On 07/01/2024 19:21, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sun, 7 Jan 2024 17:16:41 +0800 Baoquan He wrote:
with GCC 13.2.1 and W=1, there's compiling warning like this:
kernel/panic.c: In function ?__warn?:
kernel/panic.c:676:17: warning: function ?__warn? might be a candidate for
?gnu_printf? format at
FWIW: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24021
Cheers,
Manuel.
For the gcc rust frontend I was thinking of importing a couple of
gnulib modules to help with UTF-8 processing, conversion to/from
unicode codepoints and determining various properties of those
codepoints. But it seems gcc doesn't yet have any gnulib modules
imported, and maybe other frontends alr
On 14/10/17 16:32, Oren Ben-Kiki wrote:
Thanks for the pointers. I'm not currently using auto tools, but I might
end up having to use them, or cmake. Having these macros would help. I
still wish we had `-Wno-unknown-warnings` though - it would make life much
simpler.
Despite the feedback that
On 13/10/17 02:47, Martin Sebor wrote:
[*] We wrote a script scrape those off the online HTML manual
and create a "database" mapping options to GCC versions they
were introduced in (or first documented in, as not every option
always gets documented as it gets added).
I don't understand why you
On 4 Oct 2017 8:01 pm, "Nathan Sidwell" wrote:
On 10/04/2017 02:10 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
Incidentally, I don't understand why there is no "Professional Support"
> page where we can direct people to find professional support. It could
>
My recollec
On 04/10/17 00:22, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 10/03/2017 03:27 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 4:35 PM, Sandra Loosemore
mailto:san...@codesourcery.com>> wrote:
[snip]
FAOD, R0b0t1 forwarded mail I deliberately sent off-list back to the list. I
do know that business solicitations a
On 27/09/17 21:56, nick wrote:
Greetings All,
I commented here a few names ago,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82230. Not
to be a annoyance but I have a school assignment and would like someone to
reply if it's
correct or something. I am assuming it's probably wrong but any comme
On 03/09/17 23:00, Bruce Korb wrote:
RFE's are for this list: please improve the message.
The message does not have to be a dissertation, but messages
nowadays can certainly include URL's to direct people to
reasonable places. I'd suggest something like:
gcc.gnu.org/gcc-messages/xxx
WRT
On 06/03/17 21:15, Roland Illig wrote:
Hi,
I am currently translating GCC into German. During that, I noticed that
in some places the term "zero character" means '\0'. The official term
though is "null character", as per the C standard.
Since it is confusing to have two different terms for the
On 07/03/17 20:38, Roland Illig wrote:
Hi,
in the diagnostics the %qs specifier is used in most of the cases. But
there are some cases left where the more complicated %<%s%> is used. Is
there a good reason to prefer the complicated spelling?
Same for %<%T%> and %qT, and similar letters.
'q' i
On 09/09/16 13:28, Florian Weimer wrote:
For compile-time fortify checks (such as the wrappers for type-safe
open/openat), we need to add tests in glibc which examine the compiler output
for warnings and errors.
I do not want to add Dejagnu as a dependency to the glibc test suite, but I
wonder i
On 5 August 2016 at 18:34, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> I've given the 2012-2015 numbers below, just to show that (for the files
> in gcc/*.[ch]) your hypothesis doesn't hold. The vast majority of
> committers make <20 commits in a year.
My hypothesis is that fewer people are increasingly doing mos
On 5 August 2016 at 15:06, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 09:12:36PM +0100, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>> This is a problem throughout GCC. We have a single C++ maintainer, a
>> single part-time C maintainer, none? for libiberty, no regular
>> maintaine
On 5 August 2016 at 12:16, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
> - a "2-week rule"; if a patch by a reviewer goes unreviewed for 2
> weeks, the reviewer can commit it without review. A bit like your
> option a).
>
>
> The 2-week rule, in particular, came about due to frustration with
> lack of reviews.
Two we
On 4 August 2016 at 22:01, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> Manuel Lpez-Ibñez writes:
>> I don't see how that helps. Neither my message nor Thomas's is a
>> criticism of people. The question is how to get more people to help
>> and how to improve the situation. For sure, everybody is doing the
>> best that
On 4 August 2016 at 21:34, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> On 4 August 2016 at 21:27, DJ Delorie wrote:
>> Manuel Lpez-Ibñez writes:
>>
>>> none? for libiberty, no regular maintainer for build machinery,
>>
>> Perhaps this is a sign that I should step down as ma
On 4 August 2016 at 21:27, DJ Delorie wrote:
> Manuel Lpez-Ibñez writes:
>
>> none? for libiberty, no regular maintainer for build machinery,
>
> Perhaps this is a sign that I should step down as maintainers for those?
