On 01/07/2016 05:07 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 04:38:20PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-01-04 Martin Sebor
PR c/68966
* gcc.dg/atomic-fetch-bool.c: New test.
* gcc.dg/sync-fetch-bool.c: Same.
So the tradition is to re
On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 04:38:20PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> >>gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> >>2016-01-04 Martin Sebor
> >>
> >>PR c/68966
> >>* gcc.dg/atomic-fetch-bool.c: New test.
> >>* gcc.dg/sync-fetch-bool.c: Same.
> >
> >So the tradition is to repeat "New test." rather than to
On Jan 6, 2016, at 3:38 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>> 2016-01-04 Martin Sebor
>>>
>>> PR c/68966
>>> * gcc.dg/atomic-fetch-bool.c: New test.
>>> * gcc.dg/sync-fetch-bool.c: Same.
>>
>> So the tradition is to repeat "New test." rather than to say "Same."
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-01-04 Martin Sebor
PR c/68966
* gcc.dg/atomic-fetch-bool.c: New test.
* gcc.dg/sync-fetch-bool.c: Same.
So the tradition is to repeat "New test." rather than to say "Same."
Can we try not to make the rules any more rigid than they need
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 11:46:52AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> I just downloaded and installed an Emacs equivalent called redspace.
> It does the same thing. Unfortunately, it also has the effect of
> highlighting in red the one blank inserted by diff at the beginning
> of empty lines. I guess th
I agree that the rules are sometimes tedious to follow (and rebasing
patches just to fix some formatting issues isn't exactly fun). I don't
use git to commit either. My "secret" is to enable highlighting of trailing
whitespaces in vim ("let c_space_errors=1"), but that's of no use to you
I guess
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 06:18:32PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> I've fixed the problems you pointed out in the attached patch.
> The typos are my bad. As for the whitespace, I have to confess
> I'm finding all the rules tedious to follow without some sort
> of automation. Jason suggested some opt
On 01/04/2016 08:22 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
Hi Martin,
...
Thanks for the careful review!
I've fixed the problems you pointed out in the attached patch.
The typos are my bad. As for the whitespace, I have to confess
I'm finding all the rules tedious to follow without some sort
of automation
Hi Martin,
On Sun, Jan 03, 2016 at 08:03:20PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Index: gcc/doc/extend.texi
> ===
> --- gcc/doc/extend.texi (revision 232047)
> +++ gcc/doc/extend.texi (working copy)
> @@ -9238,6 +9238,8 @@
> @{
...
Index: gcc/c-family/c-common.c
===
--- gcc/c-family/c-common.c(revision 231903)
+++ gcc/c-family/c-common.c(working copy)
@@ -7667,6 +7667,6 @@
if (error_operand_p (align))
return -1;
if (TREE_CODE (align)
On 12/22/2015 09:46 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The attached patch rejects invocations of atomic fetch_op intrinsics
on objects of _Bool type as discussed in the context of PR c/68908.
Tested on x86_64.
Martin
gcc-68966.patch
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2015-12-22 Martin Sebor
PR c/68966
11 matches
Mail list logo
