Just realized that you were asking for the patch I forgot to join...
Here it is.
Le ven. 12 janv. 2024 à 11:09, Guillaume Gomez
a écrit :
>
> > It sounds like the patch you have locally is ready, but it has some
> > nontrivial changes compared to the last version you posted to the list.
> > Plea
> It sounds like the patch you have locally is ready, but it has some
> nontrivial changes compared to the last version you posted to the list.
> Please post your latest version to the list.
Sure!
This patch adds the support for attributes on functions and variables. It does
so by adding the foll
On Thu, 2024-01-11 at 22:40 +0100, Guillaume Gomez wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> > The above looks correct, but the patch adds the entrypoint
> > descriptions
> > to topics/types.rst, which seems like the wrong place. The
> > function-
> > related ones should be in topics/functions.rst in the "Functions
Hi David,
> The above looks correct, but the patch adds the entrypoint descriptions
> to topics/types.rst, which seems like the wrong place. The function-
> related ones should be in topics/functions.rst in the "Functions"
> section and the lvalue/variable one in topics/expression.rst after the
>
On Thu, 2024-01-11 at 01:00 +0100, Guillaume Gomez wrote:
> Hi David.
>
> Thanks for the review!
>
> > > +.. function:: void\
> > > + gcc_jit_lvalue_add_string_attribute
> > > (gcc_jit_lvalue *variable,
> > > + enum
> > > gcc_jit_f
Hi David.
Thanks for the review!
> > +.. function:: void\
> > + gcc_jit_lvalue_add_string_attribute (gcc_jit_lvalue
> > *variable,
> > +enum
> > gcc_jit_fn_attribute attribute,
>
On Wed, 2023-11-15 at 17:53 +0100, Guillaume Gomez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch adds the (incomplete) support for function and variable
> attributes. The added attributes are the ones we're using in
> rustc_codegen_gcc but all the groundwork is done to add more (and we
> will very likely add more a
Ping David. :)
Le lun. 18 déc. 2023 à 23:27, Guillaume Gomez
a écrit :
>
> Ping David. :)
>
> Le sam. 9 déc. 2023 à 12:12, Guillaume Gomez
> a écrit :
> >
> > Added it.
> >
> > Le jeu. 7 déc. 2023 à 18:13, Antoni Boucher a écrit :
> > >
> > > It seems like you forgot to prefix the commit messag
Ping David. :)
Le sam. 9 déc. 2023 à 12:12, Guillaume Gomez
a écrit :
>
> Added it.
>
> Le jeu. 7 déc. 2023 à 18:13, Antoni Boucher a écrit :
> >
> > It seems like you forgot to prefix the commit message with "libgccjit:
> > ".
> >
> > On Thu, 2023-11-30 at 10:55 +0100, Guillaume Gomez wrote:
>
Added it.
Le jeu. 7 déc. 2023 à 18:13, Antoni Boucher a écrit :
>
> It seems like you forgot to prefix the commit message with "libgccjit:
> ".
>
> On Thu, 2023-11-30 at 10:55 +0100, Guillaume Gomez wrote:
> > Ping David. :)
> >
> > Le jeu. 23 nov. 2023 à 22:59, Antoni Boucher a
> > écrit :
> >
It seems like you forgot to prefix the commit message with "libgccjit:
".
On Thu, 2023-11-30 at 10:55 +0100, Guillaume Gomez wrote:
> Ping David. :)
>
> Le jeu. 23 nov. 2023 à 22:59, Antoni Boucher a
> écrit :
> > David: I found back the comment you made. Here it is:
> >
> > I see you have p
Ping David. :)
Le jeu. 23 nov. 2023 à 22:59, Antoni Boucher a écrit :
> David: I found back the comment you made. Here it is:
>
>I see you have patches to add function and variable attributes; I
>wonder if this would be cleaner internally if there was a
>recording::attribute class, r
David: I found back the comment you made. Here it is:
I see you have patches to add function and variable attributes; I
wonder if this would be cleaner internally if there was a
recording::attribute class, rather than the std::pair currently in
use
(some attributes have int argument
Ping David. :)
Le mer. 15 nov. 2023 à 17:56, Antoni Boucher a écrit :
>
> David: another thing I remember you mentioned when you reviewed an
> earlier version of this patch is the usage of `std::pair`.
> I can't find where you said that, but I remember you mentioned that we
> should use a struct
David: another thing I remember you mentioned when you reviewed an
earlier version of this patch is the usage of `std::pair`.
I can't find where you said that, but I remember you mentioned that we
should use a struct instead.
Can you please elaborate again?
Thanks.
On Wed, 2023-11-15 at 17:53 +010
15 matches
Mail list logo