I don't see how that helps. Neither my message nor Thomas's is a
criticism of
On 04/08/16 15:49, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
I suppose, if I weren't paid for paid for this, I would have run away
long ago, and would have looked for another project to contribute to.
:-(
You are a *paid* developer for one of the most active companies in the GCC
community. Imagine how it feels f
On 31 July 2016 at 22:59, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 31 July 2016 at 22:06, phi gcc wrote:
>> bugzilla don't likes me, can't get in
>> Ok let's forget participation then...
>
> We were attacked by spammers last week and had to temporarily disable
> account creation. The notice you got from bu
On 31 July 2016 at 21:54, phi gcc wrote:
> Why should I ? I am not a gcc designer, just humbelly reporting a
Anybody can become a GCC developer, if they want to :)
> At some point one suggested reading the source, I did it real quick,
> and it appears trivial that getenv("TERM") is wrongly proce
On 31/07/16 13:16, phi gcc wrote:
I admit I red this a bit too fast, and since the doc sez "if
GCC_COLORS isn't present" I didn't infered what it does if set. I
didn't saw the =never was a goof for the env var.
I guess I must not be the only one trapped here.
Yet I still believe it is wrongly c
On 29 July 2016 at 16:25, Jeff Law wrote:
>> Well, if libiberty is going to be replaced en masse by gnulib, then
>> there's no sense in me cleaning up libiberty's regex.
libiberty cannot be replaced completely, because there are bits that
do not even exist in gnulib. And given the time frame, I d
On 25/07/16 21:16, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Jeff Law wrote:
I'll pre-approve removing those bits. Alternately, you could look to resync
with glibc, though that could prove painful after 15 years of divergence.
The current glibc implementation is completely different; the libi
On 11 July 2016 at 14:40, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
> wrote:
>> On 23 June 2016 at 18:02, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>> But on the other hand, the idea of maintaining multiple gnulib
>>> copies isn't that appe
On 13/07/16 14:26, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hi!
I had recently noticed that given:
#ifndef __cplusplus /* C */
_Static_assert(0, "foo");
#else /* C++ */
static_assert(0, "foo");
#endif
..., for C we diagnose:
[...]:2:1: error: static assertion failed: "foo"
_
On 11 July 2016 at 13:53, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
> On 07/10/2016 08:15 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>> Moving all gnutools to a single git/svn repository that can still be
>> built piece-wise would help sharing gnulib and other useful libraries.
>> If LLVM can do it, t
On 23 June 2016 at 18:02, Pedro Alves wrote:
> But on the other hand, the idea of maintaining multiple gnulib
> copies isn't that appealing either. Considering that the long
> term desired result ends up with a libiberty that is no longer a
> portability library, but instead only an utilities lib
On 22 June 2016 at 20:28, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
> wrote:
>> On 22 June 2016 at 19:05, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>>> Note each target in gas has its own way of parsing assembly code which
>>> is one of the reason wh
On 22 June 2016 at 19:05, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
> wrote:
>> On 22/06/16 10:02, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> GCC could parse the assembly instructions and figure out the clobbers.
>>
>>
>> Which is
On 22/06/16 10:02, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 06/21/2016 06:53 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
Me too. I wonder if there's anything else we can do to make basic asm
in a function a bit less of a time bomb.
GCC could parse the assembly instructions and figure out the clobbers.
Which is also needed for
On 14/06/16 10:32, Florian Weimer wrote:
A long time ago, GCC decided that warn_unused_result warnings should *not* be
silenced by casting to void, as in:
(void) write (STDOUT_FILENO, message, strlen (message));
Apparently, programmers have figured out to use this idiom as a replacement:
On 17 May 2016 at 12:10, Christopher Di Bella wrote:
> Just letting you know I'm still alive!
>
> I'm currently waiting on approval from my employer before I move ahead
> with anything; for now, it's just personal research to help ease into
> it. Approval may take a month or two, as I work for a l
On 09/05/16 10:18, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 8 May 2016@02:10, Christopher Di Bella wrote:
If not, I'd like to get a start on implementing a warning system for
them. I'll create a branch, but I doubt it'll be ready for gcc 7.1's
release.
Hi, I don't think anyone is working on that yet.
