Currently there is an unofficial mirror of GCC on GitHub that people
sometimes submit pull requests to:
https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc
However, this is not the proper way to contribute to GCC, so that means
that someone (usually Jonathan Wakely) has to go through the PRs and
manually tell people
On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 7:58 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2023, 16:39 Eric Gallager wrote:
>>
>> Currently there is an unofficial mirror of GCC on GitHub that people
>> sometimes submit pull requests to:
>> https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gc
On Sun, Oct 15, 2023 at 7:43 AM Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>
> "Roger Sayle" writes:
> > I'd like to ping my patch for restoring bootstrap using g++ 4.8.5
> > (the system compiler on RHEL 7 and later systems).
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-October/632008.html
> >
> > Note the p
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 4:05 PM Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> thanks for working on this.
>
> > On 17 Aug 2023, at 20:35, Eric Gallager wrote:
> >
> > This is a pretty simple patch that ought to help Darwin users understand
> > better why their build
On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 6:43 AM Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On 2023-10-19T11:57:33+0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > On Okt 19 2023, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> >> On 2023-10-18T15:42:18+0100, R jd <3246251196r...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> I guess I can ask, why there is not a recursive approach
On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 5:08 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> The existing -Wreturn-type option covers both constraint violations
> (which are mandatory to diagnose) and warnings that have known
> false positives. The new -Wreturn-mismatch warning is only about
> the constraint violations (missing or
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 5:53 AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 2:32 PM Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 02:23:00PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 06:04:09AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep
On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 4:03 PM wrote:
>
> On 22 October 2023 21:45:12 CEST, Jeff Law wrote:
> >
> >
> >On 10/22/23 10:09, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >> On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 12:47 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Current glibc headers only declare fputs_unlocked for _GNU_SOURCE.
> >>> Definin
Hi, I'd like to ping the following patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-October/633191.html
On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 8:50 PM Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 7:58 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2023, 16:
On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 11:31 AM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/1/23 08:11, Eric Gallager wrote:
> > Hi, I'd like to ping the following patch:
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-October/633191.html
> OK for the trunk.
>
Thanks, com
On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 7:25 PM Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 11:31 AM Jeff Law wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11/1/23 08:11, Eric Gallager wrote:
> > > Hi, I'd like to ping the following patch:
> > >
> > > https://gcc.gnu
On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 8:27 AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 2:19 PM Martin Liška wrote:
> >
> > Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests.
> >
> > Ready to be installed?
> > Thanks,
> > Martin
> >
> > include/ChangeLog:
> >
> >
On 11/8/19, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Nov 2019, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
>> On Nov 7, 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> > (also raises the question why we have both -dumpbase and -auxbase ...)
>>
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-08/msg00294.html
>>
>> This was before -dumpdir,
On 11/5/19, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 04:10:27PM +0100, Martin Liska wrote:
>>
>> libsanitizer/ChangeLog:
>>
>> 2019-11-05 Martin Liska
>>
>> * all source files: Merge from upstream r375507.
>> ---
>> libsanitizer/BlocksRuntime/Block.h| 59 +
>> libsanit
On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 8:58 PM Mike Stump wrote:
> On Jan 17, 2020, at 2:07 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> >
> > I ran into difficulties with the Graphviz format changing from under
> > me during an upgrade, where the new version of "dot" would reject .dot
> > files generated by the analyzer.
> >
>
On 12/5/19, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> On 05/12/2019 16:17, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> Longer lines mean less space for multiple terminal / editor windows
>> side-by-side to look at different pieces of code. I don't think that's
>> an
>> improvement.
>
> Here's a data-point
>
> My 1920 pixel-wide sc
On 12/4/19, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 11/15/19 6:23 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
>> This patch contains the command-line options for the analyzer.
>>
>
> Some of the -Wanalyzer- options sounds like they control similar
> warnings as existing options (e.g., -Wanalyzer-null-argument sounds
> like -Wnonnu
While I get that this is just the documentation, having a good list
like this will make it easy to use to respond to the individual items
it documents, so that's what I'm going to use it for:
On 11/15/19, David Malcolm wrote:
> gcc/ChangeLog:
> * doc/invoke.texi ("Static Analyzer Options"):
On 11/15/19, David Malcolm wrote:
> This patch adds support for "in-tree" plugins i.e. GCC plugins that live
> in the GCC source tree and are shipped as part of the GCC tarball.
