On Tue, 22 Apr 2025, 14:17 Guinevere Larsen, wrote:
>
> On 4/22/25 10:06 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 at 13:36, Guinevere Larsen via Gcc
> > wrote:
> >> On 4/21/25 12:59 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >>> Hi hack
On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 at 13:36, Guinevere Larsen via Gcc wrote:
>
> On 4/21/25 12:59 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > Hi hackers,
> >
> > TLDR; When using https://patchwork.sourceware.org or Bunsen
> > https://builder.sourceware.org/testruns/ you might now have to enable
> > javascript. This should not
On Fri, 18 Apr 2025, 20:14 Siva Sai Manchem via Gcc,
wrote:
> Hi Team,
>
> I hope you're doing well.
>
> We wanted to bring to your attention that one of our customers, who is
> utilizing Zscaler services, is currently facing difficulties accessing your
> website. Upon reviewing the issue, we fou
On Mon, 14 Apr 2025 at 14:47, Julian Waters wrote:
>
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> Thanks for the suggestion, it seems promising. I switched out the
> error attribute for the warning attribute at first, since they should
> be equivalent except warning just warns instead of erroring. Thi
On Mon, 14 Apr 2025 at 11:53, Julian Waters wrote:
>
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> Yep, unfortunately #pragma GCC poison is far too restrictive, it
> doesn't check if it is a function call to that particular banned
> function, it restricts any and all use of that identifier in the code
On Mon, 14 Apr 2025 at 12:57, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2025 at 11:53, Julian Waters wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jonathan,
> >
> > Yep, unfortunately #pragma GCC poison is far too restrictive, it
> > doesn't check if it is a function call to that par
On Mon, 14 Apr 2025 at 10:11, Julian Waters via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> A codebase I'm working with has decided that poisoning certain
> standard library functions is necessary, as it explicitly does not use
> those functions unless absolutely necessary for its own reasons (This
> was not my de
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 at 22:46, Martin Jambor wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> and sorry for a delayed reply.
>
> On Sat, Mar 08 2025, Gwen Fu wrote:
> > Good Afternoon Mr.Jambor!
> > Here are my questions:
> > 1.I am trying to do fix some easy bugs for participate in our community .
> > And a developer told m
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025, 22:16 Mark Wielaard, wrote:
> Hi Harald,
>
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2025 at 10:57:08PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
> > I have never tried any complex setups besides simple ssh tunnels
> > with git in the past, so believe this does not apply.
> >
> > Doing even a simple ssh -Tvv to g
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 at 21:30, Harald Anlauf via Gcc wrote:
> since I am experiencing extreme (temporary) performance problems
> again with a recently increased frequency and only during evening
> hours in Europe, I am asking if this is still the same cause.
>
> Today I've been waiting for hours fo
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 at 09:09, Gwen Fu wrote:
>
> Thank you! After replacing the outdated centOS operating system and compiling
> for eight hours（That's carzy to me）, I have successfully installed and built
> gcc😂😂
Like it says at https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/InstallingGCC "If your
computer has mult
On Sat, 8 Mar 2025, 08:43 LIU Hao via Gcc, wrote:
> 在 2025-3-8 15:20, Gwen Fu 写道:
> > OS : CentOS7
> > The official documentation doesn't mention any installation requirement
> about lib{isl , zstd} .
>
> [please reply to all.]
>
But not on this list, it belongs on gcc-help
> They are mention
Also please use the gcc-help list for questions like this.
On Sat, 8 Mar 2025, 08:24 Jonathan Wakely, wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 8 Mar 2025, 06:34 Gwen Fu via Gcc, wrote:
>
>> After I finished ../gcc/configure --prefix=$HOME/GCC-4.6.2
>> --enable-languages=c,c++,fortra
On Sat, 8 Mar 2025, 06:34 Gwen Fu via Gcc, wrote:
> After I finished ../gcc/configure --prefix=$HOME/GCC-4.6.2
> --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran --disable-multilib , I executed "make -j
> 2" . However , error occurred !