See ht
On 08/05/16 23:13, Oleg Endo wrote:
There are nearly 10,000 still unresolved bugs in Bugzilla, almost
half of which are New, and a third Unconfirmed, so I'm sure any
effort to help reduce the number is of value and appreciated.
That's exactly what prompted me to ask. There's such a vast number
On 04/05/16 19:20, David Malcolm wrote:
On Wed, 2016-05-04@18:15 +0200, Antonio Diaz Diaz wrote:
- It can't be portably disabled; older versions of gcc do not
accept
'-Wno-misleading-indentation'. (At least 4.1.2 does not accept
it).
FWIW "-Wall -Wno-misleading-indentation" works for
On 15 April 2016 at 14:34, Prasad Ghangal wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Regarding PR64955, I was observing function format_type_warning() (in
> c-family/c-format.c), how can I get format specifier for arg_type?
>
> Say, if tree arg_type stores 'char', then how can I get its format i.e. 'c' ?
That information
On 3 April 2016 at 16:56, Prasad Ghangal wrote:
>
> Also for
>
> int array[10];
> array[100]=10;
>
> Currently, GCC doesn't emit any warning (even with -Wall option)
>
> Wouldn't it be nice if GCC gives some warning like Clang, which gives:
>
> foo.c:4:3: warning: array index 100 is past the end o
On 31/03/16 23:23, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 31 March 2016@21:10, Daniel Gutson wrote:
Hi,
many times we copy code snippets from sources that change the
Unicode quotation marks ( “ ” ) rather than " ". For example
const std::string a_string(“Hello”);
That line looks innocent but
On 01/04/16 04:39, Martin Sebor wrote:
At the same time, having the ability to do what PR 70275 asks for
(i.e., suppress only warnings that have not be been explicitly
enabled or elevated to errors) can be handy as well. If it's
preferable to keep -w unchanged, providing a new option to do it
mi
On 30/03/16 00:01, Joseph Myers wrote:
If we consider that -Wno-general implies -Wno-specific and
-Werror=specific implies -Wspecific,@equal levels of indirection, then
the order of the options on the command line is what determines whether
-Wspecific is enabled (as an error). If however we cons
On 03/28/2016 01:56 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
In Bugzilla PR # 70275, Manuel López-Ibáñez reports that even though
he provides the "-Werror=return-type" option, the compiler doesn't
flag the warning/error about a control reaching the end of a non-void
function, due to the pres
On 9 March 2016 at 02:50, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 05:12:56PM -0500, Diego Novillo wrote:
>> This way, implementing a library that supports dealing with GIMPLE
>> becomes much simpler. This provides a nice foundation for all kinds
>> of gimple-oriented tooling in the futur
On 8 March 2016 at 21:00, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> Since the goal seems to be to be able to dump/reload some kind of IR
> rather than a textual representation of GIMPLE tuples, why not
> dump/load LLVM IR? The GIMPLE=>LLVM is already implemented as a GPL
> plugin in dr
On 8 March 2016 at 16:47, David Malcolm wrote:
>> > Isn't this what -fopt-info does?
>> > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Developer-Options.html
>>
>> Yes.
>
> One difference is that in this proposal, the output is emitted as a
> diagnostic, rather than to a file.
-fopt-info prints to stderr b
On 08/03/16 00:24, Trevor Saunders wrote:
...which suggests that we'd want to use gimple dumps as the input
format to a test framework - which leads naturally to the idea of a
gimple frontend.
Assuming you mean the format from -fdump-tree-* that's a kind of C like
language so argues against usi
On 4 March 2016 at 20:10, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> There were 2 projects:
Thanks! I updated the wiki.
Cheers,
Manuel.
ise to do it without someone
>> knowledgeable from GCC. We do have requirements.
>>
>> --joel
>>
>>
>>
>> On March 3, 2016 4:32:00 AM CST, "Manuel López-Ibáñez"
>> wrote:
>>>On 01/03/16 19:38, Ayush Goel wrote:
>>>> Hey,
>&
On 4 March 2016 at 19:36, David Malcolm wrote:
> Those caret locations look wrong to me - they don't seem to be
> underlining the pertinent source. Is that what the patched compiler is
> printing, or did things get messed up somewhere via email?
Probably Gmail sucks at sending plain text. It suc
On 3 March 2016 at 17:09, Prasad Ghangal wrote:
> So is gcc mentoring organization for gsoc this year? Because I was
> really interested in GIMPLE FE project. Can I start discussing on
> gcc-dev mailing lists?
