On Fri, 20 Dec 2013, DJ Delorie wrote:
> Ok, so I've got it checking for existing types and checking the target
> for supported modes. Any other features, or is it time for a second
> patch? Should I cut out the __int128 parts yet, or do you just want
> to see the new code still?
I think a patc
Ok, so I've got it checking for existing types and checking the target
for supported modes. Any other features, or is it time for a second
patch? Should I cut out the __int128 parts yet, or do you just want
to see the new code still?
To-Do: C++ parser, C++ mangling. Still no idea what to do ab
On Fri, 20 Dec 2013, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > I think using the macros for type sizes is fine, and float / vector /
> > complex types are completely irrelevant to this (so standard_type_bitsize
> > should maybe be standard_integer_type_bitsize).
>
> Whew. Am I missing any in the previous code sni
> I think using the macros for type sizes is fine, and float / vector /
> complex types are completely irrelevant to this (so standard_type_bitsize
> should maybe be standard_integer_type_bitsize).
Whew. Am I missing any in the previous code snippet (char, short,
int, long, long long) ? Those
On Fri, 20 Dec 2013, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > This seems mostly plausible, though I don't see anything to ensure that
> > __intN does not exist at all if the size matches one of the standard C
> > types, or if the mode fails targetm.scalar_mode_supported_p.
>
> What do we check against for this?
> This seems mostly plausible, though I don't see anything to ensure that
> __intN does not exist at all if the size matches one of the standard C
> types, or if the mode fails targetm.scalar_mode_supported_p.
What do we check against for this? Is there some table of standard
types we can read
==
GNU Tools Cauldron 2014
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/cauldron2014
Call for Abstracts and Participation
18-20 July 2014
Cambridge, England
=
Hey all, this thread started on the libstdc++ list where I asked a
couple of questions about patching std::string for C++11 compliance. I
have figured how to do that and it yields a library that only works in
the C++11 mode. This is not an issue here as we deploy a versioned
runtime into a spec
Stop banning this sender. Since we want to clean up spam in GCC mailing list.
If you want to restore your Mozilla Bugzilla account (seotaewong40),
you want to contact Mozilla Bugzilla.
You want to add posting permissions to wine-devel mailing list for
seotaewong40 gmail com mail address.
Status
==
The trunk remains in Stage 3 until the end of January at which
point we enter regression-and-doc-fixes-only mode.
Quality is improving slowly as we are still getting a lot of
new regressions, both due to increased testing and still merging
a lot of code (please slow down and consid
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013, DJ Delorie wrote:
> Where is the right place to set the array of "this __intN mode is
> enabled" flags? I initially set it in tree.c where __int128 is set
> up, but that happens *after* c_parse_init() needs the flag to set up
> the RID_* keywords for them.
Maybe immediately
11 matches
Mail list logo
