GCC
> intrinsic headers due to this change:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show
On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 8:48 AM David Malcolm wrote:
> Thanks for working through the above.
>
> Do you have an account in GCC's bugzilla? If so, please can you turn
> this into a bug report there. Is there a recipe for testing this via
> wine? (it's been almost 20 years since I did any Windows
On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 10:21 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 6:39 PM NightStrike via Gcc wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 9, 2021, 07:16 NightStrike wrote:
> >
> > > When porting to GCC 11, care must be taken to adjust includes of GCC
> > >
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 11:45 AM Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
> ice-on-invalid-code: ICE on code that is not syntactically valid.
> ice-on-valid-code: ICE on code that is syntactically valid.
Presumably, the distinction is there because more attention would get
paid to the latter over the former.
On Sun, Sep 11, 2022, 10:30 Junk Trash via Gcc wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I want to get the opinions of GCC developers regarding adding CMake as a
> build system for GCC. Is it something you would like, something you are
> neutral about, or something you are strongly against?
>
> Thanks for your valuable f
On Mon, Nov 14, 2022, 04:42 David Brown via Gcc wrote:
> On 13/11/2022 19:43, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc wrote:
> > Hi Andrew!
> >
> > On 11/13/22 19:41, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >> On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 10:40 AM Andrew Pinski
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 10:36 AM Alejandro Coloma
On Mon, Nov 14, 2022, 10:49 David Brown wrote:
>
>
> On 14/11/2022 16:10, NightStrike wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022, 04:42 David Brown via Gcc
> >
> > Warnings are not perfect - there is always the risk of false
> positives
> >
On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 3:09 PM Paul Koning via Gcc wrote:
> But in any case, how does that relate to the error messages I got? They
> don't seem to have anything to do with missing compilers, but rather with the
> use of language features too new for the available (downloadable) Gnat.
General
On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 5:52 AM Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
> On 17.12.22 01:26, NightStrike wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 1:44 AM Thomas Koenig wrote:
> >>
> >> On 16.12.22 03:20, NightStrike via Fortran wrote:
> >>
> >>> When I run the tes
On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 10:44 PM Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
>
> NightStrike wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 5:52 AM Thomas Koenig wrote:
> >
> >> On 17.12.22 01:26, NightStrike wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 1:44 AM Thomas Koen
On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 5:43 AM Torbjorn SVENSSON
wrote:
> I'm not sure if this helps anyone, but I experienced something similar with
> Cygwin a while back.
> What I had to do in order to have expect working when testing GCC on Windows
> 10 was to defined the "CYGWIN" environment variable to "d
On Sun, Dec 18, 2022 at 11:29 PM Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
>
> NightStrike wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 10:44 PM Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
> >
> >> [...]
> >> This is either a testsuite problem or an environment problem. The GNU
> >> Fortran I/O m
On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 12:38 PM Jacek Caban wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>
> I'm responsible for Wine changes that cause your problems. I'm also
> CCing Eric, who is Wine console expert, maybe he has better ideas. Eric,
> see [1] if you're interested in the context.
>
>
> Recent Wine versions implement W
On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 11:37 PM Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
>
> NightStrike wrote:
> > [...]
> > Second, the problems with extra \r's still remain, but I think we've
> > generally come to think that that part isn't Wine and is instead
> > either the test
On Wed, Dec 28, 2022, 00:37 Alexander Zaitsev wrote:
> Hello.
>
> We are using GCC for our C++ projects. Our projects are huge, commit
> rate is quite huge, so our CI workers are always busy (so as any other
> CI workers, honestly). Since we want to increase build speed, one of the
> option is to
On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 11:00 PM Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
> NightStrike wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 11:37 PM Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
> >> NightStrike wrote:
> >>
> >>> [...]
> >>> Second, the problems with extra \r's still remain, b
On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 10:33 PM Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
>
> NightStrike wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 11:00 PM Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
> >
> >> NightStrike wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 11:37 PM Jacob Bachmeyer
> >>>
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 9:30 PM Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
>
> NightStrike wrote:
> > [...]
> > I did another little test to try to better understand your point. I
> > ran a linux native testsuite under a simulator that just sets SIM to "
> > ". This resulted
On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 2:37 PM Jerry D via Fortran wrote:
>
> I had this show up today. I have no idea what this is about.
>
> Please advise.
I assume the buildbot thinks that
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=8011fbba7baa46947341ca8069b5a327163a68d5
broke the build, but I fail to se
On Sat, Feb 11, 2023, 14:37 Basile Starynkevitch
wrote:
> Modifying the pass manager
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Pass-manager.html#Pass-manager to
> use clock_gettime system call. See
> https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/clock_gettime.2.html
Since we can now use c++11, std::chron
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 6:20 PM Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> Alas http://www.wlandry.net/Projects/FTensor has been down for a while,
> and there does not appear to be a new location?
https://wlandry.net/Projects/FTensor/ works
On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 5:41 AM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 11:35:23AM +0200, Helmut Zeisel wrote:
> > >Von: "Jakub Jelinek"
> > >An: "Helmut Zeisel"
> > >Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> > >Betreff: Re: GCC 13.1 compile error when using CXXFLAGS=-std=c++20
> > >On Thu, Apr 27,
On Thu, Jan 25, 2024, 11:27 Iain Sandoe wrote:
> E.g. with Ada it is possible to port to a new platform by first building a
> cross-compiler and then to use that cross-compiler to build a “native
> cross” (build != host == target) to provide an initial compiler on the
> target platform.
>
And th
On Mon, Jan 22, 2024, 12:31 Arthur Cohen wrote:
> I am aware that this would mean restricting the Rust
> GCC front-end to platforms where the official Rust compiler is also
> available, which is less than ideal. However, this would only be
> temporary - as soon as the Rust front-end is able to co
On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 23:53 vspefs wrote:
> By the way, what's stop us from having compiler options like
> `g++ -Rgcm.cache -Rsomewhere/else/gcm.cache` to specify CMI repo path,
> like `-I`
> for include paths? It could be useful for projects with complex folder
> structure, as build tools like
On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 21:39 vspefs via Gcc wrote:
> Current `-Mmodules` output is based on [P1602R0](wg21.link/p1602r0), which
> speaks about a set of Makefile rules that can handle modules, with the
> help of
> module mappers and a modified GNU Make.
>
> The proposal came out in 2019, and the
On Wed, May 21, 2025, 05:27 Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> On Wed, 21 May 2025 at 09:27, Homam Alkhateeb wrote:
> > I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to request the removal
> of personal information from all relevant messages that I posted on the
> gcc.gnu.org mailing list.
> >
>
201 - 243 of 243 matches
Mail list logo
