On Sat, Jun 1, 2024 at 11:32 AM Julian Waters wrote:
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> Thanks for the reply! I'll address your comments soon. I have a
> question, if there is an option defined in c.opt as an Enum, like
> fstrong-eval-order, and the -no variant of the option is passed, would
> the Var somehow
Maybe also add a mention of the toolchain's Mastodon account while
you're there? https://fosstodon.org/@gnutools
On Sun, May 26, 2024 at 6:05 PM Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>
> Keep the reference as text; just not the link.
>
> Gerald
> ---
> htdocs/news.html | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1
On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 1:21 PM David Malcolm wrote:
>
> Ping.
>
> This patch has actually been *very* helpful to me when debugging
> selftest failures involving ASSERT_STREQ.
>
> Thanks
> Dave
>
Currently `diff` is only listed under the "Tools/packages necessary
for modifying GCC" section of
; +
> +
> +
So, this is kind of a minor style nitpick, but personally, it kind of
bothers me when autotools goes and inserts a bunch of unnecessary
blank newlines in the generated output scripts. Does anyone else think
it'd be worth it to scatter around some of m4's "dnl" comme
On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 6:14 AM Alex Coplan wrote:
>
> On 04/04/2024 11:00, Alex Coplan wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This adds a note to the GCC 14 release notes mentioning support for
> > __has_{feature,extension} (PR60512).
> >
> > OK to commit?
>
> Ping. Is this changes.html patch OK? I guess it
On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 8:43 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> The regen bot recently flagged a difference in gotools/Makefile.in.
> Trying it locally, it seems pretty random
> for i in `seq 20`; do PATH=~/automake-1.15.1/bin:~/autoconf-2.69/bin:$PATH
> automake; echo -n `git diff Makefile.in
On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 5:51 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> ---
> htdocs/gcc-14/changes.html | 11 +++
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-14/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-14/changes.html
> index 8ac08e9a..a183fad8 100644
> --- a/htdocs/gcc-14/changes.html
> +++
On Sun, Jan 28, 2024 at 6:45 AM Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> Tested on i686, x86_64 Darwin, x86_64 Linux,
> OK for trunk?
>
> --- 8< ---
>
> On some targets it seems that ssize_t is not defined by any of the
> headers transitively included by . This leads to a bootstrap
> fail when jit is enabled.
>
>
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 3:37 PM Tom Tromey wrote:
>
> Andrew> This change is causing some problems for me.
>
> Yeah, Tom de Vries as well.
>
> Andrew> One of my build machines has 2 versions of guile installed. One is
> Andrew> guile 2.0.14 and the other is guile 2.2.21.
>
> Andrew> When GDB
On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 6:36 AM Andrew Burgess wrote:
>
> Tom Tromey writes:
>
> > When I enable cgen rebuilding in the binutils-gdb tree, the default is
> > to run cgen using 'guile'. However, on my host, guile is guile 2.2,
> > which doesn't work for me -- I have to use guile3.0.
> >
> > This
On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:56 PM Jeff Law wrote:
> On 12/5/23 09:41, Eric Gallager wrote:
> > On GitHub, Joseph Myers (@jsm28 there) says in MentorEmbedded/qmtest#1
> > that the qmtest-related targets should have been removed long ago. This
> > patch does so.
> >
>
On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 10:13 AM Martin Uecker wrote:
>
> Am Mittwoch, dem 06.12.2023 um 16:01 +0100 schrieb Jakub Jelinek:
> > On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 03:56:10PM +0100, Martin Uecker wrote:
> > > > That would be my preference because then the allocation size is
> > > > correct and it is purely a
On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 1:44 PM Tom Tromey wrote:
>
> > "Arsen" == Arsen Arsenović writes:
>
> Arsen> Thanks. I'll wait for the Binutils and GDB maintainers to weigh in
> Arsen> before pushing (plus, I can't push there).
>
> Seems fine to me. Thank you.
>
> Tom
LGTM; please post once it
On GitHub, Joseph Myers (@jsm28 there) says in MentorEmbedded/qmtest#1
that the qmtest-related targets should have been removed long ago. This
patch does so.