>
I assume you copied this from https://GCC.gnu.org/wiki/InstallingGCC
On Sat, 8 Mar 2025, 06:55 LIU Hao via Gcc, wrote:
> 在 2025-3-8 14:33, Gwen Fu via Gcc 写道:
> > After I finished ../gcc/configure --prefix=$HOME/GCC-4.6.2
> > --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran --disable-multilib , I executed "make -j
> > 2" . However , error occurred !
> >
>
> What system are you
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 at 15:09, Gwen Fu via Gcc wrote:
>
> Dear GCC Community,
>
> I have just joined the GCC community and am currently learning about the
> framework and essential knowledge related to the GCC compiler. I have
> cloned the GCC source code to my virtual machine, but I find the codeba
On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 at 14:05, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
wrote:
>
> On 05/03/2025 13:47, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 at 13:37, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 05/03/2025 13:10, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> >>&g
On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 at 13:37, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
wrote:
>
> On 05/03/2025 13:10, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> > While onboarding somebody today we noticed an error in the
> > customization script if you use a non-default value for the local
> > prefix.
> >
While onboarding somebody today we noticed an error in the
customization script if you use a non-default value for the local
prefix.
I reproduced it with bash -x to show where it happens. In the output
below I entered "jw" as the local prefix, instead of the default "me":
+ echo 'Setting up track
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 at 05:01, Jerry D via Gcc wrote:
>
> Does anyone know what this is about?
>
> $ git gcc-verify
> Checking 918fcaf0cbf833063c45805ef893cfa2c9ebc875: OK
N.B. it works fine, the line above is the expected output. It just
lets you know that something was ignored in the asynchronou
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 at 22:47, Frederick Virchanza Gotham via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Tobias wrote:
>
> >>Am Mi., 12. Feb. 2025 um 10:52 Uhr schrieb Frederick Virchanza Gotham:
> >> This would be an alternative to modules (seeing as how modules might
> >> become deprecated in the future).
>
> >Huch? Where d
On Sun, 9 Feb 2025 at 21:15, Nicholas Vinson via Gcc wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2/9/25 10:38, саша савельев wrote:
> >
> > To whom it may concern
> >
> >
> > Me and my classmates found strange behaviour of «()» (in C++) on IT lesson,
> > but our teacher couldn’t anwer us why it works in this way. After, w
On Sun, 9 Feb 2025, 09:08 Thomas Koenig via Gcc, wrote:
> Hello world,
>
> looking at a few Fortran bug reports, I found some cases where
> it was not clear if the program in question was standard-conforming
> or not. I would propose to add a keyword for that, tentatively
> called "interp".
>
>
On Sun, 9 Feb 2025, 00:24 Frederick Virchanza Gotham via Gcc, <
gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> As the GNU compiler make its way through a translation unit, more and
> more classes get declared. So for each translation unit, the compiler
> maintains a list of what types it has seen so far.
>
> Could som
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 at 15:16, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:43, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > All these directories should have been removed two years ago:
> >
> > Agreed. Thank y
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:43, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > All these directories should have been removed two years ago:
>
> Agreed. Thank you for digging into this and raising it, Jonathan!
>
> > $ ls -1 -d htdocs/o
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 at 11:06, Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
>
> Am 03.02.25 um 11:02 schrieb Mark Wielaard:
> > The problem is, as always spam... Do you find the current limit (400K)
> > restricts you often from fast posting to the gcc-patches list?
>
> It happens every now and then, when the patche
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 at 10:49, Basile Starynkevitch
wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I'm in the process of writing my own C compiler for educational purposes.
>
>
> Then look also into https://frama-c.com/ and
> https://github.com/bstarynk/bismon
> and https://nwcc.sourceforge.net/ and https://bellard.org/tcc/
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 at 10:27, Marc Poulhiès wrote:
>
> I usually look at the queue a few times a day (working day)... So at least in
> my case, I may not be very active during the weekends (even less so this
> weekend)...