Nick Clifton was asking us to do something like this anyways in his
talk at Cauldron on his annobin plugin; it might be
On 11/15/19, David Malcolm wrote:
> gcc/ChangeLog:
> * analyzer/analyzer.cc: New file.
> * analyzer/analyzer.h: New file.
> ---
> gcc/analyzer/analyzer.cc | 125
> ++
> gcc/analyzer/analyzer.h | 126
> +++
On 12/7/19, Jeff Law wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-11-15 at 20:23 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
>> gcc/ChangeLog:
>> * params.def (PARAM_ANALYZER_BB_EXPLOSION_FACTOR): New param.
>> (PARAM_ANALYZER_MAX_ENODES_PER_PROGRAM_POINT): New param.
>> (PARAM_ANALYZER_MAX_RECURSION_DEPTH): New param.
>
On 12/9/19, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-12-06 at 22:38 -0500, Eric Gallager wrote:
>> On 11/15/19, David Malcolm wrote:
> [...]
>> > diff --git a/gcc/analyzer/analyzer.h b/gcc/analyzer/analyzer.h
>> > new file mode 100644
>> > index 000..ac
On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 6:36 AM Andrew Burgess wrote:
>
> Tom Tromey writes:
>
> > When I enable cgen rebuilding in the binutils-gdb tree, the default is
> > to run cgen using 'guile'. However, on my host, guile is guile 2.2,
> > which doesn't work for me -- I have to use guile3.0.
> >
> > This
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 3:37 PM Tom Tromey wrote:
>
> Andrew> This change is causing some problems for me.
>
> Yeah, Tom de Vries as well.
>
> Andrew> One of my build machines has 2 versions of guile installed. One is
> Andrew> guile 2.0.14 and the other is guile 2.2.21.
>
> Andrew> When GDB conf
On Sun, Jan 28, 2024 at 6:45 AM Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> Tested on i686, x86_64 Darwin, x86_64 Linux,
> OK for trunk?
>
> --- 8< ---
>
> On some targets it seems that ssize_t is not defined by any of the
> headers transitively included by . This leads to a bootstrap
> fail when jit is enabled.
>
>
Please cross-reference against issue 37210 if/when merging, if it
hasn't already been:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37210
On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:15 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 2:42 PM Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> >
> > Recently there are some people building GCC
On GitHub, Joseph Myers (@jsm28 there) says in MentorEmbedded/qmtest#1
that the qmtest-related targets should have been removed long ago. This
patch does so.
Ref:
https://github.com/MentorEmbedded/qmtest/issues/1
gcc/ChangeLog:
* Makefile.in: Remove qmtest-related targets.
---
gcc/Makef
On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 1:44 PM Tom Tromey wrote:
>
> > "Arsen" == Arsen Arsenović writes:
>
> Arsen> Thanks. I'll wait for the Binutils and GDB maintainers to weigh in
> Arsen> before pushing (plus, I can't push there).
>
> Seems fine to me. Thank you.
>
> Tom
LGTM; please post once it has
On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 10:13 AM Martin Uecker wrote:
>
> Am Mittwoch, dem 06.12.2023 um 16:01 +0100 schrieb Jakub Jelinek:
> > On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 03:56:10PM +0100, Martin Uecker wrote:
> > > > That would be my preference because then the allocation size is
> > > > correct and it is purely a s
On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:56 PM Jeff Law wrote:
> On 12/5/23 09:41, Eric Gallager wrote:
> > On GitHub, Joseph Myers (@jsm28 there) says in MentorEmbedded/qmtest#1
> > that the qmtest-related targets should have been removed long ago. This
> > patch does so.
> >
>
On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 5:06 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> These tests use obsolete language constructs, but they are not
> clearly targeting C89, either. So use -fpermissive to keep
> future errors as warnings.
>
> The reasons why obsolete constructs are used used vary from
> test to test. Some
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 4:58 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> This used to be a warning, enabled by default, without its own option.
Right, I meant to ask: why create a new option of
-Wdeclaration-missing-parameter-type instead of reusing the existing
-Wmissing-parameter-type for this?
>
> A subsequ
>> libasprintf; therefore there is no need to build it.
> >
> > Ah, sure, that works for me too (note that the fix is to pass
> > -frandom-seed=, according to Jakub, should this show up again).
>
> Indeed, that got a bootstrap to pass. I've also taken the opport
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 4:28 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> Pushed to trunk. We have nearly a year to make improvements to it
> before it's needed for the gcc-15 branch ... I just hope I remember it
> exists when we branch ;-)
Maybe you could leave a note about it in the docs somewhere?