Ref:
https://github.com/MentorEmbedded/qmtest/issues/1
gcc/ChangeLog:
* Makefile.in: Remove qmtest-related targets.
---
Please cross-reference against issue 37210 if/when merging, if it
hasn't already been:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37210
On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:15 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 2:42 PM Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> >
> > Recently there are some people building GCC
eeds
> >> libasprintf; therefore there is no need to build it.
> >
> > Ah, sure, that works for me too (note that the fix is to pass
> > -frandom-seed=, according to Jakub, should this show up again).
>
> Indeed, that got a bootstrap to pass. I've also taken the opportunity
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 4:58 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> This used to be a warning, enabled by default, without its own option.
Right, I meant to ask: why create a new option of
-Wdeclaration-missing-parameter-type instead of reusing the existing
-Wmissing-parameter-type for this?
>
> A
On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 5:06 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> These tests use obsolete language constructs, but they are not
> clearly targeting C89, either. So use -fpermissive to keep
> future errors as warnings.
>
> The reasons why obsolete constructs are used used vary from
> test to test. Some
On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 7:25 PM Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 11:31 AM Jeff Law wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11/1/23 08:11, Eric Gallager wrote:
> > > Hi, I'd like to ping the following patch:
> > >
> > > https://gcc.gnu.
On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 11:31 AM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/1/23 08:11, Eric Gallager wrote:
> > Hi, I'd like to ping the following patch:
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-October/633191.html
> OK for the trunk.
>
Thanks, committe
Hi, I'd like to ping the following patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-October/633191.html
On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 8:50 PM Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 7:58 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2023, 16:39 Er
On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 4:03 PM wrote:
>
> On 22 October 2023 21:45:12 CEST, Jeff Law wrote:
> >
> >
> >On 10/22/23 10:09, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >> On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 12:47 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Current glibc headers only declare fputs_unlocked for _GNU_SOURCE.
> >>>
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 5:53 AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 2:32 PM Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 02:23:00PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 06:04:09AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > > On Thu,
On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 5:08 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> The existing -Wreturn-type option covers both constraint violations
> (which are mandatory to diagnose) and warnings that have known
> false positives. The new -Wreturn-mismatch warning is only about
> the constraint violations (missing
On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 6:43 AM Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On 2023-10-19T11:57:33+0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > On Okt 19 2023, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> >> On 2023-10-18T15:42:18+0100, R jd <3246251196r...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> I guess I can ask, why there is not a recursive approach
On Sun, Oct 15, 2023 at 7:43 AM Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>
> "Roger Sayle" writes:
> > I'd like to ping my patch for restoring bootstrap using g++ 4.8.5
> > (the system compiler on RHEL 7 and later systems).
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-October/632008.html
> >
> > Note the
On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 7:58 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2023, 16:39 Eric Gallager wrote:
>>
>> Currently there is an unofficial mirror of GCC on GitHub that people
>> sometimes submit pull requests to:
>> https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gc
Currently there is an unofficial mirror of GCC on GitHub that people
sometimes submit pull requests to:
https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc
However, this is not the proper way to contribute to GCC, so that means
that someone (usually Jonathan Wakely) has to go through the PRs and
manually tell
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 7:46 AM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Tested x86_64-linux. Pushed to trunk.
>
> -- >8 --
>
> These files were filtered through autopep8 to reformat them more
> conventionally.
>
Thanks for this; I'm wondering if it might be worthwhile to do
likewise for other
On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 9:43 AM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 09:27:48AM -0400, David Malcolm via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > On Sun, 2023-09-10 at 16:36 +0200, Guillaume Gomez wrote:
> > > When going through the code, I saw a lot of trailing whitespace
> > >
On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 6:32 AM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Fri, 8 Sept 2023 at 03:16, Eric Gallager wrote:
> >
> > Maybe use $(AM_V_at) instead? That would allow it to be controlled by
> > the --enable-silent-rules flag to configure, as well as make V=1 vs.
