On 3/20/25 2:51 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 6:39 PM Matthias Klose wrote:
>>
>> For building ghdl, the compiler needs to be patched to know the "vhdl"
>> language. Could that patch be applied to the upstream GCC, so that not
>> everybody needs to patch GCC to build ghdl?
>
> On 24 Mar 2025, at 11:03, Andrew Carlotti wrote:
>
> Two brief comments, since I'm on holiday until 31st but happened to notice
> this
> patch anyway.
>
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 02:19:21AM +0800, Yangyu Chen wrote:
>> This behavior does not ensure that if any higher priority callee versio
Two brief comments, since I'm on holiday until 31st but happened to notice this
patch anyway.
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 02:19:21AM +0800, Yangyu Chen wrote:
> This behavior does not ensure that if any higher priority callee version
> were selected at runtime, then a higher priority caller version wo
The combine pass can generate an index like (and:DI (mult:DI (reg:DI)
(const_int scale)) (const_int mask)) when XTheadMemIdx is available.
LRA may pull it out, and thus a splitter is needed when Zba is not
available.
A similar splitter were introduced when XTheadMemIdx support was added,
but remov
On 3/23/25 1:55 AM, Simon Martin wrote:
Hi,
On Sat Sep 14, 2024 at 10:00 AM CEST, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 9/13/24 1:31 PM, Simon Martin wrote:
We currently ICE upon the following testcase when using -ftime-report
=== cut here ===
template < int> using __conditional_t = int;
template < typenam
Jim is back from a short COBOL-related business trip. I am going to take
this working collection of patched patched patches and put it up where he
can get at it.
That location is the float_to_tree branch of
https://gitlab.cobolworx.com/COBOLworx/gcc-cobol.git
And we'll review it. We want to ma
This patch adds support for the case where #pragma omp declare variant
with append_args is used inside a #pragma omp dispatch interop that
specifies fewer interop args than required by the variant; new interop
objects are implicitly created and then destroyed around the call to the
variant, using t
Tested on x86_64 and aarch64 Linux and x86_64 darwin,
OK for trunk?
thanks
Iain
This applies on top of
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-March/678927.html
--- 8< ---
We do not have a replacement at the moment, so fall back to using
regular random and friends.
PR cobol/11929
Hello, gentle maintainer.
This is a message from the Translation Project robot.
A revised PO file for textual domain 'gcc' has been submitted
by the Croatian team of translators. The file is available at:
https://translationproject.org/latest/gcc/hr.po
(This file, 'gcc-15.1-b20250316.hr.po
Support for the AVR-SD devices (which are 1-liners) has been backported
to v13 and v14.
Johann
--
gcc-13, gcc-14: AVR: Mention more new devices.
diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html
index 4860c500..e589e0d6 100644
--- a/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html
+++ b/htdoc
On Fri, 21 Mar 2025, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 08:32:51AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > So I really think we should go to mpfr, I can implement it tomorrow unless
> > > Richi wants to do that.
> >
> > Go to mpfr for the string conversions? Yeah, maybe that's a good
> >
Crossed in the mail.
I applied your fixes below.
The output of the one-liner program is now 1.2345678E+07, as expected.
The .00 instead of .01 problem still exists; source code coming soon.
UAT test failures down to 11 from 23.
NIST failures holding steady at 273.
> -Original Message-
Hi Jeff,
> On 23 Mar 2025, at 14:25, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 3/23/25 8:03 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>> Tested on x86_64-Linux, Darwin,
>> OK for trunk?
>> backports?
>> thanks
>> Iain
>> --- 8< ---
>> Actually, the issue is not local to the libitm case, it currently affects
>> any 'cxx=true' top-level
Added the following 6 AVR-SD devices.
Johann
--
AVR: Add AVR-SD devices.
gcc/
* config/avr/avr-mcus.def: Add AVR32SD20, AVR32SD28, AVR32SD32,
AVR64SD28, AVR64SD32, AVR64SD48.
* doc/avr-mmcu.texi: Rebuild.diff --git a/gcc/config/avr/avr-mcus.def b/gcc/config/avr/avr-mcus
Tested on x86_64-Linux, Darwin,
OK for trunk?
backports?
thanks
Iain
--- 8< ---
Actually, the issue is not local to the libitm case, it currently affects
any 'cxx=true' top-level configured target library.
The issue is a missing export of CXX_FOR_TARGET.
PR libitm/88319
ChangeLog:
Hi,
r13-1104-gf4c3ce32fa54c1 introduced a regression, which had an
accidental self assignment of TYPE_PACKED when it should have been
assigned to the type's variants. This patch fixes that.
Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-linux-gnu/-m32, committed
to mainline, and backported to relea
From: Iain Sandoe
Tested on x86_64/aarch64 Darwin and x86_64-linux,
OK for trunk?
backports to branches supporting modules?
thanks
Iain
--- 8< ---
Recent changes to the OS SDKs have altered the way in which include guards
are used for a number of headers when C++ modules are enabled. Instead o
I seek benediction. Failing that, I ask for advice.
This patch makes it possible for me to set the environment variable
'CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="-ggdb -O0"' at configure time, and end up with a
debuggable libgcobol.so.
Is this a correct way to gain that capability?
If not, then how?
If so, then O
On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 11:25:13PM -0500, Robert Dubner wrote:
> Real progress here. Preliminary report:
>
> I am still seeing trouble with a PIC PP9 variable coming back .000 instead
> of 0.001.
>
> In my 679 UAT tests, the failure count is down from 23 to 4
>
> In the NIST tests, the failure
Thanks Sandra and Jakub for your comments.
Here is attached an updated version of the patch:
* Removed special case for n==1, now use an array even when only one
interop object is passed.
* Updated scan dumps; added C/C++ disjunction where needed.
* Updated the signature of GOMP_interop to act
20 matches
Mail list logo