I see. Thank you for the clarification!
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 5:23 AM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 at 09:33, Ken Matsui wrote:
> >
> > Hi François,
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 10:11 PM François Dumont
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > Do not hesitate to dig into libr
On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 at 09:33, Ken Matsui wrote:
>
> Hi François,
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 10:11 PM François Dumont wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > Do not hesitate to dig into library doc. Especially this page:
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-8.1.0/libstdc++/manual/manual/test.html
> >
> >
Hi François,
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 10:11 PM François Dumont wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Do not hesitate to dig into library doc. Especially this page:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-8.1.0/libstdc++/manual/manual/test.html
>
> You can also find it in your git clone in /libstdc++-v3/doc/html.
>
> Y
Hi
Do not hesitate to dig into library doc. Especially this page:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-8.1.0/libstdc++/manual/manual/test.html
You can also find it in your git clone in /libstdc++-v3/doc/html.
You'll see also how to run test in different std modes like --std=c++98
to catch the k
Oooh, thank you for your help!
On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 4:25 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 at 22:30, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi François,
> >
> > I tried to use `make check-debug`, but my Makefile does not include
> > the target. Could you please tell me how
On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 at 22:30, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
> Hi François,
>
> I tried to use `make check-debug`, but my Makefile does not include
> the target. Could you please tell me how you generated your Makefile?
It's a target in the libstdc++ makefile, so you need to run it from
the $t
Hi François,
I tried to use `make check-debug`, but my Makefile does not include
the target. Could you please tell me how you generated your Makefile?
FYI, I did this command: `../configure --enable-languages=c++
--disable-error --disable-bootstrap`.
Sincerely,
Ken Matsui
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 a
Jacobson's email was treated as spam somehow. Sorry for missing your email.
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 2:59 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2023 at 12:23, Roy Jacobson via Libstdc++
> wrote:
> >
> > Clang has been providing __is_void for a very long time now, and is
> > definitely comp
On Sat, 25 Mar 2023 at 12:23, Roy Jacobson via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
> Clang has been providing __is_void for a very long time now, and is
> definitely compatible with libstdc++. Does defining this builtin cause a
> problem? Might be that the lookup rules for builtins are different or
> something.
>
Oh! Thank you!
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 2:49 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 at 22:43, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 at 21:17, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 10:33 AM François Dumont
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
>
On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 at 22:43, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 at 21:17, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 10:33 AM François Dumont
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 26/03/2023 04:01, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++ wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 5:3
On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 at 21:17, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 10:33 AM François Dumont wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 26/03/2023 04:01, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++ wrote:
> > > On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 5:38 AM Marc Glisse wrote:
> > >> On Sat, 25 Mar 2023, Ken Matsui via Gcc wrote
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 10:33 AM François Dumont wrote:
>
>
> On 26/03/2023 04:01, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++ wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 5:38 AM Marc Glisse wrote:
> >> On Sat, 25 Mar 2023, Ken Matsui via Gcc wrote:
> >>
> >>> Built-in trait naming simply adds two underscores (__) to the or
On 26/03/2023 04:01, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++ wrote:
On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 5:38 AM Marc Glisse wrote:
On Sat, 25 Mar 2023, Ken Matsui via Gcc wrote:
Built-in trait naming simply adds two underscores (__) to the original
trait name. However, the same names are already in use for some
built
On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 5:38 AM Marc Glisse wrote:
>
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2023, Ken Matsui via Gcc wrote:
>
> > Built-in trait naming simply adds two underscores (__) to the original
> > trait name. However, the same names are already in use for some
> > built-in traits, such as is_void, is_pointer, a
On Sat, 25 Mar 2023, Ken Matsui via Gcc wrote:
Built-in trait naming simply adds two underscores (__) to the original
trait name. However, the same names are already in use for some
built-in traits, such as is_void, is_pointer, and is_signed.
For example, __is_void is used in the following file
Clang has been providing __is_void for a very long time now, and is
definitely compatible with libstdc++. Does defining this builtin cause a
problem? Might be that the lookup rules for builtins are different or
something.
https://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html#type-trait-primitives
O
Hi,
I am working on the GSoC project, "C++: Implement compiler built-in
traits for the standard library traits".
Built-in trait naming simply adds two underscores (__) to the original
trait name. However, the same names are already in use for some
built-in traits, such as is_void, is_pointer, and
18 matches
Mail list logo