>
> On We
On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 7:19 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 4:14 PM Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> >
> > The libbacktrace testsuite was not passing when run with current
> > versions of clang. Add the optnone attribute to make it pass. Add
> > -Wno-attributes and -Wno-unknown-at
On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 10:37 PM Patrick Palka wrote:
>
> Bootstrapped andrregtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look
> OK for trunk?
>
> -- >8 --
>
> Here we're neglecting to emit a -Wunused-value for eligible ! operator
> expressions, and in turn for != operator expressions that are rewrit
On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 10:50 AM Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> On 7/16/24 10:31 AM, Eric Gallager wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 10:37 PM Patrick Palka wrote:
> >>
> >> Bootstrapped andrregtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look
> >> OK for trunk?
On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 1:21 PM David Malcolm wrote:
>
> Ping.
>
> This patch has actually been *very* helpful to me when debugging
> selftest failures involving ASSERT_STREQ.
>
> Thanks
> Dave
>
Currently `diff` is only listed under the "Tools/packages necessary
for modifying GCC" section of ins
Maybe also add a mention of the toolchain's Mastodon account while
you're there? https://fosstodon.org/@gnutools
On Sun, May 26, 2024 at 6:05 PM Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>
> Keep the reference as text; just not the link.
>
> Gerald
> ---
> htdocs/news.html | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+),
On Sat, Jun 1, 2024 at 11:32 AM Julian Waters wrote:
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> Thanks for the reply! I'll address your comments soon. I have a
> question, if there is an option defined in c.opt as an Enum, like
> fstrong-eval-order, and the -no variant of the option is passed, would
> the Var somehow refl
On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 8:50 AM Sam James wrote:
>
> libtool defaults to filtering flags passed at link-time.
>
> This brings the filtering in GCC's 'fork' of libtool into sync with
> upstream libtool commit 22a7e547e9857fc94fe5bc7c921d9a4b49c09f8e.
I think it'd be worthwhile to link to the upstr
On Sun, Aug 18, 2024 at 4:52 AM Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>
> When I updated one of the links yesterday I noticed we have this obsolete
> reference to GCC 4.0.1 and binutils 2.15.90.0.1.1 from 19 (nineteen) years
> ago.
>
> I suggest we remove these.
>
Instead of just removing it, I wonder if it migh
On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 5:06 PM David Malcolm wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2024-05-29 at 16:35 -0400, Eric Gallager wrote:
> > On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 1:21 PM David Malcolm
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Ping.
> > >
> > > This patch has actually been *very
On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 10:07 AM Sam James wrote:
>
> At -O1, the intention is that we compile things in a "reasonable" amount
> of time (ditto memory use). In particular, we try to especially avoid
> optimizations which scale poorly on pathological cases, as is the case
> for large machine-genera
On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 5:51 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> ---
> htdocs/gcc-14/changes.html | 11 +++
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-14/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-14/changes.html
> index 8ac08e9a..a183fad8 100644
> --- a/htdocs/gcc-14/changes.html
> +++ b/ht
On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 8:43 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> The regen bot recently flagged a difference in gotools/Makefile.in.
> Trying it locally, it seems pretty random
> for i in `seq 20`; do PATH=~/automake-1.15.1/bin:~/autoconf-2.69/bin:$PATH
> automake; echo -n `git diff Makefile.in |
On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 6:14 AM Alex Coplan wrote:
>
> On 04/04/2024 11:00, Alex Coplan wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This adds a note to the GCC 14 release notes mentioning support for
> > __has_{feature,extension} (PR60512).
> >
> > OK to commit?
>
> Ping. Is this changes.html patch OK? I guess it ne
; +
> +
> +
So, this is kind of a minor style nitpick, but personally, it kind of
bothers me when autotools goes and inserts a bunch of unnecessary
blank newlines in the generated output scripts. Does anyone else think
it'd be worth it to scatter around some of m4's "dnl" com
On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 8:18 AM Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Any objections?
>
> -- 8< --
>
> Several PRs complain about -Wswitch warning about a case for a bitwise
> combination of enumerators. Clang has an attribute flag_enum to prevent
> this; let's adopt that approach
On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 7:32 AM Andrew Kreimer wrote:
>
> Fix typos in comments.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Kreimer
> ---
> Makefile.def | 2 +-
> Makefile.in | 4 ++--
> Makefile.tpl | 4 ++--
> 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Makefile.def b/Makefile.def
> inde
On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 11:51 AM Srinath Parvathaneni
wrote:
>
> This patch adds support for aarch64 gcs build attributes.