Glad to see that I'm not the only one confused :)
IIUC, as long as you can find a GCC
On 3 March 2016 at 16:12, Jose E. Marchesi wrote:
>
> > I am interested in contributing to gcc for the gsoc 2016.
>
> Unfortunately, it seems GCC did not apply to participate in GSoC 2016
> and the deadline passed already:
> https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/organizations/?sp-sea
On 3 March 2016 at 13:23, Phil Muldoon wrote:
> On 03/03/16 13:13, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> On 03/03/2016 10:32 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>>> * Revive the gdb compile project
>>> (https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GCCCompileAndExecute), which seems dead.
>>
>&g
On 3 March 2016 at 13:47, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> I may have missed this comment but GCC wouldn't need to apply as it's own
> GSoC project. The GNU Project applied as an umbrella organization and was
> accepted. Any GCC activities would be under that. I don't know who the
> organization administ
On 3 March 2016 at 13:44, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 3 March 2016 at 10:32, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>> It also seems we did not apply last year either (at least
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/SummerOfCode does not show any accepted projects
>> for 2015).
>
> We did par
On 01/03/16 19:38, Ayush Goel wrote:
Hey,
Hi,
Things related to development of GCC are best discussed in gcc@ (not many gcc
developers actually read gcc-help). I'm moving this discussion here.
I am interested in contributing to gcc for the gsoc 2016.
Unfortunately, it seems GCC did not a
On 02/26/2016 09:28 PM, Bradley Lucier wrote:
Perhaps this question is appropriate for the gcc mail list.
Converting a float/double to unsigned int is undefined if the result would be
negative when converted to a signed int.
x86-64 and arm treat this condition differently---x86-64 returns a val
On 19 February 2016 at 19:13, David Malcolm wrote:
>> 68425.c:3:34: warning: excess elements in array initializer (6
>> elements,
>> expected 2)
>>const int array[2] = { 1, 2, 3 ,6 ,89 ,193};
>> ^
>
> Yes, that would be ideal. Unfortunately,
On 18/02/16 11:40, Prasad Ghangal wrote:
Wouldn't it be nice instead of multiple warnings if gcc gives single
warning like :
68425.c:3:34: warning: excess elements in array initializer (6
elements, expected 2)
const int array[2] = { 1, 2, 3 ,6 ,89 ,193};
On 03/02/16 21:01, Prasad Ghangal wrote:
Hi !
I am new to gcc. I would like to solve bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49973 (Bug 49973 - Column
numbers count special characters as multiple columns ). Can somebody
guide me?
I tried to debug gcc under gdb. I think I have to change
On 1 February 2016 at 22:21, Bertram, Alexander wrote:
> I'm not sure exactly where it would fit in however- I don't think it
> could be described with the machine description language. There is
> alot of complexity involved in handling things like addressable local
> variables, which have to be a
On 01/02/16 12:34, Bertram, Alexander wrote:
I wanted to share a project we've been working on for sometime within
the context of Renjin,
a new interpreter for the R language running on the JVM.
We basically needed a way to compile C and Fortran code to JVM
classes, and for the last year or two
On 25 January 2016 at 20:17, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
> As I understand, the bug report suggests that we say "suggest || instead of |
> when joining booleans" instead. We now have the API to show fix-it hints, so
> it
> would be nice to output something like
>
> test.c:17:21: warning: suggest || in
On 11/01/16 01:08, Vanush Vaswani wrote:
I am new to GCC internals.
I'm trying to create a plugin to operate on pragmas. Currently have
this working using c_register_pragma with a callback.
The callback performs pragma_lex and is able to retrieve the string
token of the pragma based on this exa
On 11/01/16 07:20, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
This is from the Wine testsuite, and the if (0) in colum one guards
one invication of the function under test that would crash (so is
the equivalent of #if 0...#endif, except that it avoids conditional
compilation).
Perhaps a good heuristic is to disable
On 16 September 2015 at 18:48, Jeff Law wrote:
>> Yes, I think so. "The kids" these days all want to use git, not svn.
>> That's harder to do because you have to set up git *and* git-svn.
>
> Right. And I find that dealing with the mixture of git and git-svn to be a
> real PITA.
OK, I was not aw
On 16 September 2015 at 18:32, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 16 September 2015 at 17:20, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>> My impression is that right now one can develop GCC with GIT or SVN (people
>> are submitting GIT patches all the time). After the conversion, only GIT
>> w
On 16/09/15 17:49, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote:
On Sep 16, 2015,@4:38 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015@7:09 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
...
Unlike Subversion branch deletion, Git branch deletion is permanent,
so this might not be the best option.