> As for unlocking too-big patches, I happen to accept the ones that are
>
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025, 18:10 Thomas Koenig via Gcc, wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I sent https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2025-February/061670.html
> to gcc-patches also, as normal, but got back an e-mail that it
> was too large. and that a moderator would look at it.
>
> Maybe the limits can be increased a
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 at 18:56, Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 7:37 AM The Cuthour via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > I understand the concerns about the C++ standard requiring constant
> > expressions to be known during compilation. However, my proposal for
> > link-time evaluatio
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 at 13:24, noname noname via Gcc wrote:
>
> hello, I'm a regular user of Fedora 41 Workstation. I usually install all
> my apps through one command which has tons of packages to it. So I'm not
> sure which one of them pulled gcc as a dependency. But either way. While
> installin
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 at 08:28, The Cuthour wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2025/01/31 17:05, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 31 Jan 2025, 06:50 The Cuthour via Gcc, > <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Suppose we have the fo
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025, 06:50 The Cuthour via Gcc, wrote:
>
> Suppose we have the following two classes:
>
> === Vec.h ===
> class Vec {
> int x, y, z;
> };
> === end Vec.h ===
>
> === Pix.h ===
> class Pix: Vec {
> int r, g, b;
> };
> === end Pix.h ===
>
> If we add or remove a member var
On Thu, 30 Jan 2025, 09:00 Dmitry Antipov, wrote:
> With (probably) -Wmaybe-uninitialized and/or -Wextra, shouldn't the
> compiler emit
> warning about possibly uninitialized 'y' passed to 'ddd()' in the example
> below?
>
Warnings are always going to be somewhat unreliable. You need a proper
st
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025, 03:27 Chris Clayton via Gcc, wrote:
> Hi
>
> Commit 017c45fa2a4da40893f0aacd96164f04c78cb245 bumped BASE-VER to 15.0.1,
> but the commit message says it's been bumped
> to 14.0.1. I guess it will obvious to readers that it's a typo, but want
> to fix it.44.
>
> Chris
>
Git c
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025, 23:27 Lee Brown via Gcc, wrote:
> In my view it is a bug. It gives an error that it can't find
> std::throw, but that is gcc's problem, not the problem according to
> the standard. According to the standard, the problem is that ::operator
> new(size_t, nothrow_t) has no
On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 20:36, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
>
>
>
> Am 15.01.25 um 20:41 schrieb Jonathan Wakely:
> > On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 17:17, Georg-Johann Lay via Gcc
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> What's the recommended way to built-in define types like _
On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 20:57, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 09:36:51PM +0100, Georg-Johann Lay via Gcc wrote:
> > > This pedwarn is correct, so I'm not sure why it's a problem. If you
> > > don't want warnings about non-standard extensions, don't use
> > > -pedantic-errors.
> >
On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 17:17, Georg-Johann Lay via Gcc wrote:
>
> What's the recommended way to built-in define types like __uint24 ?
>
> Since v4.8, the avr backend has:
>
> avr-modes.def:
>FRACTIONAL_INT_MODE (PSI, 24, 3);
>
> avr.cc:
>tree int24_type = make_signed_type (GET_MODE_BITSIZ
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 at 12:17, Ben Boeckel via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 01:27:17 +, Hao Liu via Gcc wrote:
> > I'm new to GCC community, and try to contribute some patches.
> > I am having trouble setting git send-email with Outlook on Linux. Does
> > anyone have any successful ex
N.B. your question belongs on the gcc-help list, or a general C programming
forum. This mailing list is for discussing development of GCC, and the
alignment is decided by the platform ABI not by GCC, so the question
doesn't belong here.
On Tue, 7 Jan 2025, 07:42 Jonathan Wakely, wrote:
>
On Tue, 7 Jan 2025, 03:09 M Chhapgar via Gcc, wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am learning about memory alignment and noticed that on my x86-64 machine
> with GCC 14, a `complex double` has a size of 16 bytes, but an alignment of
> only 8 bytes. I am curious as to why this is.
