On Wed, 11 May 2022 19:37:21 PDT (-0700), jia...@iscas.ac.cn wrote:
Thank you, it hasn't commited into the trunk yet.
Should be now.
ISCAS
å¨ Palmer Dabbelt ï¼2022å¹´5æ11æ¥ ä¸å5:59åéï¼
On Thu, 05 May 2022 11:45:50 PDT (-0700), [1]gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
wrote:
> On T
On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 02:58:49PM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Thu, 05 May 2022 11:45:50 PDT (-0700), gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
> > On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 06:33:20PM +0800, jiawei wrote:
> > > Some compiler target like arm-linux\riscv\power\s390x\xtensa-gcc handle
> > > char as unsigned
On Thu, 05 May 2022 11:45:50 PDT (-0700), gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 06:33:20PM +0800, jiawei wrote:
Some compiler target like arm-linux\riscv\power\s390x\xtensa-gcc handle
char as unsigned char, then there are no warnings occur and got FAIL cases.
Just change the typ
On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 06:33:20PM +0800, jiawei wrote:
> Some compiler target like arm-linux\riscv\power\s390x\xtensa-gcc handle
> char as unsigned char, then there are no warnings occur and got FAIL cases.
> Just change the type char into explicit signed char to keep the feature
> consistency.
>
Some compiler target like arm-linux\riscv\power\s390x\xtensa-gcc handle
char as unsigned char, then there are no warnings occur and got FAIL cases.
Just change the type char into explicit signed char to keep the feature
consistency.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* c-c++-common/Wconversion-1.c