> &g
Maybe use $(AM_V_at) instead? That would allow it to be controlled by
the --enable-silent-rules flag to configure, as well as make V=1 vs.
make V=0 too.
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 9:32 AM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Any objections to this change?
>
> -- >8 --
>
> This removes the 39
On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 11:23 AM Nick Clifton via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> Currently the top level configure.ac file sets the minimum required
> version of texinfo to be 4.7. I would like to propose changing this
> to 6.8.
>
> The reason for the change is that the bfd
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 11:38 PM Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 4:05 PM Iain Sandoe wrote:
> >
> > Hi Eric,
> >
> > thanks for working on this.
> >
> > > On 17 Aug 2023, at 20:35, Eric Gallager wrote:
> > >
> > >
gone through properly...)
On Sat, Aug 19, 2023 at 4:11 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/17/23 12:59, Eric Gallager via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > Subject:
> > [PATCH] improve error when /usr/include isn't found [PR90835]
> > From:
> > Eric Gallager via Gcc-p
This is a pretty simple patch that ought to help Darwin users understand
better why their build is failing when they forget to pass the
--with-sysroot= flag to configure.
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR target/90835
* Makefile.in: improve error message when /usr/include is
missing
---
This is a pretty simple patch that ought to help Darwin users understand
better why their build is failing when they forget to pass the
--with-sysroot= flag to configure.
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR target/90835
* Makefile.in: improve error message when /usr/include is
missing
---
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 4:05 PM Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> thanks for working on this.
>
> > On 17 Aug 2023, at 20:35, Eric Gallager wrote:
> >
> > This is a pretty simple patch that ought to help Darwin users understand
> > better why their bu
This is a pretty simple patch that ought to help Darwin users understand
better why their build is failing when they forget to pass the
--with-sysroot= flag to configure.
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR target/90835
* Makefile.in: improve error message when /usr/include is
missing
PING
On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 8:17 PM Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 5:42 PM Eric Gallager wrote:
> >
> > PR109836 is a request to have -Wpointer-sign enabled by default. There
> > were points of disagreement raised in the bug report, so I figured
> &
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 5:42 PM Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> PR109836 is a request to have -Wpointer-sign enabled by default. There
> were points of disagreement raised in the bug report, so I figured
> that maybe as a compromise, the warning could just be enabled by
> -Wextra,
On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 1:43 PM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
wrote:
> On 8/7/23 04:32, Arsen Arsenović via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > These are still supported in Binutils.
> >
> > ChangeLog:
> >
> > * configure: Regenerate.
> > * configure.ac: Recover tilegx/tilepro targets.
> OK. Good
On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 7:22 AM Arsen Arsenović via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> From: Alan Modra
>
> Trying to build binutils with an older gcc currently fails. Working
> around these gcc bugs is not onerous so let's fix them.
>
> include/ChangeLog:
>
> * xtensa-dynconfig.h
On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 7:19 AM Arsen Arsenović via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> This patch set, combined with a sibling patch set sent on the binutils
> and GDB MLs, bring up the shared infrastructure between the two projects
> in sync again.
>
> It largely consists of cherry-picks from
On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 8:29 PM David Malcolm via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> PR c++/110164 notes that in cases where we have a forward decl
> of a std library type such as:
>
> std::array x;
>
> we omit this diagnostic:
>
> error: aggregate ‘std::array x’ has incomplete type and cannot be
> defined
On Sat, Jun 10, 2023 at 6:38 AM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> The following patch is an attempt to implement the C23 stdckdint.h
> header on top of our GNU extension - __builtin_{add,sub,mul}_overflow
> builtins.
>
> I have looked at gnulib stdckdint.h and they are full of
PR109836 is a request to have -Wpointer-sign enabled by default. There
were points of disagreement raised in the bug report, so I figured
that maybe as a compromise, the warning could just be enabled by
-Wextra, as well (I have in fact seen some projects that enable
-Wextra but not -Wall). This
On 3/4/23, Janne Blomqvist via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 11:31 PM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Fortran
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Mere cosmetics.
