On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, Ties Klappe via Gcc wrote:
> int foo2(int *restrict *p, int *restrict *q)
> {
> **p = 10;
> **q = 11;
> return **p;
> }
In this case, *p and *q might be the same restricted pointer object. See
the more detailed explanation at
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, Ties Klappe via Gcc wrote:
> Thank you both for your quick replies.
>
> @Joseph, thank you for linking me to the other issue. If I understand
> correctly what the point is, would you then agree that the program main
> when calling foo2 has *defined* behavior?
I think that's
On Mon, 15 Jan 2024, Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote:
> The change conflated multiple issues: sanitizer support,
> async-signal-safe TLS access, and eager allocation of all TLS-related
> memory, so that subsequent accesses cannot fail. My impression was the
> main point of contention was eager
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Gcc wrote:
> Hi Joseph!
>
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 14:54:49 + (UTC)
> Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 30 Jan 2024, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > > * builtin-attrs.def (ATTR_TM_NOTHROW_RT_LIST): Use ATTR_NOTHROW_LIST
> > >
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Gcc wrote:
> * builtin-attrs.def (ATTR_TM_NOTHROW_RT_LIST): Use ATTR_NOTHROW_LIST
> instead of ATTR_TM_NOTHROW_LIST, thus removing ATTR_TM_REGPARM.
That doesn't make sense. ATTR_TM_NOTHROW_RT_LIST is specifically a
transactional
On Thu, 18 Apr 2024, Frank Ch. Eigler via Gcc wrote:
> Hi -
>
> > [...] I suggest that a basic principle for such a system is that it
> > should be *easy* to obtain and maintain a local copy of the history
> > of all pull requests. That includes all versions of a pull request,
> > if it gets
On Thu, 18 Apr 2024, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> But we like to get more feedback on what people really think a
> "pull-request" style framework should look like. We used to have a
> gerrit setup which wasn't really popular. And we already have a
> sourcehut mirror that can be used to turn your
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> Therefore I'd like to mark Nios II as obsolete in GCC 14 now, and remove
> support from all toolchain components after the release is made. I'm not sure
> there is an established process for obsoleting/removing support in other
> components; besides
On Mon, 22 Apr 2024, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > A system that uses git as the source of
> > truth for all the pull request data and has refs through which all this
> > can be located (with reasonably straightforward, documented formats for
> > the data, not too closely tied to any particular
On Thu, 2 May 2024, Fangrui Song wrote:
> > On the other hand, GitHub structures the concept of pull requests
> > around branches and enforces a branch-centric workflow. A pull request
> > centers on the difference (commits) between the base branch and the
> > feature branch. GitHub does not
On Sat, 4 May 2024, Ben Boeckel via Gcc wrote:
> - every push is stored in a ghostflow-director-side unique ref
> (`refs/mr/ID/heads/N` where `N` is an incrementing integer) to avoid
> forge-side garbage collection (especially problematic on Github;
> I've not noticed GitLab
On Wed, 24 Apr 2024, Krishna Narayanan via Gcc wrote:
> Hi all,
> Is the RISC-V community planning to add support for trapping math in RISC-V
> in the near future!?
> This LLVM thread
> https://discourse.llvm.org/t/trapping-math-for-risc-v/72168/7 suggests a
> software emulation of traps, is the
On Tue, 28 May 2024, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
> -std=gnu23 support is still incomplete even in GCC 14.
It doesn't involve ABI issues, however, unlike C++, so using the option
with GCC 14 is comparatively safe. (It might run into a few aliasing bugs
related to tag compatibility right now,
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e8f0540f23762ca155fe9ed70d6adb864be096b5
commit r14-10042-ge8f0540f23762ca155fe9ed70d6adb864be096b5
Author: Joseph Myers
Date: Fri Apr 19 20:02:56 2024 +
Update gcc sv.po
* sv.po: Update.
Diff:
---
gcc/po/sv.po | 785
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0b2c333e1a3c0bb800add1daab5b6fc8ba5c1cef
commit r15-584-g0b2c333e1a3c0bb800add1daab5b6fc8ba5c1cef
Author: Joseph Myers
Date: Thu May 16 21:20:36 2024 +
Update gcc sv.po
* sv.po: Update.
Diff:
---
gcc/po/sv.po | 514
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:81c627d47c2063b7f143c974e9733ce43c0d142e
commit r14-10213-g81c627d47c2063b7f143c974e9733ce43c0d142e
Author: Joseph Myers
Date: Thu May 16 21:21:48 2024 +
Update gcc sv.po
* sv.po: Update.
Diff:
---
gcc/po/sv.po | 514
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9b3243858bed000b0ee8c3cf718f61b0e75e72ec
commit r14-9431-g9b3243858bed000b0ee8c3cf718f61b0e75e72ec
Author: Joseph Myers
Date: Mon Mar 11 19:36:52 2024 +
Update gcc sv.po
* sv.po: Update.
Diff:
---
gcc/po/sv.po | 437
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:18555b914316e8c1fb11ee821f2ee839d834e58e
commit r14-9656-g18555b914316e8c1fb11ee821f2ee839d834e58e
Author: Joseph Myers
Date: Mon Mar 25 18:28:48 2024 +
Update gcc sv.po
* sv.po: Update.
Diff:
---
gcc/po/sv.po | 700
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f2af129b68bc6b20f79a9a44b28c96650baa702c
commit r13-8495-gf2af129b68bc6b20f79a9a44b28c96650baa702c
Author: Joseph Myers
Date: Wed Jan 31 21:39:53 2024 +
c: Fix ICE for nested enum redefinitions with/without fixed underlying type
[PR112571]
Bug 112571
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f37555028717cb1454ee258afdf68aea1c7a50e9
commit r14-9778-gf37555028717cb1454ee258afdf68aea1c7a50e9
Author: Joseph Myers
Date: Wed Apr 3 20:47:47 2024 +
Update gcc sv.po
* sv.po: Update.
Diff:
---
gcc/po/sv.po | 203
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was
generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing
the project "gcc-wwwdocs".
The branch, master has been updated
via 6eeeb6a53c2e57e3f02f97da176589cf15877247 (commit)
from
21 matches
Mail list logo
