Re: [Tinycc-devel] plans to 0.9.27 (was 0.9.28)

2017-09-25 Thread grischka 

avih wrote:

Two things:
1. Will the version be 0.9.27 or 0.9.28? 


0.9.27.


2. On windows in msys2 mingw 64 environment with gcc 7.2.0, (building tcc 64 
for windows with mingw gcc 64) the build completes but some tests fail (see 
below).


Works for me with gcc 5.3 and earlier but does not with gcc 6.3.

I found the problem is tcctest.c:test_high_clobbers()

I have no idea what is wrong with what or whether at all but we
might just #ifdef out this test for windows.

-- gr

___
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel

Re: [Tinycc-devel] plans to 0.9.27 (was 0.9.28)

2017-09-24 Thread Christian Jullien 
I only have a remote access on aarch64 using my gccfarm account and I
confess I don't test all commits.

Your suggestion:
-   char b;
+   signed char b;

Fixes it, you can push this change


-Original Message-
From: grischka [mailto:gris...@gmx.de] 
Sent: dimanche 24 septembre 2017 20:51
To: Christian Jullien; tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] plans to 0.9.27 (was 0.9.28)

Christian Jullien wrote:
> While mod after you last commit works great on Windows 32/64 Rpi arm
> 
> It has one issue on Aarch64 (yet I don't know if it is related to your 
> last commit or not):

Hm.  It might have to do with unsigned-ness of chars on arm.  If so it is a
bug in the test and the change below might fix it.  (I still wonder whether
it did work earlier (and then why) or if it just wasn't tested at all yet on
arm64).

- tests/tests2/95_bitfields.c
- index 683becf..f025c57 100644 @@ -69,9 +69,9 @@
  #elif TEST == 6
  {
  struct M P __s {
int a;
-   char b;
+   signed char b;
int x : 12, y : 4, : 0, : 4, z : 3;
char d;
  };
  TEST_STRUCT(1,2,3,4,-3);

-- gr


> jullien@gcc113:~/tinycc$ uname -a
> Linux gcc113 3.13.0-92-generic #139-Ubuntu SMP Tue Jun 28 20:45:34 UTC 
> 2016
> aarch64 aarch64 aarch64 GNU/Linux
> 
> Test: 95_bitfields...
> --- 95_bitfields.expect 2017-09-24 10:50:04.240209938 -0700
> +++ 95_bitfields.output 2017-09-24 10:50:43.236414994 -0700
> @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
>   TEST 6 
>  bits in use : 007000FF  bits as set : 
> 0030002001FD0004
> -values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
> +values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
>  align/size  : 4 12
> 
> 
> @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
>   TEST 6 - PACKED 
>  bits in use : 007000FF
>  bits as set : 0030002001FD0004
> -values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
> +values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
>  align/size  : 1 10
> 
> 
> @@ -107,7 +107,7 @@
>   TEST 6 - WITH ALIGN 
>  bits in use : 007000FF  bits as set : 
> 0030002001FD0004
> -values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
> +values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
>  align/size  : 4 12
> 
> 
> @@ -145,5 +145,5 @@
>   TEST 6 - PACKED - WITH ALIGN   bits in use : 
> 007000FF  bits as set : 0030002001FD0004
> -values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
> +values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
>  align/size  : 1 10
> make[2]: *** [95_bitfields.test] Error 1
> Test: 95_bitfields_ms...
> --- 95_bitfields_ms.expect  2017-09-24 10:50:04.240209938 -0700
> +++ 95_bitfields_ms.output  2017-09-24 10:50:43.246414020 -0700
> @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
>   TEST 6 - MS-BITFIELDS 
>  bits in use : 007000FF
>  bits as set : 0030200100FD0004
> -values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
> +values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
>  align/size  : 4 20
> 
> 
> @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
>   TEST 6 - MS-BITFIELDS - PACKED   bits in use : 
> 70FF  bits as set : 
> 302001FD0004
> -values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
> +values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
>  align/size  : 1 14
> 
> 
> @@ -107,7 +107,7 @@
>   TEST 6 - MS-BITFIELDS - WITH ALIGN   bits in use : 
> 007000FF
>  bits as set : 0030200100FD0004
> -values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
> +values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
>  align/size  : 4 20
> 
> 
> @@ -145,5 +145,5 @@
>   TEST 6 - MS-BITFIELDS - PACKED - WITH ALIGN   bits in use : 
> 70FF  bits as set : 
> 302001FD0004
> -values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
> +values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
>  align/size  : 1 14
> make[2]: *** [95_bitfields_ms.test] Error 1
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Tinycc-devel 
> [mailto:tinycc-devel-bounces+eligis=orange...@nongnu.org]
> On Behalf Of Christian Jullien
> Sent: dimanche 24 septembre 2017 19:40
> To: 'grischka'; tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] plans to 0.9.28
> 
> Very nice indeed.
> 
> I offer you my time to test every attempts on:
> 
> Windows x86/x64
> Linux x86/x64
> RPi arm
> Aarch64
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: grischka [mailto:gris...@gmx.de]
> Sent: dimanche 24 septembre 2017 19:10
> To: Christian JULLIEN; tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] plans to 0.9.28
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I just pushed a patch for more complete 'long' support (which was 
> started by Matthias Gatto for _Generic), as well as with eome 
> improvements for multicharacter constants:
> 
> http://repo.or.cz/tinycc.git/commitdiff/1443039416dd02750765

Re: [Tinycc-devel] plans to 0.9.27 (was 0.9.28)

2017-09-24 Thread grischka 

Christian Jullien wrote:

While mod after you last commit works great on
Windows 32/64
Rpi arm

It has one issue on Aarch64 (yet I don't know if it is related to your last
commit or not):


Hm.  It might have to do with unsigned-ness of chars on arm.  If so
it is a bug in the test and the change below might fix it.  (I still
wonder whether it did work earlier (and then why) or if it just wasn't
tested at all yet on arm64).