>>
>> - if (foo != NULL)
>> free (foo);
>>
>> With the caveat that coccinelle ruins replacement whitespace or i'm
>> uneducated
I tried turning -Wnarrowing back on earlier this year, but
unfortunately it didn't work due to triggering a bunch of new errors.
This patch silences at least some of them, but there will still be
more left even after applying it. (When compiling with clang,
technically the warning flag is
On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 12:30 AM Sandra Loosemore
wrote:
>
> On 12/1/22 20:29, Eric Gallager via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > A pretty simple patch; borrowed from Andrew Pinski on bugzilla:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59447
> > Tested by doing `./conf
A pretty simple patch; borrowed from Andrew Pinski on bugzilla:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59447
Tested by doing `./configure --help` in the gcc subdirectory and
noting that the "(or later)" made it into the output. OK for trunk?
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR bootstrap/59447
*
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 7:09 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> PR sanitizer/107298
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * doc/invoke.texi: Document sanitizers can trigger warnings.
> ---
> gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 4
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 5:03 PM Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>
> This is implicitly mentioned in the docs, but there were some questions
> in a recent patch. This makes it more exlicit that -falign-functions is
> meant to be ignored under -Os.
>
> gcc/doc/ChangeLog
>
> * invoke.texi
On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 11:22 AM Tom de Vries via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Currently, we cannot build gdb without makeinfo installed.
>
> It would be convenient to work around this by using the configure flag
> MAKEINFO=/usr/bin/true or some such, but that doesn't work because top-level
>
On Tue, Aug 2, 2022 at 11:33 PM Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> On Aug 2, 2022, Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 2, 2022 at 1:24 AM Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> >> -elif test -x as$build_exeext; then
> >> +elif test -x as$build_exeext \
> >
On Tue, Aug 2, 2022 at 1:24 AM Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> Hello, Eric,
>
> Thanks for looking into this.
>
> On Aug 1, 2022, Eric Gallager via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
>
> >> This just reassigns the value that was retrieved a couple of lines
> >> above fro
On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 3:54 AM Andreas Schwab wrote:
>
> On Jul 31 2022, Eric Gallager via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > It just makes the configure script respect the --with-build-time-tools
> > flag.
>
> Why does it make any difference?
>
See the original bug report
Hi, there's been a patch sitting in bug 43301 for over a decade that I
think still makes sense to apply, so I rebased it against current
trunk and found that it still applies. It just makes the configure
script respect the --with-build-time-tools flag. OK to commit?
ChangeLog:
PR
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 2:07 AM Xi Ruoyao via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> egrep has been deprecated in favor of grep -E for a long time, and the
> next GNU grep release (3.8 or 4.0) will print a warning if egrep is used.
> Unfortunately, old hosts with non-GNU grep may lack the support for -E
>
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 2:10 AM Xi Ruoyao via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> egrep/fgrep has been deprecated in favor of grep -E/-F for a long time,
> and the next grep release (3.8 or 4.0) will print a warning if egrep or
> fgrep is used. Stop using egrep and fgrep so we won't see the warning.
>
> But,
Hi, I'd like to ping this patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-June/596654.html
(cc-ing the build machinery maintainers listed in MAINTAINERS this time)
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 3:51 PM Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> So, in investigating PR target/34422, I discovered that t
On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 3:37 PM Vit Kabele wrote:
>
> When the compiler warns about padding struct to alignment boundary, it
> now also informs the user about the size of the alignment that needs to
> be added to get rid of the warning.
