https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114246
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114241
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever co
compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.1 20240305 (experimental)
8776468d9e57ace5f832c1368243a6dbce9984d5 (Gentoo Hardened 14.0. p, commit
c8305c9bdf09abe3e2f89783fe62f2e4049468fa)
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114250
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #57623|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114151
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> (In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #9)
> > Created attachment 57620 [details]
> > proposed patch
> >
> > Does this solve your problem if there is an a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114151
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #9)
> Created attachment 57620 [details]
> proposed patch
>
> Does this solve your problem if there is an active ranger? it bootstraps
> with no regressions
I'll
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114250
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 57623
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57623&action=edit
reduced.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114245
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I am trying to understand the issue of having the vtable writing to the object.
Is the issue you have an order issue where an object is destroyed but still in
use else where, that sounds like an undefined b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114245
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 57622
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57622&action=edit
Full testcase
Next time please attach or paste inline the full testcase rather than just
linking to godbolt.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114246
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #2 from And
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114246
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114246
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.5
CC|
t-pie --enable-host-pie --enable-host-bind-now
--enable-default-ssp --disable-fixincludes --with-build-config='bootstrap-O3
bootstrap-lto'
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.1 20240305 (experimental)
8776468d9e57ace5f832c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105456
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jerry DeLisle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:21edfb0051ed8d0ff46d5638c2bce2dd71f26d1f
commit r14-9328-g21edfb0051ed8d0ff46d5638c2bce2dd71f26d1f
Author: Jerry DeLisle
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110644
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Any luck getting a reduced case?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114249
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
my guess is r14-9316-g7890836de20912
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114151
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Macleod ---
Created attachment 57620
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57620&action=edit
proposed patch
Does this solve your problem if there is an active ranger? it bootstraps with
no regressions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108680
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114249
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is a very recent failure since g:264e3ad419cf71b10e7951a23750ac3507e21df9
worked .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114249
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Reduced:
```
enum { SEG_THIN_POOL } read_only;
struct {
unsigned skip_block_zeroing;
unsigned ignore_discard;
unsigned no_discard_passdown;
unsigned error_if_no_space;
} _thin_pool_emit_segment_line_seg;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109105
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Assignee|unassigned at gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93802
HaoChen Gui changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105361
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106295
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
--- Comment #19 from g.peterh...@t-online.de ---
> So, no need to use frexp/ldexp, just comparisons of hi above against sqrt of
> (max finite / 3), in that case scale by multiplying all 3 args by some
> appropriate scale constant, and similarly ot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114249
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think the different functions are due to inlining differences between -O2 and
-O3 and the ICE is due to code in _load_node as dm_tree_preload_children calls
_load_node .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114249
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93727
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jvdelisle at gcc dot
gnu.org
-bind-now
--enable-default-ssp --disable-fixincludes --with-build-config='bootstrap-O3
bootstrap-lto'
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.1 20240305 (experimental)
8776468d9e57ace5f832c1368243a6dbce9984d5 (Gentoo Hardened 14.0. p, commit
c8305c9bdf09abe3e2f89783fe62f2e4049468fa)
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114215
--- Comment #8 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> Still waiting on a full application rather then small benchmark type
> sources. The heurstic here is that if you call operator[] multiple times, it
> might be better
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104113
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||f.heckenb...@fh-soft.de
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114248
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114248
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
--- Comment #1 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114248
Bug ID: 114248
Summary: invalid "scalar object" error
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97696
--- Comment #5 from Rama Malladi ---
Thank you Richard for this patch/ fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114186
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Indu Bhagat :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5d24bf3afd1bea3e51b87fb7ff24c21e29913999
commit r14-9325-g5d24bf3afd1bea3e51b87fb7ff24c21e29913999
Author: Cupertino Miranda
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114247
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110323
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
VAL is constexpr, which implies const, which in the global scope implies
static. Then constrain_visibility_for_template makes "struct conditional<(B ==
VAL), int, float>" non-TREE_PUBLIC. So with
extern
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114247
Bug ID: 114247
Summary: RISC-V: miscompile at -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110323
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Ah -- if we walk into TYPE_CONTEXT (t) (here: struct conditional), then in
min_vis_r we determine the visibility as VISIBILITY_ANON. Without it, it
remains VISIBILITY_DEFAULT.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110323
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
This makes a difference for some reason:
--- a/gcc/cp/tree.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/tree.cc
@@ -5542,7 +5542,7 @@ cp_walk_subtrees (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees_p,
walk_tree_fn func,
break;
case TYPENAM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114244
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110323
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114243
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Subreg improvements to ra is planned for gcc 15 as the riscv folks are running
into it for vector modes in some cases. Maybe that will improves the situation
here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81473
--- Comment #4 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
This was fixed long ago.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114243
--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
May be related to PR110093. As Vladimir noted in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110093#c5
the problem is that data flow analysis cannot cope with the subregs generated
from lower-subregs,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114229
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
In the reduced testcase the vtable for basic_streambuf should get emitted
only from 114229_d but it seems to get emitted from 114229_b too.