Hi, just wondering if you could clarify what "GCS" stands for in this
context? When I see it, my first thought is "GNU Coding Standards",
but I don't think that's right...
>
On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 5:28 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> The following patch implements the clang -Wheader-guard warning, which warns
> if a valid multiple inclusion header guard's #ifndef/#if !defined directive
> is immediately (no other non-line directives nor other (non-comment)
> token
On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 4:19 PM Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>
> Hi -
>
> The gcc-testresults mailing list is a well-established place to plop
> snippets of testsuite results. It's an okay way to archive and
> distribute overall counts, but it's not machine readable, and it's way
> incomplete (lacks .
On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 11:24 AM Andrew Kreimer wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 11:06:40AM -0400, Eric Gallager wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 7:32 AM Andrew Kreimer wrote:
> > >
> > > Fix typos in comments.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: A
On 7/6/15, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 07/05/2015 04:58 PM, Eric Gallager wrote:
>> I was just matching the code that was already used there... should the
>> lines to ignore the CVS and .svn folders be re-written into the style
>> you propose, too?
> Might as well have a cons
On 7/27/15, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Eric Gallager writes:
>
>> Okay, I tried embedding "! -name CVS/ ! -name .svn/" into the find
>
> -name does an exact match, so you don't need the slash.
>
> Andreas.
>
Okay, attached a new version of the patch; make
On 10/10/19, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> While I agree that this is quite cool to have, the following:
>
>> +/* DOCUMENTATION_ROOT_URL should be supplied via -D by the Makefile
>> + (see --with-documentation-root-url).
>> +
>> + Expect an anchor of the form "index-Wf
On 10/16/19, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 10:03:51AM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> > The counter example would be:
>> > #define F(x) \
>> >__extension__ (({ __typeof__ (x) _x = x; _x < 0 ? -_x : _x; }))
>> > #define G(x) \
>> >__extension__ (({ __typeof__ (x) _x = x; F(_x
On 11/26/19, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> When I tried to bootstrap with --enable-languages=default, which
> includes objc, it failed to build libobj.
>
> As Rhy0lite on IRC correctly guessed, the issue is that the cet.m4 file
> is at a different location. I wonder why no one had the problem before
> in
On 11/29/19, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
>> I've noticed quite significant package failures caused by the revision.
>
> How significant? Is it mostly the common mistake of forgetting extern?
>
>> Would you please consider documenting this change in porting_to.html
>> (and in changes.html)
On 11/20/19, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 11:02 PM David Malcolm wrote:
>>
>> > > The checker is implemented as a GCC plugin.
>> > >
>> > > The patch kit adds support for "in-tree" plugins i.e. GCC plugins
>> > > that
>> > > would live in the GCC source tree and be shipped as p
On 11/16/19, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi David!
>
> On 2019-11-15T20:22:47-0500, David Malcolm wrote:
>> This patch kit
>
> (I have not looked at the patches.) ;-)
>
>> introduces a static analysis pass for GCC that can diagnose
>> various kinds of problems in C code at compile-time (e.g. double
On 8/1/18, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 08/01/2018 05:20 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>> On 07/30/18 17:49, Joseph Myers wrote:
>>> On Mon, 30 Jul 2018, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>>
Hi,
this is how I would like to handle the over length strings issue in the
C FE.
If the string const
On 8/4/18, Martin Sebor wrote:
> The sprintf handling of wide characters neglects to consider
> that calling the function may fail due to a conversion error
> (when the wide character is invalid or not representable in
> the current locale). The handling also misinterprets
> the POSIX %S wide str
On 8/15/18, David Malcolm wrote:
> This patch adds the ability to label source ranges within a rich_location,
> to be printed by diagnostic_show_locus.
>
> For example:
>
> pr69554-1.c:11:18: error: invalid operands to binary + (have 'const char *'
> and 'const char *')
> 11 | return (p + 1) + (
On 8/14/18, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2018, Martin Jambor wrote:
>
>> when you try compiling a call to function abs and provide an unsigned
>> int in the argument in C++, you will get an error about ambiguous
>> overload. In C however, it will pass without silently. The following
>> p
On 6/23/17, Michael Collison wrote:
> This patch cleans up warning messages due to unused variables and overly
> complicated loop structures.
>
> Okay for trunk?
