Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-11-01 Thread Trevor Saunders
On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 10:30:29AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 10/31/2017 08:47 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 11:38:48AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > > On 10/31/2017 11:22 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > > > I don't see a reason not to other than a pretty small amount of work

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-11-01 Thread Jeff Law
On 10/31/2017 08:47 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote: On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 11:38:48AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: On 10/31/2017 11:22 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: I don't see a reason not to other than a pretty small amount of work each time we make a release. I'm not sure it would be so small an amount o

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-31 Thread Trevor Saunders
On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 11:38:48AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 10/31/2017 11:22 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > >> I don't see a reason not to other than a pretty small amount of work > >> each time we make a release. > > > > I'm not sure it would be so small an amount of work, especially on > > non-L

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-31 Thread Jeff Law
On 10/31/2017 11:22 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> I don't see a reason not to other than a pretty small amount of work >> each time we make a release. > > I'm not sure it would be so small an amount of work, especially on non-Linux > platforms, so this would IMO divert our resources for little bene

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-31 Thread Eric Botcazou
> I don't see a reason not to other than a pretty small amount of work > each time we make a release. I'm not sure it would be so small an amount of work, especially on non-Linux platforms, so this would IMO divert our resources for little benefit. > Well first this would only matter to the 0.01

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-31 Thread Trevor Saunders
On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 11:11:12AM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > It sounds like people are mostly concerned about sun studio and xlc? It > > doesn't seem that hard to provide precompiled binaries for those two > > platforms, and maybe 4.8 binaries for people who want to compile theire > > own gcc

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-30 Thread Eric Botcazou
> It sounds like people are mostly concerned about sun studio and xlc? It > doesn't seem that hard to provide precompiled binaries for those two > platforms, and maybe 4.8 binaries for people who want to compile theire > own gcc from source. I'm not sure that we want to enter the business of preco

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-30 Thread Richard Sandiford
Trevor Saunders writes: > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 09:37:31PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> > Can you figure what oldest GCC release supports the C++11/14 POD handling >> > that would be required? >> >> GCC needs to be buildable by other compilers than itself though. > > It sounds like people are

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-29 Thread Trevor Saunders
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 09:37:31PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > Can you figure what oldest GCC release supports the C++11/14 POD handling > > that would be required? > > GCC needs to be buildable by other compilers than itself though. It sounds like people are mostly concerned about sun studio

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-27 Thread Jeff Law
On 10/27/2017 02:35 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 02:43:55PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Richard Sandiford >>> wrote: Richard Biener writes: > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:2

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-27 Thread Pedro Alves
On 10/27/2017 09:35 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 02:43:55PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >>> Can you figure what oldest GCC release supports the C++11/14 POD handling >>> that would be required? >> >> I think it is to

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-27 Thread Eric Botcazou
> There's always the possibility of building GCC 4.8 with the other compiler > and then GCC 9+ (?) with GCC 4.8. What an user-friendly solution... > What's the list of other compilers people routinely use? I see various > comments on other compilers in install.texi but those are already saying >

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-27 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:35:56AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > I think it is too early for that, we aren't LLVM or Rust that don't really > > care about what build requirements they impose on users. > > That's true, which is why I asked. For me requiring sth newer than GCC 4.8 > would be a b

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-27 Thread Richard Biener
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 02:43:55PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Richard Sandiford >> wrote: >> > Richard Biener writes: >> >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Richard Sandiford >> >> wrote: >> >>> This p

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-27 Thread Richard Biener
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 9:37 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> Can you figure what oldest GCC release supports the C++11/14 POD handling >> that would be required? > > GCC needs to be buildable by other compilers than itself though. There's always the possibility of building GCC 4.8 with the other comp

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-26 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 02:43:55PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Richard Sandiford > wrote: > > Richard Biener writes: > >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Richard Sandiford > >> wrote: > >>> This patch adds a POD version of fixed_size_mode. The only current u

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-26 Thread Richard Sandiford
Richard Biener writes: > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Richard Sandiford > wrote: >> Richard Biener writes: >>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Richard Sandiford >>> wrote: This patch adds a POD version of fixed_size_mode. The only current use is for storing the __builtin_apply a

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-26 Thread Eric Botcazou
> Can you figure what oldest GCC release supports the C++11/14 POD handling > that would be required? GCC needs to be buildable by other compilers than itself though. -- Eric Botcazou

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-26 Thread Richard Biener
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Richard Biener writes: >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Richard Sandiford >> wrote: >>> This patch adds a POD version of fixed_size_mode. The only current use >>> is for storing the __builtin_apply and __builtin_result register mode

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-26 Thread Richard Sandiford
Richard Biener writes: > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Richard Sandiford > wrote: >> This patch adds a POD version of fixed_size_mode. The only current use >> is for storing the __builtin_apply and __builtin_result register modes, >> which were made fixed_size_modes by the previous patch. > >

Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-26 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > This patch adds a POD version of fixed_size_mode. The only current use > is for storing the __builtin_apply and __builtin_result register modes, > which were made fixed_size_modes by the previous patch. Bah - can we update our host comp

[09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class

2017-10-23 Thread Richard Sandiford
This patch adds a POD version of fixed_size_mode. The only current use is for storing the __builtin_apply and __builtin_result register modes, which were made fixed_size_modes by the previous patch. 2017-10-23 Richard Sandiford Alan Hayward David Sherwood gcc/