On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 4:18 PM Xinliang David Li
wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 12:07 PM Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
>> David,
>> >
>> > The text format is documented here:
>> > https://clang.llvm.org/docs/UsersManual.html
>> > The binary format is not documented. The binary format is not
>> gua
Hi,
> Snapshot gcc-11-20210425 is now available on
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11-20210425/
> and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
>
> This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 11 git branch
> with the following options: git
On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 12:07 PM Jan Hubicka wrote:
> David,
> >
> > The text format is documented here:
> > https://clang.llvm.org/docs/UsersManual.html
> > The binary format is not documented. The binary format is not guaranteed
> to
> > be backward compatible, so sharing the same format may no
Snapshot gcc-11-20210425 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11-20210425/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 11 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
Hello:
I wonder what do you think about a patch to implement getting a pointer
to the current function. Is it a "no, under no circumstances"? Or it is
a "maybe, show us the code"?
I'll explain better what I mean: currently there is the statement
__func__ that returns a string with the name o
On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 08:21:12PM +0100, Iain Sandoe via Gcc wrote:
> William Seurer via Gcc wrote:
>
> > On 4/23/21 8:31 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
> > > Some blocker bugs were reported against the first release candidate
> > > of GCC 11.1, so there is a second release candidate for GCC 1
William Seurer via Gcc wrote:
On 4/23/21 8:31 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
Some blocker bugs were reported against the first release candidate
of GCC 11.1, so there is a second release candidate for GCC 11.1
available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11.1.0-RC-20210423/
ftp://
David,
>
> The text format is documented here:
> https://clang.llvm.org/docs/UsersManual.html
> The binary format is not documented. The binary format is not guaranteed to
> be backward compatible, so sharing the same format may not be the best way
> as changes for clang may break GCC.
>
> Since