ies accessing your
> > website. Upon reviewing the issue, we found that the website is being
> > blocked when accessed via Zscaler IPs.
>
> I will pass this onto the system admins, but the problem is that some of
> your customers have been abusing our services constantly, m
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. Up
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 found that the website is being
blocked when accessed via Zscaler IPs
at does not make sense to me unless the aim is
>to slow down the compile code. The above code would be
>transformed into something like (ignoring passing convention).
>float
>foo(float x)
>{
> if (runtime_option & fcheck_implicit_type)
>runtime_error(&qu
On Mon, Apr 07, 2025 at 02:42:10PM +0800, Gwen Fu wrote:
> Thanks for your reply !
> >The word "parameter" has very a specific meaning in Fortran. The
> >entity that is passed into a function or subroutine is an "actual
> >argument". The entity within the
Thanks for your reply !
>The word "parameter" has very a specific meaning in Fortran. The
>entity that is passed into a function or subroutine is an "actual
>argument". The entity within the functions associated with the
>"actual argument" is a "dummy
On Sat, Apr 05, 2025 at 03:16:45PM +0800, Gwen Fu wrote:
> My doubt :
> 1.Does the compilation option only need to support fortran versions above
> 9, o5r does it also need to support fortran 77?
gfortran started life as a Fortran 95 compiler. It should
support anything that is Fort
Hi.
We're trying to remove the duplication of the attributes code between
the C and libgccjit frontend.
The attached patch shows a draft of this attempt that only supports a
few attributes.
Would that kind of approach be acceptable (I'm not sure since this
includes a c-family file in
My doubt :
1.Does the compilation option only need to support fortran versions above
9, o5r does it also need to support fortran 77?
2.Regarding parameter checking, *my idea is that after the user creates an
array of a specified size, it is passed into the function as a parameter*.
However, the
Hi Kaaden!
On 2025-03-10T22:20:21+, Kaaden Ruman via Gcc wrote:
> Hello, my name is Kaaden and I am a student at the University of Alberta in
> Canada.
Welcome to GCC!
> I am interested in pursuing the "Extend the static analysis pass" idea as a
> medium size proje
Hi!
On 2025-03-17T20:03:48+, Iain Sandoe via Gcc wrote:
>> On 17 Mar 2025, at 19:43, Toon Moene wrote:
>>
>> I was eager to try the new rust updates ...
>>
>> But I got this:
>>
>> error[E0554]: `#![feature]` may not be used on the stab
Hi Martin,
We actually are planning a large project (350) hours, as Ethan plans to
work essentially full time over the summer. Sorry for the confusion. I
had the terminology a bit confused, and thought "large" was closer to a
6-month commitment.
We will be submitting the propos
Thanks, Martin. We expect it to be a medium size project. And we will be
sure that Ethan can build, test, and debug the GNAT-FE and other GCC
components.
Take care,
-Tuck
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 7:23 PM Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hello,
>
> in general the project proposal looks very goo
Hello,
in general the project proposal looks very good. A few comments inline:
On Tue, Mar 18 2025, Tucker Taft via Gcc wrote:
>
[...]
> The GNAT front end is organized into three basic phases, a parser, a
> semantic analyzer, and an expander. In the sources, these are represented
&g
Thank you! Yes, I realize we need to submit the proposal to the GSoC
program, and I believe we can do so starting today.
Take care,
-Tuck
On Sun, Mar 23, 2025 at 11:28 PM Sam James wrote:
> Tucker Taft via Gcc writes:
>
> > Proposal: Google Summer of Code on GCC A
Tucker Taft via Gcc writes:
> Proposal: Google Summer of Code on GCC Ada Front end
>
>-
>
>Goal : Implement some of the light-weight parallelism features of Ada
>2022 in the GNAT front end
>-
>
>Contributor: Ethan Luis McDonough, PSU '2025 (
&
ng on a medium-sized (or
> large-sized) project that, broadly speaking, extends the static-analysis
> pass(es). In particular, I’ve been dabbling between extending the analyzer’s
> support for C++ and extending the plugin to add checking for usage of the
> CPython API, such as refere
Dear all,
I hope you’ve been doing well!
I’m Zhiwen, an undergraduate who is working towards his degree jointly in
mathematics and computer science.