Hi, thanks for taking the time to improve -Wpadded; I have
So, in investigating PR target/34422, I discovered that the gcc
subdirectory's configure script had an instance of AC_ARG_ENABLE with
3rd and 4th its arguments reversed: the one where it warns that the
--enable-fixed-point flag is being ignored is the one where that flag
hasn't even been passed in
On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 7:02 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 5:54 PM Eric Gallager via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > So, I'm working on fixing PR bootstrap/44425, and have this patch to
> > have the top-level configure script check in the value pas
On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 7:22 AM Xi Ruoyao wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2022-06-09 at 16:04 -0400, Eric Gallager via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > Hi, I'd like to ping this patch:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-June/596126.html
> > (cc-ing the build machinery maintaine
Hi, I'd like to ping this patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-June/596126.html
(cc-ing the build machinery maintainers listed in MAINTAINERS this time)
On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 11:53 AM Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> So, I'm working on fixing PR bootstrap/44425, and have this
So, I'm working on fixing PR bootstrap/44425, and have this patch to
have the top-level configure script check in the value passed to
`--prefix=` when looking for gmp/mpfr/mpc. It "works" (in that
configuring with just `--prefix=` and none of
`--with-gmp=`/`--with-mpfr=`/`--with-mpc=` now works
On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 2:30 PM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
wrote:
> On 5/24/2022 11:32 AM, Eric Gallager via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > This patch adds entries for the c++tools, gotools, libbacktrace,
> > libcc1, libcody, liboffloadmic, and libsanitizer directories into the
> > li
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 3:57 PM Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On 5/27/22 15:33, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches writes:
> >> diff --git a/gcc/gimple-range-side-effect.cc
> >> b/gcc/gimple-range-side-effect.cc
> >> index 2c8c77dc569..548e4bea313 100644
> >> ---
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 3:17 AM Simon Sobisch via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi fellow hackers,
>
> first of all: I'm not sure if this is the correct mailing list for this
> question, but I did not found a separate one and
> gnu.org/software/libiberty redirects to
>
On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 3:32 PM David Malcolm via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> With C++11 we can add "final" and "override" to the decls of vfuncs
> in derived classes, which documents to both human and automated readers
> of the code that a decl is intended to override a vfunc in a base class,
> and
This patch adds entries for the c++tools, gotools, libbacktrace,
libcc1, libcody, liboffloadmic, and libsanitizer directories into the
list of toplevel source directories in sourcebuild.texi. I also
removed the entry for boehm-gc (which is no longer in-tree), and fixed
the alphabetization for
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 9:27 AM David Seifert via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2022-03-14 at 18:38 +0100, David Seifert wrote:
> > Use AC_CACHE_CHECK to store the result of the header check for
> > systemtap's "sys/sdt.h", which is similar in spirit to libstdc++'s
> > AC_CACHE_CHECK(...,
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 10:13 AM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 09:26:57AM -0400, Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > Thanks for the patch.
> >
> > The new configure option needs documenting in doc/install.texi, and
> > configure
> > needs to be
On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 8:42 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> Ready to be installed?
>
> Thanks,
> Martin
>
> ---
> htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html
> index 6c5b2a37..f7f6866d 100644
> ---
On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 2:26 PM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 5/5/22 14:24, Richard Biener wrote:
> > Hmm, but we support C++11 host compilers that are not GCC but
> > may claim to be, with GCC_VERSION 4.2.x for example. Are we sure
> > all those liars implement what we guard with the version
On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 9:53 AM David Malcolm via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2022-05-05 at 14:16 +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> > Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression
> > tests.
> >
> > Ready to be installed?
>
> I looked over the changes to:
>
> gcc/analyzer/*.cc
>
On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 5:37 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> As noticed by Alan, we can stop using the non-ANSI C specific macro (PTR).
> Let's removed its usafe in libiberty.
>
> Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests.
>
> Ready to be installed?
> Thanks,
>
On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 8:27 AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 2:19 PM Martin Liška wrote:
> >
> > Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests.
> >
> > Ready to be installed?
> > Thanks,
> > Martin
> >
> > include/ChangeLog:
> >
> >
On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 9:28 AM David Malcolm via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Further jit doc fixes, which fix links to
> gcc_jit_function_type_get_param_type and gcc_jit_struct_get_field.
>
> I also regenerated libgccjit.texi (not included in the diff below).
