On Sun, 26 Nov 2023 at 01:49, Weslley da Silva Pereira
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> Is there a way I can see my patch merged (when it gets merged)?
> Particularly, I want to have a link for the commit. I would like to add this 
> as "impact on third party software" for the software 
> https://github.com/tlapack/tlapack.


Sorry that it took so long, but this has now been committed to trunk for GCC 16.

I didn't commit the testcase you provided, because it uses Eigen so
can't be used in the GCC testsuite. We would need a standalone test.
Anyway, the code is in now, at last.


>
> Thanks,
>   Weslley
>
> On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 3:44 AM Jonathan Wakely <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 at 17:47, Weslley da Silva Pereira
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Jonathan,
>> >
>> > I am sorry for the delay. The mailing lists [email protected] and 
>> > [email protected] have just too many emails, so your email got lost. 
>> > I hope my changes still make sense to be included in GCC. Please, find my 
>> > comments below.
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks for the updated patch, test etc. Yes, I think this still makes
>> sense and I'll take care of committing it.
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 3:57 PM Jonathan Wakely <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 at 22:25, Weslley da Silva Pereira via Libstdc++ 
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Dear all,
>> >>>
>> >>> Here follows a patch that removes implicit type casts in std::complex.
>> >>>
>> >>> *Description:* The current implementation of `complex<_Tp>` assumes that
>> >>> `int, double, long double` are explicitly convertible to `_Tp`. Moreover,
>> >>> it also assumes that:
>> >>>
>> >>> 1. `int` is implicitly convertible to `_Tp`, e.g., when using
>> >>> `complex<_Tp>(1)`.
>> >>> 2. `long double` can be attributed to a `_Tp` variable, e.g., when using
>> >>> `const _Tp __pi_2 = 1.5707963267948966192313216916397514L`.
>> >>>
>> >>> This patch transforms the implicit casts (1) and (2) into explicit type
>> >>> casts. As a result, `std::complex` is now able to support more types. One
>> >>> example is the type `Eigen::Half` from
>> >>> https://eigen.tuxfamily.org/dox-devel/Half_8h_source.html which does not
>> >>> implement implicit type conversions.
>> >>>
>> >>> *ChangeLog:*
>> >>> libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
>> >>>
>> >>>         * include/std/complex:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thank you for the patch. Now that we're in developement stage 1 for GCC 
>> >> 14, it's time to consider it.
>> >>
>> >> You're missing a proper changelog entry, I suggest:
>> >>
>> >>        * include/std/complex (polar, __complex_sqrt)
>> >>        (__complex_pow_unsigned, pow, __complex_acos): Replace implicit
>> >>        conversions from int and long double to value_type.
>> >
>> >
>> > I agree with your proposal for the changelog.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> You're also missing either a copyright assignment on file with the FSF 
>> >> (unless you've completed that paperwork?), or a DCO sign-off. Please see 
>> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html#legal and 
>> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/dco.html for more details.
>> >
>> >
>> > Here is my DCO sign-off:
>> >
>> > Copyright:
>> > Signed-off-by: Weslley da Silva Pereira <[email protected]>
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> *Patch:* fix_complex.diff. (Also at
>> >>> https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/pull/84)
>> >>>
>> >>> *OBS:* I didn't find a good reason for adding new tests or test results
>> >>> here since this is really a small upgrade (in my view) to std::complex.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I don't agree. The purpose of this is to support std::complex<Foo> for a 
>> >> type Foo without implicit conversions (which isn't required by the 
>> >> standard btw, only the floating-point types are required to work, but we 
>> >> can support others as an extension). Without tests, we don't know if that 
>> >> goal has been met, and we don't know if the goal continues to be met in 
>> >> future versions. A test would ensure that we don't accidentally 
>> >> re-introduce code requiring implicit conversions.
>> >>
>> >> With a suitable test, I think this patch will be OK for GCC 14.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks again for contributing.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > Tests:
>> > See the attached file `test_complex_eigenhalf.cpp`
>> >
>> > Test results:
>> > - When using x86-64 GCC (trunk), I obtained compilation errors as shown in 
>> > the attached text file. Live example at: https://godbolt.org/z/oa9M34h8P.
>> > - I observed no errors after applying the suggested patch on my machine.
>> > - I tried it with the flag `-Wall`. No warnings were shown.
>> > - My machine configuration and my GCC build information are displayed in 
>> > the file `config.log` generated by the configuration step of GCC.
>> >
>> > Let me know if I need to do anything else.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >   Weslley
>> >
>> > --
>> > Weslley S. Pereira
>>
>
>
> --
> Weslley S. Pereira

Reply via email to