I’m writing to express my interest in working on a medium-sized (or
large-sized) project that, broadly speaking, extends the static-analysis
Hello
Antoni Boucher wrote:
> We're trying to remove the duplication of the attributes code between
> the C and libgccjit frontend.
> The attached patch shows a draft of this attempt that only supports a
> few attributes.
> Would that kind of approach be acceptable (I&#
Proposal: Google Summer of Code on GCC Ada Front end
-
Goal : Implement some of the light-weight parallelism features of Ada
2022 in the GNAT front end
-
Contributor: Ethan Luis McDonough, PSU '2025 (
ethanluismcdono...@gmail.com)
-
Mentors: S. Tucker Taft (Lexi
On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 4:49 PM Antoni Boucher via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi.
> We're trying to remove the duplication of the attributes code between
> the C and libgccjit frontend.
> The attached patch shows a draft of this attempt that only supports a
> few attributes.
> Woul
> On 17 Mar 2025, at 19:43, Toon Moene wrote:
>
> I was eager to try the new rust updates ...
>
> But I got this:
>
> error[E0554]: `#![feature]` may not be used on the stable release channel
> --> src/lib.rs:19:1
> |
I was eager to try the new rust updates ...
But I got this:
error[E0554]: `#![feature]` may not be used on the stable release channel
--> src/lib.rs:19:1
|
19 | #![feature(extern_types)]
| ^
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0
Can I provide information for the list.
Regards,
Erin Lewis
From: Erin Lewis
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2025 7:36 AM
To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Discover the Latest Trends at Bio-IT World Expo 2025
Just a quick question: would you be interested in receiving the Bio-IT World
Conference &
Kaaden Ruman via Gcc writes:
> Hello, my name is Kaaden and I am a student at the University of Alberta in
> Canada. I am interested in pursuing the "Extend the static analysis pass"
> idea as a medium size project.
>
> I have cloned and built gcc and ran the t
Just a quick question: would you be interested in receiving the Bio-IT World
Conference & Expo 2025 attendance details?
Attendees: Executive, Director, Manager, Professor, Scientist/Tecnologist,
Sales & Marketing, Assistant and many.
Regards,
Erin Lewis
Basile Starynkevitch writes:
> hello
>
> You could take (and improve/refactor) some obsolete code from
> https://github.com/bstarynk/bismon
> and read the below draft report
> http://www.starynkevitch.net/Basile/bismon-chariot-doc.pdf
>
> I am no more working on that
hello
You could take (and improve/refactor) some obsolete code from
https://github.com/bstarynk/bismon
and read the below draft report
http://www.starynkevitch.net/Basile/bismon-chariot-doc.pdf
I am no more working on that code base.
My current open source project is https://github.com
>> Hi Jose,
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 08, 2025 at 02:17:52PM +0100, Jose E. Marchesi wrote:
>>> > Since you already have a fork on the (experimental) forge we could
>>> > also move your fork under https://forge.sourceware.org/gcc that way
>>> > you c
Hello, my name is Kaaden and I am a student at the University of Alberta in
Canada. I am interested in pursuing the "Extend the static analysis pass" idea
as a medium size project.
I have cloned and built gcc and ran the testsuite and would like a nudge in the
direction of what
Sent from my iPhone
> Hi Jose,
>
> On Sat, Mar 08, 2025 at 02:17:52PM +0100, Jose E. Marchesi wrote:
>> > Since you already have a fork on the (experimental) forge we could
>> > also move your fork under https://forge.sourceware.org/gcc that way
>> > you can experiment with mer
Hi Jose,
On Sat, Mar 08, 2025 at 02:17:52PM +0100, Jose E. Marchesi wrote:
> > Since you already have a fork on the (experimental) forge we could
> > also move your fork under https://forge.sourceware.org/gcc that way
> > you can experiment with merge requests if you like
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 03:57:40PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) via Gcc
> wrote:
>> On 07/03/2025 15:41, Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc wrote:
>> > The Steering Committee has decided not to merge the Algol 68 Front-End
>> > in master at this point,
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 03:57:40PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) via Gcc
wrote:
> On 07/03/2025 15:41, Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc wrote:
> > The Steering Committee has decided not to merge the Algol 68 Front-End
> > in master at this point, but is ok with us using a branc
On 07/03/2025 15:41, Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello people!
