On 07/11/14 13:09, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 04/11/14 13:17, Tejas Belagod wrote:
On 03/11/14 17:58, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Mon, 3 Nov 2014, Tejas Belagod wrote:
If I mention in a couple of sentences the level of ACLE support there is in
GCC currently, this section will need to be updated ev
On 04/11/14 13:17, Tejas Belagod wrote:
> On 03/11/14 17:58, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> On Mon, 3 Nov 2014, Tejas Belagod wrote:
>>
>>> If I mention in a couple of sentences the level of ACLE support there is in
>>> GCC currently, this section will need to be updated every time there is an
>>> improvem
On 03/11/14 17:58, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Mon, 3 Nov 2014, Tejas Belagod wrote:
If I mention in a couple of sentences the level of ACLE support there is in
GCC currently, this section will need to be updated every time there is an
improvement in ACLE support - I guess we'll just have to remembe
On Mon, 3 Nov 2014, Tejas Belagod wrote:
> If I mention in a couple of sentences the level of ACLE support there is in
> GCC currently, this section will need to be updated every time there is an
> improvement in ACLE support - I guess we'll just have to remember to remove
> parts of this section
On 29/10/14 00:22, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014, Tejas Belagod wrote:
Hi,
Here is patch that consolidates AArch64 and ARM Intrinsics sections in
extend.texi into one ACLE section to avoid information repetition and adds
reference to the ARM C Language Extension spec on infocenter
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014, Tejas Belagod wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is patch that consolidates AArch64 and ARM Intrinsics sections in
> extend.texi into one ACLE section to avoid information repetition and adds
> reference to the ARM C Language Extension spec on infocenter.arm.com.
This seems to lose the i
Hi,
Here is patch that consolidates AArch64 and ARM Intrinsics sections in
extend.texi into one ACLE section to avoid information repetition and
adds reference to the ARM C Language Extension spec on infocenter.arm.com.
Built aarch64-none-elf and viewed gcc.info and associated HTML. OK for
t