>
> Tested with "make html" and with a
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 3:55 PM Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Fri, 11 Mar 2022, Krishna Narayanan via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> > The following is a patch for the PR92209,which gives a warning when
> > the function prototype does not specify its argument type.In this
> > patch there has been
On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 3:05 PM David Seifert via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> * `-Werror` can cause issues when a more recent version of GCC compiles
> an older version:
> - https://bugs.gentoo.org/229059
> - https://bugs.gentoo.org/475350
> - https://bugs.gentoo.org/667104
> ---
>
On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 8:18 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 1/19/22 13:49, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 19 2022, Martin Liška wrote:
> >> On 10/18/21 11:01, Martin Liška wrote:
> >>> On 10/12/21 10:59, Martin Liška wrote:
> Hello.
>
> There's a complete patch
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 6:33 PM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/13/2021 5:27 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > This is missing an invoke.texi update for the new option.
> And that update should probably note that -Oz turns on O2. OK with that
> change.
>
> jeff
A news entry for the new
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 5:59 PM Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> This fixes
>
> gcc/cp/parser.c:4618:41: warning: narrowing conversion of '(char)(*(str +
> ((sizetype)i)))' from 'char' to 'unsigned char' [-Wnarrowing]
> 4618 | unsigned char s[3] = { '\'', str[i], '\'' };
> |
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 11:11 AM Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
> ---
> gcc/config.gcc | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config.gcc b/gcc/config.gcc
> index c8824367b13..fe93a72a16c 100644
> --- a/gcc/config.gcc
> +++ b/gcc/config.gcc
> @@ -252,6 +252,7 @@ case ${target} in
>
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 1:33 PM Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 1:17 PM Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > On 12/12/21 3:13 AM, Andrea Monaco via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello.
> > >
> > >
> > >
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 1:17 PM Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On 12/12/21 3:13 AM, Andrea Monaco via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >
> > Hello.
> >
> >
> > I propose to make that message more verbose. It sure would have helped
> > me once. You don't always have a Web search available :)
>
>
On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 6:10 PM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/7/2021 2:55 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > The following patch adds support for relocation of the PCH blob on PCH
> > restore if we don't manage to get the preferred map slot for it.
> > The GTY stuff knows
On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 10:54 AM Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021, Eric Gallager wrote:
> > This next patch does more than just removing old stuff: it adds an
> > extra sentence to describe a shell command used to generate a list, so
> > to
Hi, I'd like to ping this patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-November/585294.html
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 2:11 AM Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 6:27 PM Eric Gallager wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 8:14 AM Eric Gallager wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 9:48 AM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/28/2021 6:34 PM, Eric Gallager via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > The attached patch allows users to specify a path to their `etags`
> > executable for use when doing `make tags`, which is meant to close PR
The attached patch allows users to specify a path to their `etags`
executable for use when doing `make tags`, which is meant to close PR
other/103021: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103021
I based this patch off of this one from upstream automake:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 10:22 AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> This resurrects -Wunreachable-code and implements a warning for
> trivially unreachable code as of CFG construction. Most problematic
> with this is the C/C++ frontend added 'return 0;' stmt in main
> which the patch
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 6:27 PM Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 8:14 AM Eric Gallager wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 1:48 AM Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> > >
> > > Cool, thank you!
> > >
> > > Please feel free to comm
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 8:14 AM Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 1:48 AM Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> >
> > Cool, thank you!
> >
> > Please feel free to commit patches like this without asking for
> > approval (though I'm happy to review and approv
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 1:48 AM Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2021, Eric Gallager wrote:
> > I'd find it easier to just edit the page linked to in wwwdocs instead,
> > so I'm going to start seeing what I can do to update it. I figured I'd
> > start by removin
igured I'd start by removing the
references to Java in it, since Java has been removed. A patch to do
that is attached.
Eric Gallager
patch-beginner-projects-01.diff
Description: Binary data
On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 8:50 AM Xi Ruoyao via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> POSIX says:
>
> On some implementations, if buf is a null pointer, getcwd() may obtain
> size bytes of memory using malloc(). In this case, the pointer returned
> by getcwd() may be used as the argument in a
On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 6:20 PM Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Patch 2 in this series adds support for detecting the uses of
> dangling pointers: those to auto objects that have gone out of
> scope. Like patch 1, to minimize false positives this detection
> is very simplistic. However,
1 - 100 of 279 matches
Mail list logo
