On Apr 1 09:34, Peter Foley wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Yaakov Selkowitz
> wrote:
> > See https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-6/porting_to.html, section named "Optimizations
> > remove null pointer checks for this".
>
> If there's an better way to do this, I'm all ears.
On Apr 1 09:31, Peter Foley wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 8:16 AM, Corinna Vinschen
> wrote:
> > Can we please fold the --without-mingw-progs and --without-library-checks
> > into a single option? Given the task is basically the same, the option
> > name should
On Apr 1 08:12, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
> On 2016-04-01 07:13, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Mar 31 12:18, Peter Foley wrote:
> >>G++ 6.0 asserts that the "this" pointer is non-null for member functions.
> >>Refactor methods that check if this is non-null to be static where
> >>necessary, and
G++ 6.0 asserts that the "this" pointer is non-null for member
functions.
Refactor methods that check if this is non-null to resolve this.
Signed-off-by: Peter Foley
---
Just wanted to make sure that this approach looked good before I fix all the
problematic files.
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Corinna Vinschen
wrote:
> As I mentioned in my first reply, I'd prefer if the callers check the
> pointer explicitly. Changing the methods to static methods seems ...
> wrong. Ugly, if you don't mind me saying so.
Fair enough, I'll
On Mar 30 21:12, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> On 03/30/2016 09:04 PM, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
> > On 2016-03-30 13:53, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> >> To support in-cygwin package managers, the fork() implementation must
> >> not rely on .exe and .dll files to stay in their original location,
On Mar 31 12:18, Peter Foley wrote:
> G++ 6.0 asserts that the "this" pointer is non-null for member functions.
> Refactor methods that check if this is non-null to be static where
> necessary, and remove the check where it is unnecessary.
No, sorry, but now. Converting all affected functions to
On Mar 31 12:33, Peter Foley wrote:
> When cross-compiling a toolchan targeting cygwin, building cygwin1.dll
> requires libgcc.
> However, building libgcc requires the cygwin headers to be
> installed.
> Configuring cygwin requries the mingw-crt libraries, which require the
> cygwin headers to be
On Mar 30 11:55, Daniel Colascione wrote:
>
>
> On 03/30/2016 11:53 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > this is the updated and split series of patches to use hardlinks
> > for creating the child process by fork(), in reply to
> >
On Mar 31 14:04, Peter Foley wrote:
> HAVE_BUILTIN_MEMTEST and AC_ALLOCA were removed in 4bd8eb7d1b.
> Cleanup leftover references.
> Use the 3-arg form of AC_DEFINE.
> MALLOC_DEBUG and NEWVFORK haven't been defined since 2008
> (46162537516c5e5fbb). Remove all references to tem.
> Don't use
As a Cygwin-specific header, there is no need to guard functions based on
capability macros. Instead, guard several blocks based on additions or
removals in later versions of POSIX.1, along with a few which are only
XSI or GNU extensions.
Signed-off-by: Yaakov Selkowitz
---
glibc returns -1 for negative infinity:
http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/isinfl.3.html
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15367
Signed-off-by: Yaakov Selkowitz
---
winsup/cygwin/math/isinf.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff
The available specifications obviously differ on 32-bit and 64-bit, as
already handled in .
Signed-off-by: Yaakov Selkowitz
---
winsup/utils/getconf.c | 35 +++
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git
POSIX spawn and thread barriers have since been added. Also fix a typo in
_POSIX2_C_DEV (result is the same).
Signed-off-by: Yaakov Selkowitz
---
winsup/cygwin/sysconf.cc | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/winsup/cygwin/sysconf.cc
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 8:16 AM, Corinna Vinschen
wrote:
> Can we please fold the --without-mingw-progs and --without-library-checks
> into a single option? Given the task is basically the same, the option
> name should reflect something along the lines of
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
> See https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-6/porting_to.html, section named "Optimizations
> remove null pointer checks for this".
If there's an better way to do this, I'm all ears.
However, it seems to come down to either making
On 2016-04-01 07:13, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 31 12:18, Peter Foley wrote:
G++ 6.0 asserts that the "this" pointer is non-null for member functions.
Refactor methods that check if this is non-null to be static where
necessary, and remove the check where it is unnecessary.
No, sorry, but
17 matches
Mail list logo