Because it's roughly equival
On Sat, 28 Dec 2024, 16:17 Jonathan Wakely, wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 28 Dec 2024, 15:26 Paul Smith via Gcc, wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 2024-12-28 at 09:00 -0600, Paul Markfort via Gcc wrote:
>> > I realize that C is not a line oriented language and usually
>> >
On Sat, 28 Dec 2024, 15:26 Paul Smith via Gcc, wrote:
> On Sat, 2024-12-28 at 09:00 -0600, Paul Markfort via Gcc wrote:
> > I realize that C is not a line oriented language and usually
> > completely ignores line termination characters (so yes this is
> > probably not a simple thing to do).
>
> Y
On Sat, 30 Nov 2024 at 10:10, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 30, 2024 at 09:54:02AM +, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> > On Sat, 30 Nov 2024, 09:01 David H. Lynch Jr. via Gcc,
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Is it possible to build gcc 13 with gcc 14 ?
> >
On Sat, 30 Nov 2024, 09:54 Jonathan Wakely, wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 30 Nov 2024, 09:01 David H. Lynch Jr. via Gcc,
> wrote:
>
>> Is it possible to build gcc 13 with gcc 14 ?
>>
>
> Yes
>
>
>> My system updated to gcc 14 and I am doing some private
On Sat, 30 Nov 2024, 09:01 David H. Lynch Jr. via Gcc,
wrote:
> Is it possible to build gcc 13 with gcc 14 ?
>
Yes
> My system updated to gcc 14 and I am doing some private development for
> hardware stesting of a new memory addressing paradigm using the GCC 13
> code base.
> Now I can't compi
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:42, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > All these directories should have been removed two years ago:
>
> Agreed. Thank you for digging into this and raising it, Jonathan!
>
> > $ ls -1 -d htdocs/o
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:22, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:14, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >
> > Hi Gerald,
> >
> > The HTML pages from Martin Liska's Sphinx doc experiment are still
> > online, and Google thinks they are the cano
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:14, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> Hi Gerald,
>
> The HTML pages from Martin Liska's Sphinx doc experiment are still
> online, and Google thinks they are the canonical locatiosn for GCC
> docs.
> e.g. try
> https://www.google.com/search?c
Hi Gerald,
The HTML pages from Martin Liska's Sphinx doc experiment are still
online, and Google thinks they are the canonical locatiosn for GCC
docs.
e.g. try
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=%22inline+function+is+as+fast+as+a+macro%22++gcc
The only hit from gcc.gnu.org is a s
On Tue, 12 Nov 2024 at 03:19, 王皓冉 via Gcc wrote:
>
> Dear GCC
>
> I am running docker to build a GCC image for C++ compile. But the image
> call the ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gcc, may I know the reason for this?
Building GCC does not require network access, but maybe you're using
somebody else's scri
On Sun, 10 Nov 2024, 11:13 Alexander Monakov, wrote:
>
> On Sun, 10 Nov 2024, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
>
> > But 1 - (10 * 0.1) won't, and so the warning is pointing out that any
> exact
> > equality comparisons can be affected by this kind of problem. If you
On Sun, 10 Nov 2024, 08:26 Sad Clouds via Gcc, wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Nov 2024 11:49:56 -0800
> Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> > You can use the diagnostic pragma to disable it directly for the
> statement.
>
> Thanks for the tip. After a quick search, I came across this page,
> which explains it:
> https
On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 at 12:12, quic_zijuhu via Gcc wrote:
>
> i am not sure if this is the good way to report gcc issue. (^^)
Please see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs (or the "Bugs" section of the
sidebar on the https://gcc.gnu.org homepage).