>
> 2017-03-30 Michael Collison
>
> PR target/68535
> * config/arm/arm.c (gen_ldm_seq): Remove last unnecessary
> s
Ping again: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-11/msg00123.html
On 11/2/17, Eric Gallager wrote:
> Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-10/msg01834.html
>
> On 10/25/17, Eric Gallager wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 8:05 PM, Eric Gallager
>> wrote:
>&g
Ping yet again: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-11/msg00123.html
On 11/9/17, Eric Gallager wrote:
> Ping again: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-11/msg00123.html
>
> On 11/2/17, Eric Gallager wrote:
>> Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-10/msg01834.html
On 11/16/17, Koval, Julia wrote:
> // I failed to send patch itself, it is too big even in gzipped form. What
> is the right way to send such big patches?
>
> Hi, this patch removes cilkplus. Ok for trunk?
I'm not a reviewer, but just as an onlooker, I'd want to see notes
about the removal in th
On 5/24/18, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 05/12/2018 08:00 AM, Sergei Trofimovich via gcc-patches wrote:
>> From: Sergei Trofimovich
>>
>> Before the change systemtap probes were enabled
>> if target headers had sys/sdt.h at ./configure time.
>>
>> After the change explicitly ask to enable or disable
>> f
On 5/29/18, David Malcolm wrote:
> This patch is the JSON patch I posted last year;
> it adds support to gcc for reading and writing JSON,
> based on DOM-like trees of json::value instances.
>
> This is overkill for what's needed by the rest of the
> patch kit (which just needs to be able to write
On 5/30/18, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-05-30 at 13:25 -0400, Eric Gallager wrote:
>> On 5/29/18, David Malcolm wrote:
>> > This patch is the JSON patch I posted last year;
>> > it adds support to gcc for reading and writing JSON,
>> > based on DOM
On 6/5/18, Martin Sebor wrote:
> The attached patch adds basic support for handling strnlen
> as a built-in function. It touches the strlen pass where
> it folds constant results of the function, and builtins.c
> to add simple support for expanding strnlen calls with known
> results. It also cha
On 6/5/18, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 17:13 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> On 06/05/2018 03:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 04:40 -0400, Trevor Saunders wrote:
>> > > You may want to look at gdb's enum-flags.h which I think already
>> > > implements what your
On 6/5/18, David Edelsohn wrote:
> Martin,
>
> With your recent patch, I receive the following failure building
> libgcov-driver-system.c
>
> In file included from
> /nasfarm/edelsohn/src/src/gcc/../libgcc/libgcov-driver.c:322:0:
> /nasfarm/edelsohn/src/src/gcc/../libgcc/libgcov-driver-system.c: I
On 6/7/18, Martin Sebor wrote:
> A bunch of warning options are missing an @opindex entry,
> usually for the negative form. I went through them all
> and added them where it made sense.
>
> Unless there are objections I will commit the patch to
> trunk next week.
>
> I think the patch is also app
On 6/11/18, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 06/11/2018 11:06 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> If we're not doing a general update from upstream libtool, I think we
>> should use the upstream ltmain.sh fix (libtool commit
>> 74c8993c178a1386ea5e2363a01d919738402f30, it looks like), or follow it as
>>
>> close as po
On 6/13/18, Matthew Fortune wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch was developed as part of preparing ever more complex multilib
> combinations for the MIPS architecture and aims to solve several problems
> in this area. I've attempted to be quite verbose in the description, so
> that I can explain how I am
On 6/15/18, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> On 06/15/18 09:07, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Thu, 14 Jun 2018, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>
>>> On 06/14/18 15:43, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Hi!
>
>
> This patch converts the splay-tree internals in
On 6/21/18, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 06/12/2018 11:21 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Jun 2018, Martin Sebor wrote:
>>
>>> The proposal to enable -Wstrict-prototypes discussed below
>>> was considered too late for GCC 8. I'd like to revive it
>>> now for GCC 9.
