On 22/01/2020 16:28, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 04:05:37PM +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
"Richard Earnshaw (lists)" writes:
On 21/01/2020 17:20, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 1/21/20 10:40 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 21/01/2020 15:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue,
On 22/01/2020 16:28, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 04:05:37PM +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
"Richard Earnshaw (lists)" writes:
On 21/01/2020 17:20, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 1/21/20 10:40 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 21/01/2020 15:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue,
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 04:05:37PM +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" writes:
> > On 21/01/2020 17:20, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> On 1/21/20 10:40 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> >>> On 21/01/2020 15:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:33:22PM
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 04:05:37PM +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" writes:
> > On 21/01/2020 17:20, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> On 1/21/20 10:40 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> >>> On 21/01/2020 15:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:33:22PM
"Richard Earnshaw (lists)" writes:
> On 21/01/2020 17:20, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On 1/21/20 10:40 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>>> On 21/01/2020 15:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:33:22PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
wrote:
>> Some examples would be
"Richard Earnshaw (lists)" writes:
> On 21/01/2020 17:20, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On 1/21/20 10:40 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>>> On 21/01/2020 15:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:33:22PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
wrote:
>> Some examples would be
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 10:00:00AM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 21/01/2020 19:26, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 02:52:00PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> >>+ A brief summary
> >
> >You could stress that this is the one thing that really matters.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 10:00:00AM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 21/01/2020 19:26, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 02:52:00PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> >>+ A brief summary
> >
> >You could stress that this is the one thing that really matters.
On 21/01/2020 19:26, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Hi!
Thanks for doing this.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 02:52:00PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
This patch proposes some new (additional) rules for email subject lines
when contributing to GCC. The goal is to make sure that, as far as
On 21/01/2020 19:26, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Hi!
Thanks for doing this.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 02:52:00PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
This patch proposes some new (additional) rules for email subject lines
when contributing to GCC. The goal is to make sure that, as far as
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 09:35:31AM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 22/01/2020 09:07, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 06:50:13PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> > > > Doesn't this use of [] have the same problem with git am?
> > >
> > > No, because only
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 09:35:31AM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 22/01/2020 09:07, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 06:50:13PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> > > > Doesn't this use of [] have the same problem with git am?
> > >
> > > No, because only
On 22/01/2020 09:07, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 06:50:13PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
Doesn't this use of [] have the same problem with git am?
No, because only 'leading' [] blocks are removed - git mailinfo --help
I've used
openmp: Teach omp_code_to_statement
On 22/01/2020 09:07, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 06:50:13PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
Doesn't this use of [] have the same problem with git am?
No, because only 'leading' [] blocks are removed - git mailinfo --help
I've used
openmp: Teach omp_code_to_statement
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 06:50:13PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> > Doesn't this use of [] have the same problem with git am?
>
> No, because only 'leading' [] blocks are removed - git mailinfo --help
I've used
openmp: Teach omp_code_to_statement about rest of OpenMP statements
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 06:50:13PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> > Doesn't this use of [] have the same problem with git am?
>
> No, because only 'leading' [] blocks are removed - git mailinfo --help
I've used
openmp: Teach omp_code_to_statement about rest of OpenMP statements
Hi!
Thanks for doing this.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 02:52:00PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> This patch proposes some new (additional) rules for email subject lines
> when contributing to GCC. The goal is to make sure that, as far as
> possible, the subject for a patch will form a
Hi!
Thanks for doing this.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 02:52:00PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> This patch proposes some new (additional) rules for email subject lines
> when contributing to GCC. The goal is to make sure that, as far as
> possible, the subject for a patch will form a
On 21/01/2020 17:20, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 1/21/20 10:40 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 21/01/2020 15:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:33:22PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
wrote:
Some examples would be useful I'd say, e.g. it is unclear in what
way you
want
On 21/01/2020 17:20, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 1/21/20 10:40 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 21/01/2020 15:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:33:22PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
wrote:
Some examples would be useful I'd say, e.g. it is unclear in what
way you
want
On 1/21/20 10:40 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 21/01/2020 15:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:33:22PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
Some examples would be useful I'd say, e.g. it is unclear in what
way you
want the PR number to be appended, shall it be
On 1/21/20 10:40 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 21/01/2020 15:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:33:22PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
Some examples would be useful I'd say, e.g. it is unclear in what
way you
want the PR number to be appended, shall it be
On 21/01/2020 15:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:33:22PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
Some examples would be useful I'd say, e.g. it is unclear in what way you
want the PR number to be appended, shall it be
something: whatever words describe it PR12345
or
On 21/01/2020 15:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:33:22PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
Some examples would be useful I'd say, e.g. it is unclear in what way you
want the PR number to be appended, shall it be
something: whatever words describe it PR12345
or
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:33:22PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> > Some examples would be useful I'd say, e.g. it is unclear in what way you
> > want the PR number to be appended, shall it be
> > something: whatever words describe it PR12345
> > or
> > something: whatever words describe
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:33:22PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> > Some examples would be useful I'd say, e.g. it is unclear in what way you
> > want the PR number to be appended, shall it be
> > something: whatever words describe it PR12345
> > or
> > something: whatever words describe
On 21/01/2020 15:04, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 02:52:00PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
[updated, following some comments from Gerald, main differences are
slight tweaks to the html markup and changing "email" to "e-mail"]
This patch proposes some new (additional)
On 21/01/2020 15:04, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 02:52:00PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
[updated, following some comments from Gerald, main differences are
slight tweaks to the html markup and changing "email" to "e-mail"]
This patch proposes some new (additional)
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 02:52:00PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> [updated, following some comments from Gerald, main differences are
> slight tweaks to the html markup and changing "email" to "e-mail"]
>
> This patch proposes some new (additional) rules for email subject lines
> when
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 02:52:00PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> [updated, following some comments from Gerald, main differences are
> slight tweaks to the html markup and changing "email" to "e-mail"]
>
> This patch proposes some new (additional) rules for email subject lines
> when
[updated, following some comments from Gerald, main differences are
slight tweaks to the html markup and changing "email" to "e-mail"]
This patch proposes some new (additional) rules for email subject lines
when contributing to GCC. The goal is to make sure that, as far as
possible, the
[updated, following some comments from Gerald, main differences are
slight tweaks to the html markup and changing "email" to "e-mail"]
This patch proposes some new (additional) rules for email subject lines
when contributing to GCC. The goal is to make sure that, as far as
possible, the
32 matches
Mail list logo