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 at 16:29, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-10-21 at 03:22 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > As an experiment Sourceware is now running an forgejo v9 instance at
> > https://forge.sourceware.org
> >
> > Everybody with an @sourceware.org, @cygwin.com or @gcc.gnu.org
> > address
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 at 16:06, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 4:35 PM Jonathan Wakely
> wrote:
> >> For illustrative purposes, I don't care about the name:
> >> -align-object-data-section=64
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >
> >
&
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 at 15:00, Mateusz Guzik via Gcc wrote:
> I understand the stock behavior of pilling variables on may happen to
> improve cache usage.
>
> However, in a multicore setting it is a never-ending source of
> unintentionally showing up and disappearing false-sharing depending on
> u
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 at 20:44, Eric Gallager wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2024 at 9:27 PM Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >
> > As an experiment Sourceware is now running an forgejo v9 instance at
> > https://forge.sourceware.org
> >
> > Everybody with an @sourceware.org, @cygwin.com or @gcc.gnu.org address
>
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 at 16:42, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 at 16:29, David Malcolm wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2024-10-21 at 03:22 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>> > As an experiment Sourceware is now running an forgejo v9 instance at
>&g
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 at 17:30, yxj-github-437 via Gcc
wrote:
> This is a patch to fix target android
Thanks for the patch. Patches need to be sent to the gcc-patches mailing
list, and there are other requirements for all contributors, please see
https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 at 17:02, Dennis Luehring via Gcc
wrote:
> latest SUSE Tumbleweed/gcc 14.2
>
> c99 -O2 test.c
>
> returns:
> c99: invalid option -- '2'
>
> cc -O2 test.c
>
> returns successfull
>
>
> according to https://linux.die.net/man/1/c99 the -O2 option should work
> c99 is used in an o
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 at 10:14, Roosh Fourtytwo via Gcc
wrote:
> Hi, Thanks for the clear and concise instructions. I'm building gcc-14,
> and have a small suggestion.
>
> Kind regards,
> Roosh42
>
> *Webpage to update:*
> https://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html
>
> *Suggestion:*
> Add curl
On Fri, 27 Sept 2024 at 09:13, Dennis Luehring wrote:
>
> Am 27.09.2024 um 09:56 schrieb Jonathan Wakely:
> > On Fri, 27 Sept 2024, 08:39 Dennis Luehring, wrote:
> >
> > > Am 27.09.2024 um 09:34 schrieb Jonathan Wakely:
> > >
> > >
> > > >
On Fri, 27 Sept 2024, 08:39 Dennis Luehring, wrote:
> Am 27.09.2024 um 09:34 schrieb Jonathan Wakely:
>
>
> > They might not have
> > been using the original gcc-3.4.0 sources.
>
>
> seems to be very possible
>
>
>
> > There should be no need to edit
On Fri, 27 Sept 2024, 08:24 Dennis Luehring via Gcc,
wrote:
> im currently trying to replicate a gcc-3.4.0 arm-elf build from an very
> old cross toolchain
> building with my script (https://pastebin.com/kAEK0S24) works
> but my -print-multi-lib returns only
>
> ---
> .;
> thumb;@mthumb
> ---
>
>
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 19:00, Eric Gallager via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 8:09 AM Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > [For the fortran people: Discussion on gcc@]
> >
> > Just a general remark.
> >
> > There are people, such as myself, who regularly mess up
> > their git repositori
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 16:20, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Jonathan Wakely:
>
> > The discussion is about how we do patch submission and patch review.
> > The GitHub pull request workflow is widely seen as simpler than our
> > current email-based workflow (not everyb
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 14:36, enh wrote:
>
> it doesn't make the patch _management_ problem better ("now i have two
> problems"), but https://github.com/landley/toybox takes the "why not both?"
> approach --- you can use pull requests if you grew up with/adapted to
> git/github, or you can use
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 13:09, Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
>
> [For the fortran people: Discussion on gcc@]
>
> Just a general remark.