r14-9323-20240305175124-g8776468d9e5-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.1 20240305 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114245
Bug ID: 114245
Summary: Defaulted virtual destructors that do no work
overwrite the vtable with `-O0`
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114229
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114242
--- Comment #5 from Andreas Fertig ---
My latest conclusion is that my code is indeed invalid. In the case of the
lambda, I have a class type. http://eel.is/c++draft/dcl.fct.def.coroutine#4
says that in such a case, p1 is an lvalue of *this. If
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97696
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fca6f6fddb22b8665e840f455a7d0318d4575227
commit r14-9324-gfca6f6fddb22b8665e840f455a7d0318d4575227
Author: Richard Sandiford
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90706
--- Comment #24 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #23)
> As it appears, this bug is not fixed completely. For the -mmcu=avrtiny
> architecture, there is still bloat for even the smallest test cases like:
Diffe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105533
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114242
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Fertig ---
Thanks for looking into the issue!
While CWG 2585 tweaks the wording, my reading is that the code should be valid
even with C++20.
Regardless of that, without the lambda, the code compiles and uses a cust
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114242
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||C++-coroutines,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114242
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 57617
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57617&action=edit
testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114242
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note IIRC C++26 (maybe even 23) changed in this area over C++20 and GCC is
following (the initial?) C++20 rules.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113510
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113510
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Earnshaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:067a012bde15bfb62d9af309d9d524ebfe91b705
commit r14-9322-g067a012bde15bfb62d9af309d9d524ebfe91b705
Author: Richard Earnshaw
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113510
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rearnsha at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114244
Bug ID: 114244
Summary: Need to use round when parsing fractional seconds
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113611
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98881
--- Comment #5 from Pilar Latiesa ---
(In reply to Pilar Latiesa from comment #4)
> I can no longer reproduce the issue with 11.3 or 12.1
Because those were releases that didn't have checking enabled.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111839
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114243
Bug ID: 114243
Summary: -fsplit-wide-types bloats code by more than 50%
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114240
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
So this would fix it:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/chrono_io.h
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/chrono_io.h
@@ -2826,7 +2826,9 @@ namespace __detail
__offset = &__off;
using __format::_Ch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114242
Bug ID: 114242
Summary: Coroutine with lambda-coroutine and operator new does
not compile
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114241
Bug ID: 114241
Summary: False-positive -Wodr warning when using -flto and
-fno-semantic-interposition
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112307
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Thanks, so keeping this open but it will likely end up INVALID.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111958
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112337
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114240
--- Comment #2 from Howard Hinnant ---
In my date lib I just presumed 00:00:00 time of day when parsing time_points,
unless the parse produced another time of day. Though I must admit that this
didn't come through in the spec. So there is a li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112337
--- Comment #16 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Earnshaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2ba3171f161452df476485272cc966bc523d9859
commit r14-9321-g2ba3171f161452df476485272cc966bc523d9859
Author: Saurabh Jha
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112337
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114240
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think the problem is that I just have some generic logic that assumes all
sys_time specializations are a date time, and so require both a date and a
time. But obviously for sys_days we only need a date.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114239
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114240
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-03-05
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114236
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114240
Bug ID: 114240
Summary: sys_days not being parsed with only a date in the
stream
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112307
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
return EnumeratorRange(Enumerator(std::views::single(Intersection(;
This creates a temporary Intersection object, then copies that into a
single_view object. Then that is copied into an Enumerator o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43167
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jlame646 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114237
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114237
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
--- Comment #1 from Jonath
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114009
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114234
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-03-05
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114009
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That said, I fail to see why the a/2*2 in there matters.
a*!a is simply always 0 for integral types, both signed and unsigned, including
signed 1-bit precision. If a is 0, the result is 0*1 (or for the last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #26 from Jan Hubicka ---
> I think optimize_function_for_size_p (cfun) isn't always true if
> optimize_size is since it looks at the function-specific setting
> of that flag, so you'd have to use opt_for_fn (cfun, optimize_size).
Wh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #25 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 57614
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57614&action=edit
Proposed patch
Proposed patch that changes optimize_function_for_size_p (cfun) to
optimize_size.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114239
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
The testcase is the same as in PR113555 - so should've added to test suite I
suppose. Indeed ICEs on trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114239
Bug ID: 114239
Summary: ice: error: definition in block does not dominate use
in block
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114234
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114234
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101461
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #22)
> I think optimize_function_for_size_p (cfun) isn't always true if
> optimize_size is since it looks at the function-specific setting
> of that flag, so you'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #23 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #21)
> Looking at the prototype patch, why need to change also the splitters?
Purely for implementation reasons, we check for general resp. SSE register in
the operand p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #22 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 5 Mar 2024, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
>
> --- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Either change those too, or the splitter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114238
Bug ID: 114238
Summary: Multiple 554.roms_r run-time regressions (4%-20%)
since r14-9193-ga0b1798042d033
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114009
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #21 from Jan Hubicka ---
Looking at the prototype patch, why need to change also the splitters?
My original goal was to use splitters to expand to faster code sequences
while having patterns necessary for both variants. This makes
1 - 100 of 145 matches
Mail list logo
