On 10/2/20 2:52 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
I wonder I can get the branch moved, so I can do the benchmarking :)
Any suggestions how to do that?
I just installed a small patch, hot-fix style which I am hoping will
fix your problem. Can you try it? It passes the testsuite, so the change
should be
On 2020-10-01 15:46, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> I hope WG14 will adopt something like
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2465.pdf and the
> whole mess will go away.
>
> intmax_t will be deprecated, and implementations can provide 128-bit
> integers without caveats.
On 2020-10-01 1
Hi Paul,
On 2020-10-01 19:32, Paul Eggert wrote:
> If you're going to document this at all, I suggest documenting 'void' as
> well as 'void *', and putting both sets of documentation into the same
> man page.
>
All the types we're documenting are in the same page:
system_data_types(7).
And then
Hi Paul,
On 2020-10-01 19:38, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 10/1/20 7:35 AM, Alejandro Colomar via Libc-alpha wrote:
>> +The narrowest signed integer type
>> +of a width of at least N bits,
>
> Motivation is missing here. Why is there an int_leastN_t type at all?
Well, I'd say the motivation is for th
Hi Michael,
On 2020-10-02 10:24, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
On 2020-10-01 19:32, Paul Eggert wrote:
> For 'void *' you should also mention that one cannot use arithmetic on
> void * pointers, so they're special in that way too.
Good suggestion!
> Also, you should
> warn that because one can
From: Alejandro Colomar
> Sent: 02 October 2020 09:25
> > For 'void *' you should also mention that one cannot use arithmetic on
> > void * pointers, so they're special in that way too.
>
> Good suggestion!
Except that is a gcc extension that is allowed in the kernel.
> > Also, you should
>
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 08:14, Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 10/2/20 2:52 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> >>> I wonder I can get the branch moved, so I can do the benchmarking :)
> >>> Any suggestions how to do that?
> >
> > I just installed a small patch, hot-fix style which I am hoping will
> > fix your p
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 09:28, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc wrote:
> However, it might be good that someone starts a page called
> 'type_qualifiers(7)' or something like that.
Who is this for? Who is trying to learn C from man pages? Should
somebody stop them?
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 12:49, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 09:28, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc
> wrote:
> > However, it might be good that someone starts a page called
> > 'type_qualifiers(7)' or something like that.
>
> Who is this for? Who is trying to learn C from man pages? S
Hi Alex,
On 10/2/20 10:48 AM, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On 2020-10-02 10:24, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>> On 2020-10-01 19:32, Paul Eggert wrote:
>> > For 'void *' you should also mention that one cannot use arithmetic on
>> > void * pointers, so they're special in that way too.
Hi Alex,
On 10/1/20 6:55 PM, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
>
> On 2020-10-01 18:38, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hi Alex,
>>
>>> +According to the C language standard,
>>> +a pointer to any object type may be converted to a pointer to
>>> +.I void
>>> +and back.
>>> +POSIX further requires
> > I can confirm I was able to delete a branch on remove server:
> >
> > $ git push origin --delete refs/users/marxin/heads/gfc-trailing-spec
> > To git+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git
> > - [deleted] refs/users/marxin/heads/gfc-trailing-spec
>
> That's because I fixed GCC's hook
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 13:19, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>
> > > I can confirm I was able to delete a branch on remove server:
> > >
> > > $ git push origin --delete refs/users/marxin/heads/gfc-trailing-spec
> > > To git+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git
> > > - [deleted] refs/users/marxin
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 12:31, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 12:49, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 09:28, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > > However, it might be good that someone starts a page called
> > > 'type_qualifiers(7)' or somet
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 09:36, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> On 2020-10-01 19:38, Paul Eggert wrote:
> > On 10/1/20 7:35 AM, Alejandro Colomar via Libc-alpha wrote:
> >> +The narrowest signed integer type
> >> +of a width of at least N bits,
> >
> > Motivation is missing her
On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 at 16:51, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> On 2020-10-01 17:34, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> > Hello Alex,
> >
> > On 10/1/20 5:06 PM, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> >> Hello Michael,
> >>
> >> This type is very special,
> >> so I will probably have misse
On 2020-10-02 15:06, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 12:31, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 12:49, Jonathan Wakely
wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 09:28, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc
wrote:
However, it might be good that someone star
> Which is what Joseph said, I think. The problem was that the
> update_hook script still gets called for branch deletions, and it was
> rejecting them. My fix was just to stop rejecting them:
>
> Author: Jonathan Wakely
> Date: Thu Oct 1 18:04:54 2020 +
>
>Do not check anything for re
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 14:20, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2020-10-02 15:06, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 12:31, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 12:49, Jonathan Wakely
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 09:28, Alejand
Hi Jonathan,
On 2020-10-02 15:27, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 14:20, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
On 2020-10-02 15:06, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 12:31, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 12:49, Jonathan Wakely
wrote
On 10/2/20 2:10 AM, David Laight wrote:
> Also, you should
> warn that because one can convert from any pointer type to void * and
> then to any other pointer type, it's a deliberate hole in C's
> type-checking.
That isn't what the C standard says at all.
What is says is that you can ca
Snapshot gcc-9-20201002 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/9-20201002/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 9 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
22 matches
Mail list logo
