On Fri, 2016-11-04 at 20:43 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> So what's the motivation here? When we don't have any constants
> then
> I'd think we'd be better off punting into the library.
When none of the args to strncmp are constant, I'd be inclined to
agree. However the current state of affairs is th
The patch adds testcase init-statement6.C, which includes the declaration
extern void publish (int), raise (int);
POSIX defines
int raise (int);
in which gets included by the C++ headers for the testcase on AIX.
This is causes the error message:
/nasfarm/edelsohn/src/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg
The patch below documents the rule of thumb for what changes are
appropriate for bug-fix release branches that we discussed in
the gcc-patches thread Re: relax rule for flexible array members
in 6.x (78039 - fails to compile glibc tests)
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg01818.html
The attached patch adds an explanation of the new
-Wshadow=(global|local|compatible-local) to gcc-7/changes.html.
OK to commit?
Thanks,
Mark
Index: htdocs/gcc-7/changes.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-7/changes.html,v
From: Chen Gang
r10 may also be as parameter stack pointer for the nested function, so
need save it before call mcount.
Also clean up code: use '!' instead of "== 0" for checking
static_chain_decl and compute_total_frame_size.
2016-11-06 Chen Gang
gcc/
PR target/71331
On 10/24/2016 04:46 PM, kugan wrote:
Hi,
I noticed that in ipcp_bits_lattice::meet_with we have:
else if (TREE_CODE_CLASS (code) == tcc_unary)
else if (code == NOP_EXPR)
Since TREE_CODE_CLASS for NOP_EXPR is tcc_unary, if (code == NOP_EXPR)
is unreachable and therefore removi
On 11/04/2016 10:53 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
Hi,
now that we removed java, let us check whether the FIXME this removes
(and that was added by Honza) is actually true. It only affects
checking runs and if it turns out to be false, we can easily revert
this.
Bootstrapped, LTO-bootstrapped and te
On 11/01/2016 04:29 PM, Aaron Sawdey wrote:
Builtin expansion of strncmp currently only happens when at least one
of the string arguments is a constant string. I'd like to make it also
attempt expansion of the cmpstrnsi pattern in the case where neither
argument is a constant string, as is alread
On 11/02/2016 06:27 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
I'm still torn about all the rest of the stuff and question its
usability (esp. merging the epilogue with the main vector loop).
But it has already been approved ... oh well.
Note that merging of the epilogue with the main vector loop may well be
use
On 11/04/2016 02:07 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
since we were discussing this recently...
The condition is copied from the existing 0 % X case, visible in the
context of the diff.
As far as I understand, the main case where we do not want to optimize
is during constexpr evaluation in the C++
On 11/04/2016 06:26 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
While experimenting with -Walloca and cross-referencing the manual
I noticed a few minor nits that I thought could stand to corrected
and/or clarified. Attached is a patch.
In the update I mentioned that the alloca argument must have integer
type for
Hi,
the following patch fixes PR68468.
Patch is used for a while in Buildroot without issues.
2016-11-05 Waldemar Brodkorb
PR gcc/68468
* libgcc/unwind-dw2-fde-dip.c: fix build on FDPIC targets.
diff --git a/libgcc/unwind-dw2-fde-dip.c b/libgcc/unwind-dw2-fde-dip.c
index f7a1c3f
On 11/03/16 20:58, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Bernd Edlinger
> wrote:
>> Yes, I am inclined to enable the warning by default now.
>>
>> Most of the test cases are fixable in a fairly obvious way,
>> see attachment.
>>
Most test cases are fixed now.
I have added -w to t
On Sat, Nov 05, 2016 at 10:05:30AM +0100, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
>
> Bootstraps and regtests on FC21/x86_64 - OK for trunk?
OK with minor nit (see below).
>
> + /* F2003 12.4.1.7 */
> + if (to->expr_type == EXPR_VARIABLE && from->expr_type ==EXPR_VARIABLE
Need a space after ==.
--
Hi guys,
>> I will set aside the patch and wait for the release of 6.2 unless there
>> is demand for it to be applied now. I am somewhat nervous about doing
>> this, however, since it is a rather radical change to select type and
>> has been in trunk for less than two weeks.
>
> This is the usual
> Dear All,
>
> I was intending to backport this patch to 6-branch. However, I see
> that this is closed to all but regressions and documentation at
> present.
>
> The patch applies cleanly, except for two small chunks in resolve.c
> which were easily inserted by hand, and bootstraps and regtests O
The alignment of int64 is 8 everywhere except m68k, where the biggest
alignment is 2, and x86-32, where the biggest field alignment is 4.
This fixes all select tests on powerpc -m32.
Andreas.
diff --git a/libgo/configure b/libgo/configure
index 7a9df58c21..adabb74baa 100755
--- a/libgo/configure
Dear All,
I was intending to backport this patch to 6-branch. However, I see
that this is closed to all but regressions and documentation at
present.
The patch applies cleanly, except for two small chunks in resolve.c
which were easily inserted by hand, and bootstraps and regtests OK. I
will set
>> The patch is OK for trunk.
>
> thanks a lot. Will commit soon.
Committed as r241870. Thanks again.
Cheers,
Janus
>> On 5 November 2016 at 10:15, Janus Weil wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> here is a patch that I had submitted already in February (see
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-02/m
Dear Andre,
The patch looks fine to me. OK for trunk.
Cheers
Paul
On 4 November 2016 at 01:57, Steve Kargl
wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 02:16:48PM +0100, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
>>
>> Bootstraps and regtests fine on x86_64-linux/F23. Ok for trunk?
>>
>> @Dominique: Would you give it a go
Hi Paul,
> The patch is OK for trunk.
thanks a lot. Will commit soon.
> PS While you are with us, are you intending to deal with the 14 PRs
> for which you are the assignee or will you unassign yourself?
Good point. I will look through them and see what I can do. In fact I
might have a bit of
Hi Janus,
Welcome back!
The patch is OK for trunk.
Best regards
Paul
PS While you are with us, are you intending to deal with the 14 PRs
for which you are the assignee or will you unassign yourself?
On 5 November 2016 at 10:15, Janus Weil wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> here is a patch that I had submi
Hello, gentle maintainer.
This is a message from the Translation Project robot.
A revised PO file for textual domain 'gcc' has been submitted
by the Spanish team of translators. The file is available at:
http://translationproject.org/latest/gcc/es.po
(This file, 'gcc-6.2.0.es.po', has just
Hi all,
here is a patch that I had submitted already in February (see
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-02/msg00011.html). Unfortunately
it was never approved and I got distracted with other things and
forgot about it.
It's a diagnostics patch, which makes sure that the responsible flag
is prin
Dear All,
This patch introduces an error if the to and from arguments of
move_alloc contain the same object or its subobjects. Please see the
comment in the testcase for an explanation and the link to the clf
discussion.
Bootstraps and regtests on FC21/x86_64 - OK for trunk?
Paul
2016-11-05 Pa
> >From 531392d44eb195bd39cb49a169047f5bd898242f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: marxin
> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 11:12:06 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] time_profiler: Set proper type to time_profiler_counter_ptr.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> 2016-11-04 Martin Liska
>
> * tree-profile.c (gimple_ge
Committed as 'obvious' in revision 241869.
This fixes the problem in comment #9. Andre seems to have fixed
comment #10 and so I am closing the PR.
Paul
2016-11-05 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/67564
* trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_class_to_class): Return _len component
of unlimited polymorphic
27 matches
Mail list logo