>
> There are people, such as myself, who regularly mess up
> their git repositories because they have no mental model
> of what git is doing
I highly recommend
On Mon, 16 Sept 2024, 23:40 Alain Mosnier, wrote:
> On 2024-09-16 23:54, Alain Mosnier wrote:
> > On Sun Sep 15 22:38:20 GMT 2024, GCC Administrator wrote:
> >
> > > When a particular snapshot is ready for public consumption the
> > LATEST-15
> > > link is updated
> >
> > I'm new here. Where do I
On Mon, 16 Sept 2024 at 13:13, Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 1:37 PM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > Git supports signing commits with a GPG key, and more recently (since
> > Git 2.34) also started supporting signing with an SSH key.
--show-signature origin/master | head -6
commit eb67e2396f3ee834bf3a8299f5b6d93ba82d3950
Good "git" signature for jwak...@redhat.com with RSA key
SHA256:8rFaYhDWn09c3vjsYIg2JE9aSpcxzTnCqajoKevrUUo
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date: Mon Sep 16 10:04:40 2024
If a signature is not recognised
As a reminder, I added .b4-config to the top-level, so that using the
kernel's b4 tool inside a GCC source tree will automatically use
inbox.sourceware.org and will submit mail to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org
See https://b4.docs.kernel.org/en/latest/ for docs on how to use b4 to
work with patches in th
I've pushed .editorconfig files for the libstdc++-v3 sub-directory:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-September/663071.html
As mentioned there, I'll experiment with similar files for the rest of
the tree. I will share those files and it would be helpful if people
who work on the rest
On Fri, 13 Sept 2024 at 12:52, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Fri, 13 Sept 2024 at 10:30, Sunil Kumar Dora
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear GCC Community,
> > I am currently encountering an issue with the -Wrange-loop-construct
> > warning in GCC version 14, as well as in
On Fri, 13 Sept 2024 at 10:30, Sunil Kumar Dora
wrote:
>
> Dear GCC Community,
> I am currently encountering an issue with the -Wrange-loop-construct warning
> in GCC version 14, as well as in earlier versions. It appears that the
> warning is triggered incorrectly for certain loop constructs.
>
On Tue, 3 Sept 2024 at 12:30, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 3 Sept 2024, 10:15 Iain Sandoe, wrote:
>>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> When we build a C++ binary module (CMI/BMI), we obviously have access to its
>> source to produce diagnostics, all fine.
On Tue, 3 Sept 2024, 10:15 Iain Sandoe, wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> When we build a C++ binary module (CMI/BMI), we obviously have access to
> its source to produce diagnostics, all fine.
>
> However, when we consume that module we might also need access to the
> sources used to build it - since diagn
On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, 22:27 FX Coudert via Gcc, wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> You are right, thanks for reporting these issues in the libquadmath
> documentation. I am CC’ing the GCC mailing-list. Does the following patch
> seem right?
>
> diff --git a/libquadmath/libquadmath.texi b/libquadmath/libquadma
On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 at 17:25, Arsen Arsenović wrote:
>
> Jonathan Wakely via Overseers writes:
>
> > I don't care which account does the changes but I'd prefer to keep the
> > emails. There's always at least one that reminds me a bug is actually fixed
>
On Fri, 2 Aug 2024, 00:29 Sam James via Gcc, wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This came out of some discussion with Arsen and prompted by some other
> comments on IRC.
>
> At the moment, during release time, maintainer-scripts/branch_changer.py
> is run by release managers and causes a large amount of bugmail to
On Mon, 29 Jul 2024 at 10:20, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Mon, 29 Jul 2024 at 09:20, Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > for the fortran-unsigned branch, I would like to be able to run all
> > existing Fortran tests also with -funsigned, to mak
On Mon, 29 Jul 2024 at 09:20, Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> for the fortran-unsigned branch, I would like to be able to run all
> existing Fortran tests also with -funsigned, to make sure the option
> does not break anything on existing code.
>
> Question is: How?
