On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 03:11:05PM -0700, Jerry DeLisle wrote:
> Pushed:
>
> To git+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git
> 651684b462f..01685676a93 master -> master
>
> Author: Steve Kargl
> Date: Sat Mar 27 15:02:16 2021 -0700
>
> fortran: Fix off-by-one in buffer sizes.
>
>
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 23:14:41 +
Patrick McGehearty via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Changes in Version 9 since Version 8:
>
> Revised code to meet gcc coding standards in all files, especially
> with respect to adding spaces around operations and removing
> excess () in #define macro
Pushed:
To git+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git
651684b462f..01685676a93 master -> master
Author: Steve Kargl
Date: Sat Mar 27 15:02:16 2021 -0700
fortran: Fix off-by-one in buffer sizes.
gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
* misc.c (gfc_typename): Fix off-by-one in buffer sizes.
On 26/03/21 21:41 +0100, François Dumont via Libstdc++ wrote:
I review the allocator aware move constructors of _GLIBCXX_DEBUG containers.
I think the recently added __gnu_debug basic_string one is also
missing the rvalue reference, no ?
You mean is_nothrow_constructible instead
of
Hi!
extract_muldiv{,_1} is apparently only prepared to handle scalar integer
operations, the callers ensure it by only calling it if the divisor or
one of the multiplicands is INTEGER_CST and because neither multiplication
nor division nor modulo are really supported e.g. for pointer types,
On 26/03/21 02:50 -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
The calibration loop I've recently added to the libstdc++
future/members/poll.cc tests could still select iteration counts that
might yield zero-time measurements for the wait_for when ready loop.
Waiting for a future that has already had a value
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 11:27 PM Xionghu Luo wrote:
>
> From: "luo...@cn.ibm.com"
>
> 32bit and P7 VSX could also benefit a lot from the variable vec_insert
> implementation with shift/insert/shift back method.
>
> Tested pass on P7BE/P8BE/P8LE{-m32,m64} and P9LE{m64}.
I successfully
* Michael Meissner via Gcc-patches:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 11:12:54PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> This change appears to have broken builds for powerpc in a configuration
>> that bootstraps a cross toolchain starting with a GCC build with no libc
>> available.
>>
>> Specifically, such a