We could have a 2nd git reposit
On 13/09/15 05:32, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 2:11 PM, David Kunsman wrote:
Hello...I am thinking about starting to hack on something and I found
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Speedup_areas and one of the projects is a
multi-threaded linker. I am just wondering if this is stil
On 4 September 2015 at 17:44, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 09/04/2015 09:40 AM, David Kunsman wrote:
>>
>> what do you think about the sub project in the wiki:
>>
>> Parallel Compilation:
>>
>> One approach is to make the front end multi-threaded. (I've pretty
>> much abandoned this idea. There are too ma
On 4 September 2015 at 17:11, Tom Tromey wrote:
> Manuel> The overall goal of the project is worthwhile, however, it is unclear
> Manuel> whether the approach envisioned in the wiki page will lead to the
> Manuel> desired benefits. See http://tromey.com/blog/?p=420 which is the last
> Manuel> stat
On 02/09/15 22:44, David Kunsman wrote:
Hello, I just read over the incremental compiler project on the gcc
wiki...and I am excited to try to finish it. I am just wondering if
it is even wanted anymore because it is 7-8 years old. Does anybody
know if this project is wanted anymore?
The overa
On 25 June 2015 at 02:13, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
> On 24.06.2015 13:41, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>> Is nobody seeing this? Is it a known problem with parallel make check?
>> If so, can we work-around it in compare_tests?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Manuel.
>&g
Since a few months, I'm having a lot of trouble comparing test results
using contrib/compare_tests because there are duplicated test results
when using parallel make check.
make -k -j10 check RUNTESTFLAGS=--target_board=unix/\{-m32,-m64\}
will sometimes run:
Executing on host:
/home/manuel/te
On 7 May 2015 at 19:51, Martin Uecker wrote:
> Am Mon, 04 May 2015 18:28:49 +0200
> schrieb Manuel López-Ibáñez :
>
>> On 04/05/15 07:40, Martin Uecker wrote:
>> >
>> > BTW: Why is 'nonnull' a function attribute and not something
>> > which can
On 04/05/15 07:40, Martin Uecker wrote:
BTW: Why is 'nonnull' a function attribute and not something
which can be attached to pointer types?
I think this is something wanted for a long time:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-04/msg00550.html
but nobody has implemented it yet. Perhaps there was
On 16 April 2015 at 17:15, Andrew Haley wrote:
> However, I am advising caution, particularly when documenting
> structures whose shape might soon change. And with respect to new
> contributions, it would be a shame if someone came along, did a great
> job of documenting the structures and interf
On 16/04/15 10:04, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 16/04/15 06:12, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
So, I want to create a similar page in GCC's internal docs, but I don't
know what should be included (i.e. did I miss something important, or
did I include something obsolete), so I ask for some assistance.
The re
On 04/15/2015 11:53 AM, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
You mentioned that you are planning to do reorganization of the
directory structure. That would be really helpful. LLVM has two separate
directories for utility classes, functions and custom datatypes
(llvm/include/llvm/ADT and llvm/include/llvm/Supp
Done!
On 30 March 2015 at 23:23, Martin Uecker wrote:
>
> Hi Manuel,
>
> sorry for the late reply, I was travelling last week.
> My account name is: MartinUecker
>
> Martin
>
>
> Manuel López-Ibáñez :
>
>> Martin,
>>
>> did you manage to create
Martin,
did you manage to create a wiki account?
I can add you to the editors group then.
On 27 January 2015 at 22:54, Martin Uecker wrote:
> Am Tue, 27 Jan 2015 15:15:08 -0500
> "Frank Ch. Eigler" :
>
>> Hi -
>>
>> > > thank you, I tried creating an account, but it said: Unknown action
>> > >
On 16 March 2015 at 16:55, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 16 March 2015 at 15:54, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> "DejaGnu" is not meant to be a link, but the wiki automatically treats
>> any MixedCase word as a link.
>
> I've fixed that now.
We can actually link to the DejaGNU page if someone is interest
>> Thanks for the feedback, they were really helpful. I have updated the patch.
>> Please review this.
>> Also, although I run `make check` while compiling gcc (with bootstrap
>> enabled), I'm not sure if 'omp' related tests were exercised.
>> I'm still unfamiliar with several components of gcc.
On 16 March 2015 at 10:58, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> If it is really difficult to implement '@' in GCC then yes, that's the other
> way. I expected to learn GCC parser on this IMO-simpler case so one can later
> implement for example the '{TYPE} ADDR' GDB extension, dropping C++ class
> protections
On 16 March 2015 at 09:32, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 04:22:35 +0100, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>> Thus, the question is what info GDB needs from GCC to be able to print
>> the contents of the array.