>
> The Steering Committee has decided not to merge the Algol 68 Front-End
> in master at this point, but is ok with us using a branch in gcc.git to
> develop and maintain the front-end as well as a mail
Hello people!
The Steering Committee has decided not to merge the Algol 68 Front-End
in master at this point, but is ok with us using a branch in gcc.git to
develop and maintain the front-end as well as a mailing list in
algo...@gcc.gnu.org. The mailing list has been already set up by the
Welcome to form an IWACCE 2025 session!
The 4th International Workshop on Automation, Control and Communication
Engineering (lWACCE2025) will be held in Changchun, China from August 8 to 10,
2025!
(Detail:
http://email.ms.iwacce.org/c
s/libgccjit/_static and it's parent
onlinedocs/libgccjit have not been updated since 14 Nov 2022, which was
the day of the attempted wholesale conversion to Sphinx.
Is onlinedocs/libgccjit just how what is now onlinedocs/jit would have
been called after the conversion and should be removed?
Gerald
le/_static/
> ./gnat_ugn/_static/
:
> ./libgdiagnostics/_static/
> ./libgomp/_static/
> ./libiberty/_static/
> ./libitm/_static/
> ./libquadmath/_static/
Mostly. :-)
libgdiagnostics is a new library by David (Malcolm) the documentation of
which is in Sphinx, so I kept that. Correct
ou for digging into this and raising it, Jonathan!
> >
> > > $ ls -1 -d htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/*/
> > > htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/c-implementation-defined-behavior/
> > > htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/extensions-to-the-c++-language/
> > > htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/ext
nlinedocs/gcc/*/
> > htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/c-implementation-defined-behavior/
> > htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/extensions-to-the-c++-language/
> > htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/extensions-to-the-c-language-family/
> > htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/gcc-command-options/
> > htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc
Hi Bradley,
Thanks for following the discussion and your input.
We have also been discussing some policy wording changes on gcc-patches:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/20241202101600.1041524-1-m...@klomp.org/T
If you have any suggestions for improving the actual wording change
that
Dear GCC Gurus,
We are compiling a GCC using "pre-existing" GCC and
we want to have control over the order of the system directories that are
searched
particularly we want /usr/include to be searched before others. We are not
in a position to keep adding -I/usr/include to our bui
> On 11/24/24 11:49 AM, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
> > One size doesn't necessarily fit all. Perhaps if you're changing the DCO
> > text for the toolchain projects at this moment, it might be a good time to
> > consider if the Linux DCO text suits your project pe
On 11/24/24 11:49 AM, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
> One size doesn't necessarily fit all. Perhaps if you're changing the DCO
> text for the toolchain projects at this moment, it might be a good time to
> consider if the Linux DCO text suits your project perfectly.
This is not a cha
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Tamar Christina wrote:
> FWIW, Even though I was one of those that really liked and wanted this
> documentation update to sphinx, I agree with removing them as it is just
> confusing or misleading to users at this point.
>
> I do hope that in the future
Carlos O'Donell wrote on Friday:
> The DCO was introduced to gcc, glibc and binutils in 2021 and 2022
> to expand and align the contribution process with other free and open
> source software projects that had been effectively using DCO for
> contributions.
> To that end I&
; than a known identity that could be contacted to discuss the
> contribution (and what was attested).
>
> The same changes have been made to other projects including as noted
> by Sam James in the Gentoo project [2], Mark Wielaard in elfutils [3],
> and CNCF [4].
It should probably b
The DCO was introduced to gcc, glibc and binutils in 2021 and 2022
to expand and align the contribution process with other free and open
source software projects that had been effectively using DCO for
contributions.
To that end I'm aligning the glibc usage following the Linux kernel
changes
The 16th Open Source Development Tools Conference (formerly HelloGCC
Workshop, hereinafter referred to as OSDTConf) is scheduled to be held
in Beijing, China, on December 7, 2024. The OSDTConf is an annual
developer exchange conference organized by the OSDT community (formerly
known as the
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> The HTML pages from Martin Liska's Sphinx doc experiment are still
> online, and Google thinks they are the canonical locatiosn for GCC docs.
...which is really weird. I wonder what influenced Google's ranking here
(all the more
On 11/13/24 5:33 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Fri, 8 Nov 2024, Richard Sandiford via Gcc wrote:
We changed one of the AArch64-specific --params for GCC 14.
