On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 8:57 PM, Christopher Di Bella wrote:
>> I'm currently waiting on approval from my employer before I move ahead
>with anything
>
> My employer has given me the okay to contribute to gcc, provided that I
> follow some fairly straightforward rules. Most of these things are
> I'm currently waiting on approval from my employer before I move ahead
with anything
My employer has given me the okay to contribute to gcc, provided that I
follow some fairly straightforward rules. Most of these things are given,
such as "don't contribute to gcc while at work", "don't put wo
On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
wrote:
> Please also note that, in terms of legal papers, the FSF is much more
> flexible than one may think, but they are not very pro-active or fast
> (in my past experience, things may have changed now). If you find some
> internal resistance
On 17 May 2016 at 12:10, Christopher Di Bella wrote:
>> I don't know the status of the static analysis tool the Microsoft were
>> planning to release, which would do a lot of the checking.
>
> As far as I'm aware, this is a Visual Studio tool, and thus closed
> source. I might be wrong!
Currently
On 17 May 2016 at 12:10, Christopher Di Bella wrote:
> Just letting you know I'm still alive!
>
> I'm currently waiting on approval from my employer before I move ahead
> with anything; for now, it's just personal research to help ease into
> it. Approval may take a month or two, as I work for a l
On 05/17/2016 02:10 PM, Christopher Di Bella wrote:
>
>> I don't know the status of the static analysis tool the Microsoft were
>> planning to release, which would do a lot of the checking.
>
> As far as I'm aware, this is a Visual Studio tool, and thus closed
> source. I might be wrong!
Some o
Just letting you know I'm still alive!
I'm currently waiting on approval from my employer before I move ahead
with anything; for now, it's just personal research to help ease into
it. Approval may take a month or two, as I work for a large
corporation.
> I don't know the status of the static anal
On 09/05/16 10:18, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 8 May 2016@02:10, Christopher Di Bella wrote:
If not, I'd like to get a start on implementing a warning system for
them. I'll create a branch, but I doubt it'll be ready for gcc 7.1's
release.
Hi, I don't think anyone is working on that yet.
See ht
On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 8 May 2016 at 02:10, Christopher Di Bella wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've been tracking gcc-digest for a bit, but would like to be a little
>> more involved in the development of gcc.
>>
>> I haven't been able to find anything about the CppC
On 8 May 2016 at 02:10, Christopher Di Bella wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've been tracking gcc-digest for a bit, but would like to be a little
> more involved in the development of gcc.
>
> I haven't been able to find anything about the CppCoreGuidelines in
> gcc -- I'm wondering if there's a warning sys
Hi all,
I've been tracking gcc-digest for a bit, but would like to be a little
more involved in the development of gcc.
I haven't been able to find anything about the CppCoreGuidelines in
gcc -- I'm wondering if there's a warning system in the pipeline that
I might have missed in the digest threa
11 matches
Mail list logo
