[Bug libstdc++/98389] [11 regression] libstdc++-abi/abi_check fails after r11-6249 on powerpc64 big endian

2021-03-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98389 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- If we had a time machine, I strongly hope that double double wouldn't exist at all. It is a fast but completely useless type without any usable numerical properties.

[Bug libstdc++/98389] [11 regression] libstdc++-abi/abi_check fails after r11-6249 on powerpc64 big endian

2021-03-23 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98389 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #7) > So if we had a time machine we could mangle double-double as 'u8__ibm128' Or even 'u2dd' for "double double" :-)

[Bug libstdc++/98389] [11 regression] libstdc++-abi/abi_check fails after r11-6249 on powerpc64 big endian

2021-03-23 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98389 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4) > The demangler does the right, although confusing thing. Because the Itanium > ABI says that g is __float128: >::= f # float >

[Bug libstdc++/98389] [11 regression] libstdc++-abi/abi_check fails after r11-6249 on powerpc64 big endian

2021-02-24 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98389 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/98389] [11 regression] libstdc++-abi/abi_check fails after r11-6249 on powerpc64 big endian

2021-02-24 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98389 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f90027d18a94d02ba8f3b7503c5f0835f432a89e commit r11-7365-gf90027d18a94d02ba8f3b7503c5f0835f432a89e Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug libstdc++/98389] [11 regression] libstdc++-abi/abi_check fails after r11-6249 on powerpc64 big endian

2021-02-19 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98389 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug libstdc++/98389] [11 regression] libstdc++-abi/abi_check fails after r11-6249 on powerpc64 big endian

2021-02-19 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98389 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to seurer from comment #0) > 3 incompatible symbols > 0 > _ZSt8to_charsPcS_g > std::to_chars(char*, char*, __float128) It took me a while to realise that these symbols are not __float128,

[Bug libstdc++/98389] [11 regression] libstdc++-abi/abi_check fails after r11-6249 on powerpc64 big endian

2021-02-19 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98389 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug libstdc++/98389] [11 regression] libstdc++-abi/abi_check fails after r11-6249 on powerpc64 big endian

2021-01-05 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98389 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Priority|P3

[Bug libstdc++/98389] [11 regression] libstdc++-abi/abi_check fails after r11-6249 on powerpc64 big endian

2020-12-19 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98389 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug libstdc++/98389] [11 regression] libstdc++-abi/abi_check fails after r11-6249 on powerpc64 big endian

2020-12-19 Thread schwab--- via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98389 --- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab --- The list just needs to be updated.