>
> I came as far as
>
On Wed, 24 Jul 2024 at 11:38, Dennis Luehring via Gcc wrote:
>
> using latest gcc/STL
>
> -
> #include
>
> using int_set1 = std::set>;
> using int_set2 = std::set;
>
> static_assert(std::is_same());
> -
>
>
> the two iterators are equal when not using _GLIBCXX_DEBUG but become
> d
On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 at 19:26, M.C.A. (Marco) Devillers
wrote:
>
> All your proposals now boil down to: Do explicit memory management
> whereas the developer supposes that is handled for them.
There's no explicit memory management in the loop I showed. It's
explicit control of lifetime, which is w
On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 at 19:12, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 16 Jul 2024, 18:51 M.C.A. (Marco) Devillers via Gcc,
> wrote:
>>
>> Document number: SCF4C++00
>> Date: 2024-7-16
>> Audience: GCC email list
>> Reply-to: marco.devill...@gma
On Tue, 16 Jul 2024, 18:51 M.C.A. (Marco) Devillers via Gcc, <
gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> Document number: SCF4C++00
> Date: 2024-7-16
> Audience: GCC email list
> Reply-to: marco.devill...@gmail.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
>
> I. Introduction
>
> Because C++ smart pointers are based on RAII it is eas
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 at 14:16, U.Mutlu wrote:
>
> The below test code demonstrates that sscanf fails
> to parse the string "" (ie. an empty string inside "") in line2 (fErr=1).
> Is this a bug?
This mailing list is for discussing the development of GCC, and sscanf
is not part of GCC. The behaviour
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 at 20:08, Dalbey, Keith wrote:
>
> The means by which this FIX was implemented caused OTHER problems
>
> template
> std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, const std::pair& pr)
> {
> os << "(" << pr.first << ", " << pr.second << ")";
> return os;
> }
>
> Wil
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 at 20:08, Dalbey, Keith wrote:
>
> The means by which this FIX was implemented caused OTHER problems
>
> template
> std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, const std::pair& pr)
> {
> os << "(" << pr.first << ", " << pr.second << ")";
> return os;
> }
>
> Wil
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 at 17:58, Dalbey, Keith via Gcc wrote:
>
> I'm not going to argue about the change for CONCRETE operators, I'm going to
> argue about the loss of power/flexibility for TEMPLATED operators, because it
> defeats the whole purpose of TEMPLATED functions/operators otherwise
This
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 at 01:03, Dalbey, Keith via Gcc wrote:
>
> So I'm on redhat 7 and just got devtoolsset-12 and code (a system of
> overloaded<< operators) that was working with devtoolset-10 now break
> (because of ordering)
>
> To not bury the lead..
>
> My code relies on the version 11 or o
On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 21:55, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 05, 2024 at 09:28:46PM GMT, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > If we marked endptr as "write_only" (which it might already
> > > be) then a future warning mechanism for -Wrestrict could
&
On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 21:26, Martin Uecker wrote:
>
> Am Freitag, dem 05.07.2024 um 21:28 +0200 schrieb Alejandro Colomar:
>
> ...
> >
> > > > Showing that you can contrive a case where a const char* restrict and
> > > > char** restrict can alias doesn't mean there's a problem with strtol.
> > >
>
On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 20:47, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> On Fri, Jul 05, 2024 at 08:38:15PM GMT, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 20:28, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 05, 2
On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 20:28, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jul 05, 2024 at 06:30:50PM GMT, Martin Uecker wrote:
> > Am Freitag, dem 05.07.2024 um 17:24 +0100 schrieb Jonathan Wakely:
> > > On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 17:02, Xi Ruoyao via Gcc wrote:
> >
On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 17:02, Xi Ruoyao via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2024-07-05 at 17:53 +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > At least, I hope there's consensus that while current GCC doesn't warn
> > about this, ideally it should, which means it should warn for valid uses
> > of strtol(3), which mean
On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 16:54, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc wrote:
> At least, I hope there's consensus that while current GCC doesn't warn
> about this, ideally it should, which means it should warn for valid uses
> of strtol(3), which means strtol(3) should be fixed, in all of ISO,
> POSIX, and glibc
1 - 100 of 1966 matches
Mail list logo
