On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 11:10 PM, Steve Kargl
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If I run configure with "--program-suffix=6", I get gcc6, gfortran6, etc.
> When ldd looks for libgcc.so.1 on FreeBSD, she finds the wrong one.
>
> % cat foo.f90
> program foo
>print *, 'Hello'
> end program
> % gfortran6 -o z foo.
On 18 August 2016 at 08:59, Richard Biener wrote:
> No, but you can try --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs
But be aware that for multilib targets that's been broken for years, PR32415
On 18/08/16 00:44, Toshi Morita wrote:
> David Brown wrote:
>
>> No, it would not be valid. Declaring pfoo as a "const int*" tells the
>> compiler "I will not change anything via this pointer - and you can
>> optimise based on that promise". It does /not/ tell the compiler "the
>> thing that th
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 09:25:41AM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 18 August 2016 at 08:59, Richard Biener wrote:
> > No, but you can try --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs
>
> But be aware that for multilib targets that's been broken for years, PR32415
Richi, Thanks for the pointer to the
Snapshot gcc-6-20160818 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/6-20160818/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 6 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-6
According to the docs
(https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/x86-Built-in-Functions.html),
__builtin_ia32_fxsave() has return type 'void.' Given that, does this
code (from gcc/config/i386/fxsrintrin.h) make sense?
_fxsave (void *__P)
{
return __builtin_ia32_fxsave (__P);
}
Ret
Given the `_fxsave()` function returning `void`, it is invalid C but valid C++:
# WG14 N1256 (C99) / N1570 (C11)
6.8.6.4 The return statement
Constraints
1 A return statement with an expression shall not appear in a function
whose return type is void. ...
# WG21 N1804 (C++03)
6.6.3 The return sta
Interesting. Seems slightly strange, but I've seen stranger. I guess
it's seen as "cleaner" than forcing this into 2 statements.
IAC, it seems wrong for headers, since they can be used from either C or
C++. Also, seems unnecessary here, since 'return' is implied by the
fact that the 'next'
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 01:50:52PM +0800, lhmouse wrote:
> Given the `_fxsave()` function returning `void`, it is invalid C but valid
> C++:
It is also a GNU C extension.
Jakub
