Hi Pau!
On 2025-03-19T21:53:22-0400, Pau Sum via Gcc wrote:
> Hey GCC Community,
Welcome to GCC!
> I am interested in contributing to the "Enhance OpenACC Support" project for
> Google Summer of Code 2025.
Thanks for your interest!
I saw you also briefly discussed on GCC IRC. I'm logged in,
> You can see what -fuse-linker-plugin says, what gcc/auto-host.h contains
> for HAVE_LTO_PLUGIN. I don't know whether the BFD linker (or mold)
> supports linker plugins on windows. I do know that libiberty simple-object
> does not support PE, that is, at _least_ (DWARF) debuginfo will be subpar.
Snapshot gcc-13-20250404 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13-20250404/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 13 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
Hello,
and sorry for a somewhat late reply.
On Fri, Mar 28 2025, Ansh Jaiswar via Gcc wrote:
> Dear GCC Developers,
>
> I am Ansh Jaiswar , a second-year Computer Science student interested in
> compilers and systems programming. I have experience with C/C++ and basic
> knowledge of Rust.
>
> I
Here is my (potentially naive) understanding of how we may implement bind() and
device_type (probably in a follow-up email) in GCC. These are primary parts of
the project that I am interested in. I would be open to exploring the cache
directive as well though would like to start with a limited s
Hello!
My name is Carter. I’m looking to become active in the GCC community. I would
of course love to be funded through GSoC (and will most definitely be
submitting a formal proposal) but will contribute regardless of this. I’m
interesting in the OpenACC parts of the posted projects, so helpfu
On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 07:21:47AM +0300, Eldar Kusdavletov wrote:
> Thanks. I’ve submitted a more concrete version of the proposal — attaching it
> here.
>
> I’ve taken a brief look at Clang’s implementation, but the idea isn’t to
> follow
> it exactly — rather, to provide a similar kind of trac
On 23/03/2025 20:26, Toon Moene wrote:
> I had the following message when sending test results to gcc-testresults
> *starting* today (3 times):
>
> Note that the message is generated by *my* exim4 "mail delivery software"
> (Debian Testing) - it is not the *receiving* side that thinks the lines
Hi Arijit, Andrew!
Arijit, welcome to GCC!
On 2025-03-11T03:26:44+0530, Arijit Kumar Das via Gcc wrote:
> Thank you for the detailed response! This gives me a much clearer picture
> of how things work.
>
> Regarding the two possible approaches:
>
>- I personally find *Option A (self-containe
On Thursday, April 3rd, 2025 at 10:45 PM, Andi Kleen
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 07:21:47AM +0300, Eldar Kusdavletov wrote:
>
> > Thanks. I’ve submitted a more concrete version of the proposal — attaching
> > it
> > here.
> >
> > I’ve taken a brief look at Clang’s implementation, b
On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 1:20 PM Julian Waters via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I've been trying to chase down an issue that's been driving me insane
> for a while now. It has to do with the flatten attribute being
> combined with LTO. I've heard that flatten and LTO are a match made in
> hell (Someo
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 02 2025, Leul Abiy via Gcc wrote:
> Dear Sir/Madam,
>
> I would like to work on the rust frontend for this summer.
We are delighted you found contributing to GCC interesting.
> I am trying to
> break down all the steps for the first project in the rust frontend. So far
> I plan o
The COBOL compiler has this routine:
void
gg_exit(tree exit_code)
{
tree the_call =
build_call_expr_loc(location_from_lineno(),
builtin_decl_explicit (BUILT_IN_EXIT),
1,
exit_code);
gg_append_statement(the_c
Thank you. I will implement that hook. And I'll see about that data
definition.
I could try to explain how RETURN-CODE became __gg___11_return_code6, and
why I defined it as unsigned char __gg__data_return_code[2] = {0,0}; But I
have a rule that I try to follow, which is that when I am starti
On Fri, Apr 4, 2025 at 3:35 PM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2025 at 3:06 PM Robert Dubner wrote:
> >
> > This program exhibits the behavior when compiled with -O2, -O3 and -OS
> >
> > PROGRAM-ID. PROG.
> > PROCEDUREDIVISION.
> > MOVE 1 TO RETURN-CO
On Fri, Apr 4, 2025 at 3:06 PM Robert Dubner wrote:
>
> This program exhibits the behavior when compiled with -O2, -O3 and -OS
>
> PROGRAM-ID. PROG.
> PROCEDUREDIVISION.
> MOVE 1 TO RETURN-CODE
> STOP RUN.
Hmm, the call to exit() is still in the progra
This program exhibits the behavior when compiled with -O2, -O3 and -OS
PROGRAM-ID. PROG.
PROCEDUREDIVISION.
MOVE 1 TO RETURN-CODE
STOP RUN.
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Biener
> Sent: Friday, April 4, 2025 03:02
> To: Robert Dubner
>
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for your detailed response! I've updated the proposal based on the
feedback. Please kindly check it out. Thanks a lot!
Project Goals and Tasks
GCC currently only partially supports the features specified in OpenACC
2.6. This project aims to enhance GCC's OpenACC support in the
On Fri, Apr 4, 2025 at 3:37 AM Krister Walfridsson
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 3 Apr 2025, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 2:23 AM Krister Walfridsson via Gcc
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> I have more questions about GIMPLE memory semantics for smtgcc.
> >>
> >> As before, each section starts wi
19 matches
Mail list logo