Unfortunately, it seems that a lot of people were relying on the
previous behaviour.
Umpf.
Every --param is documented in the user
nlinedocs/gcc/*/
> > htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/c-implementation-defined-behavior/
> > htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/extensions-to-the-c++-language/
> > htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/extensions-to-the-c-language-family/
> > htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/gcc-command-options/
> > htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc
linedocs/gcc/extensions-to-the-c++-language/
> htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/extensions-to-the-c-language-family/
> htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/gcc-command-options/
> htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/gcov/
> htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/gnu-objective-c-features/
> htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/known-causes-of-trouble-with-g
Hi,
On Fri, 2024-11-15 at 12:14 +, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> On IRC mjw suggested that you (Gerald) might object to breaking links
> by just removing them. I think the pages are already broken (the links
> in the sidebar are half missing already).
>
> If we think p
> -Original Message-
> From: Gcc On Behalf Of
> Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2024 12:25 PM
> To: Gerald Pfeifer
> Cc: gcc Mailing List
> Subject: Re: We need to remove the Sphinx HTML docs
>
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:22, Jonathan Wa
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
On Fri, 8 Nov 2024, Richard Sandiford via Gcc wrote:
> We changed one of the AArch64-specific --params for GCC 14.
> Unfortunately, it seems that a lot of people were relying on the
> previous behaviour.
Umpf.
> Every --param is documented in the user-facing manual, so it's not
We changed one of the AArch64-specific --params for GCC 14.
Unfortunately, it seems that a lot of people were relying on the
previous behaviour.
Every --param is documented in the user-facing manual, so it's not
surprising that people picked it up. The documentation of --param
itself starts
On Okt 10 2024, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Laurent Cimon via Gcc:
>
>> I realize that compilers have evolved with time, and that many
>> things required the use of function prototypes, but my question is,
>> what is the historical reason that a function defined further do
* Laurent Cimon via Gcc:
> I realize that compilers have evolved with time, and that many
> things required the use of function prototypes, but my question is,
> what is the historical reason that a function defined further down
> in a C file cannot be used without a function prototyp
Hello,
I'm a computer science student at the Université Laval in Quebec City. I'm
currently following a course on compilers. We're learning semantic analysis at
this time and the course is based on the book Compilers: principles,
techniques & tools by Alfred V. Aho
"Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc" writes:
> Hello people!
>
> This year we will be having a kernel BoF at Cauldron. It is scheduled
> for Saturday from 15:30 to 16:30. There will be several kernel
> maintainers and hackers in attendance, and the goal of the BoF is to
>
> On 26 Sep 2024, at 19:22, Ramana Radhakrishnan
> wrote:
>
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has appointed
> Christophe Lyon as a MVE Reviewer for the AArch32 port.
>
> Pl
Troy via Gcc kirjoitti 29.9.2024 klo 6.15:
I've created a Unix-like system, and although it's not very complete
yet, I want to make a cross-compilation chain for it so that I can use
some open source c libraries.
More important would be to see the -v output when you ran the compiler
a
Could someone help me out ？Sorry for thread broken.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 9:47 AM Troy wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 12:27 AM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 9/25/24 2:56 AM, Troy Mitchell via Gcc wrote:
>> > Hi everyone, I'm new to the world of gc
Hi Ramana,
On 9/26/24 19:22, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has appointed
Christophe Lyon as a MVE Reviewer for the AArch32 port.
Please join me in congratulating Christophe on his new role.
Christophe, please update your listings in the
I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has appointed
Christophe Lyon as a MVE Reviewer for the AArch32 port.
Please join me in congratulating Christophe on his new role.
Christophe, please update your listings in the MAINTAINERS file.
Regards,
Ramana
> From: Joseph Myers
> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 10:46 PM
>
> On Wed, 25 Sep 2024, Jiang, Haochen via Gcc wrote:
>
> > The potential issue might be the PR will be closed after merging, which
> > might
> > be flooded in history if the regression i
On 9/25/24 2:56 AM, Troy Mitchell via Gcc wrote:
Hi everyone, I'm new to the world of gcc.
I don't know if this is the right place to post, but I'm having some
issues that are really annoying.