- tests/tests2/95_bitfields.c -
index 683becf..f025c57 100644
@@ -69,9 +69,9 @@
 #elif TEST == 6
 {
 struct M P __s {
int a;
-   char b;
+   signed char b;
int x : 12, y : 4, : 0, : 4, z : 3;
char d;
 };
 TEST_STRUCT(1,2,3,4,-3);

-- gr



jullien@gcc113:~/tinycc$ uname -a
Linux gcc113 3.13.0-92-generic #139-Ubuntu SMP Tue Jun 28 20:45:34 UTC 2016
aarch64 aarch64 aarch64 GNU/Linux

Test: 95_bitfields...
--- 95_bitfields.expect 2017-09-24 10:50:04.240209938 -0700
+++ 95_bitfields.output 2017-09-24 10:50:43.236414994 -0700
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
  TEST 6 
 bits in use : 007000FF
 bits as set : 0030002001FD0004
-values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
+values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
 align/size  : 4 12


@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
  TEST 6 - PACKED 
 bits in use : 007000FF
 bits as set : 0030002001FD0004
-values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
+values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
 align/size  : 1 10


@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@
  TEST 6 - WITH ALIGN 
 bits in use : 007000FF
 bits as set : 0030002001FD0004
-values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
+values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
 align/size  : 4 12


@@ -145,5 +145,5 @@
  TEST 6 - PACKED - WITH ALIGN 
 bits in use : 007000FF
 bits as set : 0030002001FD0004
-values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
+values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
 align/size  : 1 10
make[2]: *** [95_bitfields.test] Error 1
Test: 95_bitfields_ms...
--- 95_bitfields_ms.expect  2017-09-24 10:50:04.240209938 -0700
+++ 95_bitfields_ms.output  2017-09-24 10:50:43.246414020 -0700
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
  TEST 6 - MS-BITFIELDS 
 bits in use : 007000FF
 bits as set : 0030200100FD0004
-values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
+values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
 align/size  : 4 20


@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
  TEST 6 - MS-BITFIELDS - PACKED 
 bits in use : 70FF
 bits as set : 302001FD0004
-values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
+values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
 align/size  : 1 14


@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@
  TEST 6 - MS-BITFIELDS - WITH ALIGN 
 bits in use : 007000FF
 bits as set : 0030200100FD0004
-values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
+values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
 align/size  : 4 20


@@ -145,5 +145,5 @@
  TEST 6 - MS-BITFIELDS - PACKED - WITH ALIGN 
 bits in use : 70FF
 bits as set : 302001FD0004
-values  : 01 02 03 04 fffd
+values  : 01 02 03 04 fd
 align/size  : 1 14
make[2]: *** [95_bitfields_ms.test] Error 1

-Original Message-
From: Tinycc-devel [mailto:tinycc-devel-bounces+eligis=orange...@nongnu.org]
On Behalf Of Christian Jullien
Sent: dimanche 24 septembre 2017 19:40
To: 'grischka'; tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] plans to 0.9.28

Very nice indeed.

I offer you my time to test every attempts on:

Windows x86/x64
Linux x86/x64
RPi arm
Aarch64


-Original Message-
From: grischka [mailto:gris...@gmx.de]
Sent: dimanche 24 septembre 2017 19:10
To: Christian JULLIEN; tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] plans to 0.9.28

Hi,

I just pushed a patch for more complete 'long' support (which was started by
Matthias Gatto for _Generic), as well as with eome improvements for
multicharacter constants:

http://repo.or.cz/tinycc.git/commitdiff/1443039416dd02750765efde1af35e31c8d4
1be3

So, now, basically, I'd agree to, including the offer to undertake the
necessary steps, to release this, say after some weeks of for finel testing,
as
 ___ 0.9.27 ___.

What do people think?

-- gr

Christian JULLIEN wrote:

Hi all,


Last December, we where close to release 0.9.28 but more than 6 months 
later, I see no plans for an imminent 0.9.28 release.


I'm fortunate to know how to build tcc on the many machines I use but 
also see many users trying to use a very old 0.9.27 version.


I think it's time to release 0.9.28 and start new dev. on 0.9.29 IMHO,

- we should decide what we really want to implement before we release
0.9.28 and propose an ETA for implementation

- enter a bug fix, validation cycle (no new feature or gratuitous
changes)

- check all ports (Windows 32/64, Linux x86, x64, arm, Aarch64, 
more?), I will test all of them


- Make 0.9.28


Sounds reasonable to you?


--
--

__