>
> Variable with an array type in DWARF.
How does it w
>
> But GDB features a useful custom expression operator '@':
> https://sourceware.org/gdb/onlinedocs/gdb/Arrays.html
>
> I have problems implementing '@' into GCC, could you suggest at which place
> should I call build_array_type_nelts()? Or is it the right way at all?
>
> Testing it on a sam
On 02/19/15 14:56, Chris Johns wrote:
>
> My main concern is not knowing the trap has been added to the code. If I
> could build an application and audit it somehow then I can manage it. We
> have a similar issue with the possible use of FP registers being used in
> general code (ISR save/restore t
On 27 January 2015 at 18:31, Martin Uecker wrote:
>
>
> Manuel López-Ibáñez :
>
>> On 26 January 2015 at 19:15, Martin Uecker wrote:
>> >
>> > Since my patch to change this has been accepted, could you please
>> > update the FAQ again?
>>
>
On 26 January 2015 at 19:15, Martin Uecker wrote:
>
> Since my patch to change this has been accepted, could you please
> update the FAQ again?
Done. Moreover, if you create a wiki account, I will grant you editing powers.
> Also, I think the change could be mentioned here:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.o
> What else have been people working
> on and can get posted for review before stage1 closes?
> As before, when new features are posted for review during stage 1 and only
> acked early during stage 3, they can still be accepted for GCC 5.
This patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg
On 14 October 2014 01:12, Martin Uecker wrote:
> Converting a pointer to an array to a pointer to a constant array
> is safe. Converting a pointer to a pointer to a pointer to a pointer
> to a constant is not (as the CFAQ points out).
You are probably right that it is safe. Unfortunately, C consi
> Could we have an option to turn these warnings off?
This will be controlled by a new option in GCC 5.0.
For the details and the answer to your other questions, see
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FAQ#constmismatch
(If others have comments that are not covered in the FAQ, or believe
the answer there c
Dear all,
I have received quite a few private messages about how to start
contributing and where.
I understand that some people might be too shy (or not wish to raise
false expectations) to write even a private message. Thus, my overall
advice is to follow these 10 steps:
https://gcc.gnu.org/wik
Dear GCC users,
As you may have noticed, GCC diagnostics have steadily improved in
recent releases. In addition to the myriad of bugs fixed per release,
every release had at least one major improvement in diagnostics.
Unfortunately, the number of people contributing to this effort is
very limited
On 5 October 2014 03:39, Adrian May wrote:
> But it absolutely has to follow the preprocessor, so how do I do that?
> I'm a bit surprised about that being a problem cos when I look at
> preprocessor output it looks very convenient - I get one big file but
> it's full of clues as to where it all ca
On 4 October 2014 21:07, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 4 October 2014 15:47, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>> The trivial one is that you build a plugin
>> (https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Plugins.html) and hook it at
>> PLUGIN_FINISH_DECL (and perhaps also at PLUGIN_
> I imagine doing it for c++ and outputting cscope format which is
> reasonably expressive and popular.
>
> I have no idea how hard it would be, but if I can bug people for help
> I'd be willing to give it a shot.
There are two ways to do this with GCC. One is trivial and one is
hard, but the hard
Hi Maxim,
Many thanks for your leadership and hard work administering this.
I would be interested in reading about the results of the projects and
evaluations. Please student (and mentors), could you provide some
details?
Maxim, would it be possible to add this year projects to
https://gcc.gnu.o
On 21 August 2014 00:31, Tomsy Paul wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am designing a new language. I hope I can customize the front end of
> gcc to suit my language. I am comfortable with lex & yacc. I went
> through the source code of gcc but could not locate any lex or yacc
> source file.
>
> I prefer to mo
On 18 August 2014 16:34, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> Not sure I understand what the problem is. Responded inline.
>
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Yury Gribov wrote:
>> On 08/18/2014 09:42 AM, Yury Gribov wrote:
>>>
>>> On 08/16/2014 04:37 AM, Manuel Lóp
The wiki also contains the following: https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/LoopOptTasks
Probably very outdated, but updating it might be a helpful learning
experience. Don't be afraid to edit the wiki, we can always revert
your changes ;-)
Cheers,
Manuel.
On 18 August 2014 13:43, Manuel López-I
1 - 100 of 613 matches
Mail list logo