I've created a Unix-like system, and although it's not very complete
ye
On Wed, 25 Sep 2024, Jiang, Haochen via Gcc wrote:
> The potential issue might be the PR will be closed after merging, which might
> be flooded in history if the regression is not fixed with the PR forgotten to
> be
> reopened. I am not sure the reopen could be automatically done.
Hi everyone, I'm new to the world of gcc.
I don't know if this is the right place to post, but I'm having some
issues that are really annoying.
I've created a Unix-like system, and although it's not very complete
yet, I want to make a cross-compilation chain for i
pdated to work with pull requests and update the pull requests with such
> CI results.
>
> > > Beyond putting everything through PRs, eventually I'd hope to have
> > > merges to mainline normally all go through a CI system that makes sure
> > > there ar
On Tue, 24 Sep 2024, Jiang, Haochen via Gcc wrote:
> I am running regression tests on x86_64 and sending the regressions to
> gcc-regression mailing thread, will I need to send to another place or
> using another API to do that?
I don't expect use of pull requests to change
This event has been canceled with a note:
"Removing due to Holidays!"
Office Hours for the GNU Toolchain
Thursday Dec 26, 2024 ⋅ 11am – 12pm
Eastern Time - New York
Location
https://bbb.linuxfoundation.org/room/adm-xcb-for-sk6
https://www.google.com/url?q=h
> From: Joseph Myers
> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2024 11:51 PM
>
Hi Jospeh,
Thank for your overall introduction on the scope of the future PR
system. It will help the patches not flooded in mails. And keep merging
what we have got in PRs to the right branch to avoid some accidents
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Schwinge
> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 7:37 PM
> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Prathamesh Kulkarni
> Cc: Tom de Vries ; Roger Sayle
>
> Subject: GCC nvptx-none Target Testing (was: New page "nvptx" in the GCC
> wi
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 m
Thomas Koenig writes:
> [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 (case in point: The Fortran unsig
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 repositories because they have no mental model
> of what git
> On 23 Sep 2024, at 15:33, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> 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 "w
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
* 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 everybody agrees, of course). The
> idea is to *lower* the barrier of entry for contr
On Mon, 23 Sep 2024, enh via Gcc 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 t
d would
> like (this would make things really nice, but they won't really block a
> transition).
The assessment of a forge against the criteria isn't expected to be simple
yes/no; it's expected to involve more of an analysis/discussion of how
criteria / underlying goals rel
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/ada
Hi!
On 2017-02-16T21:10:20+0100, I wrote:
> I created a new page "nvptx" in the GCC wiki to document
> --target=nvptx-none configurations: <https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/nvptx>.
(I've revised that one -- it's been a few years... -- and in particular
then) I've
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 the mailing list otherwis
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 d
On 19/09/2024 16:51, Joseph Myers via Gcc wrote:
1. Introduction
This message expands on my remarks at the Cauldron (especially the
patch review and maintenance BoF, and the Sourceware infrastructure
BoF) regarding desired features for a system providing pull request
functionality (patch
On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 8:08 AM Thomas Koenig via Gdb
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
[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 (case in point: The Fortran unsigned
branch, which I managed to put into an unrepairable
Office Hours for the GNU Toolchain on 2024-09-26 at 11am EST5EDT.
Agenda:
* https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/OfficeHours#Next
Meeting Link:
* https://bbb.linuxfoundation.org/room/adm-xcb-for-sk6
--
Cheers,
Carlos
Carlos O'Donell writes:
> On 9/19/24 11:51 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> 1. Introduction
>
> Thanks for writing this up!
>
> [...]
> Agreed.
>
I just want to say the same. My sentiments match Carlos.
On Fri, 20 Sep 2024, Matt Rice via Gcc wrote:
> To me though it is nice being able to edit the PR cover letter
> directly in the editor, and do the pull-request using command line
> tools.
In the common case of a single-commit PR without dependencies, it seems
reasonable to follow the
essages
> > that would cause other automated processes to fall over later, for
> > example).
>
> These could all move to pre-commit CI checks that block merging.
Checks are supposed to apply to direct pushes as well as to merging
through the PR system. (Direct pushes should I hope e
On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 3:52 PM Joseph Myers via Gdb
wrote:
>
> 1. Introduction
>
> This message expands on my remarks at the Cauldron (especially the
> patch review and maintenance BoF, and the Sourceware infrastructure
> BoF) regarding desired features for a system prov
1 - 100 of 5969 matches
Mail list logo