>>>
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/
On 6/26/18, Martin Sebor wrote:
> With the exception of built-ins with the ellipsis (like sprintf),
> GCC silently accepts declarations of built-in functions without
> prototypes as well as calls to such functions with any numbers
> or types of arguments, compatible or otherwise. Calls with
> arg
On 6/29/18, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 06/27/2018 08:40 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> On 06/27/2018 03:53 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> On 06/27/2018 09:27 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 09:17:07AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> About 115 tests fail due to incompatible declarations of
>
On 6/29/18, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 8:43 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 09:09:38AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> > Btw, running find to search for libtool.m4/ltmain.sh I find extra
>>> > copies in
>>> >
>>> > ./libgo/config/ltmain.sh
>>> > ./libgo/confi
On 1/19/18, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> Jason,
> what do you think about deprecating the ARM-era for-scope handling that
> allows:
>void f ()
>{
> for (int i = 0;;);
> i = 2;
>}
>
> we noisily accept that in c++98 mode with -fpermissive. It wasn't even
> well formed then. Imple
I've attached trivial, 1-line patch to fixincludes_check.tpl; it
allows 'make check' to succeed on OS X, by ignoring the files that
Finder creates to keep track of the status of directories.
-Eric Gallager
fixincludes/check.tpl | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --gi
I was just matching the code that was already used there... should the
lines to ignore the CVS and .svn folders be re-written into the style
you propose, too?
On 7/5/15, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Eric Gallager writes:
>
>> I've attached trivial, 1-line patch to fixincludes_check.
On 5/28/19, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 5/28/19 4:24 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 5/28/19 11:31 AM, David CARLIER wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Here a tiny patch to fix few build warnings.
>>>
>>> Kind regards.
>>>
>>
>> Hi.
>>
>> Well, I see a lot of these struct/class discrepancies when building GCC
>> w
On 12/6/18, Jason Merrill wrote:
> Since pvt was removed, it's bugged me that to pretty-print a vec I
> needed to write out "call debug($)". So this patch adds a generic
> command "pp" to print anything handled by a debug overload.
>
> OK for trunk?
>
Why does it also change pbb to do the same t
On 12/7/18, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12/7/18 6:36 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 10:22 PM Jason Merrill wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 11:14 AM Jason Merrill wrote:
Looks good to me. Independently, do you see a reason not to disable
the
old deman
On 10/11/18, Martin Sebor wrote:
> The manual says that:
>
>The packed attribute specifies that a variable or structure
>field should have the smallest possible alignment--one byte
>for a variable, and one bit for a field...
>
> The variable part doesn't actually reflect reality: GCC a
On 10/10/18, Martin Sebor wrote:
> While writing tests for fixes and enhancements for attribute
> handling I keep finding myself coming up with the same boiler-
> plate code to verify whether an attribute has or has not been
> successfully applied. It's often error-prone because it
> depends on t
On 10/12/18, David Malcolm wrote:
> Here's a proposed "User Experience Guidelines" section for our
> internals manual
>
> It's a mixture of proposed policy, together with notes on how to
> implement the recommendations.
>
> Thoughts?
I have no comments on the actual contents of the patch, just th
On 10/13/18, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Attached is an updated/enhanced patch with many more tests
> and the suggested documentation tweak. It also restores
> the handling of empty attributes that the first revision
> inadvertently removed from the C parser.
>
> The tests are much more comprehensive n
On 10/17/18, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 10/16/2018 02:06 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
>> I've been extending -fopt-info to cover inlining, and I added a %S
>> format code to dump_printf which accepts a symtab_node *.
>>
>> Unfortunately, -Wformat doesn't like the fact that I'm passing in a
>> subclass p
On 10/26/18, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> After the GCC 6.5 release the GCC 6 branch is now closed. Please
> refrain from committing to it from now on.
>
> Thanks
> Jakub
>
So, since it's the last branch with java in it, can we go and finally
remove the last vestiges of java from the gcc website
On 10/12/18, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> The Linux kernel people want a feature that makes GCC pretend some
> inline assembler code is tiny (while it would think it is huge), so
> that such code will be inlined essentially always instead of
> essentially never.
>
> This patch lets you say "asm inl
On 10/30/18, Joseph Myers wrote:
> This patch (diffs to generated files omitted below) updates GCC to use
> autoconf 2.69 and automake 1.15.1. (That's not the latest automake
> version, but it's the one used by binutils-gdb, with which consistency
> is desirable, and in any case seems a useful in
On 10/31/18, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 11:02:16AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>> [Yes, I can't count]
>>
>> Include file handling duplicated cleanup code in each exit path. Simpler
>> to
>> just commonize it with goto. Also noticed a memory leak in buffer
>> popping.
>>
>>
On 11/7/18, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/6/18 9:37 AM, Hafiz Abid Qadeer wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> I was investigating a character set related problem with windows hosted
>> GDB and I tracked it down to a typo in iconv.m4. This typo caused
>> libiconv detection to fail and related support was not built into
1 - 100 of 314 matches
Mail list logo
