On 8/6/19 11:30 AM, Steve Ellcey wrote:
Ed,
I have run into an ICE that I tracked down to this patch:
commit 02fefffe6b78c4c39169206aa40fb53f367ecba8
Author: emsr
Date: Thu Aug 1 15:25:42 2019 +
2019-08-01 Edward Smith-Rowland <3dw...@verizon.net>
Implement C++20 p0
On Tue, 2019-08-06 at 16:47 -0400, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 08:30:14PM +, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> > On Tue, 2019-08-06 at 21:04 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > >
> > > The RAJAPerf code appears to be built with -std=gnu++11 which
> > > means
> > > Ed's patch should make a
On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 08:30:14PM +, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-08-06 at 21:04 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >
> > The RAJAPerf code appears to be built with -std=gnu++11 which means
> > Ed's patch should make almost no difference at all. 99% of the patch
> > has no effect unless co
On Tue, 2019-08-06 at 21:04 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> The RAJAPerf code appears to be built with -std=gnu++11 which means
> Ed's patch should make almost no difference at all. 99% of the patch
> has no effect unless compiling with -std=gnu++2a.
>
> I don't see any ICE running the libstdc+
On 06/08/19 15:30 +, Steve Ellcey wrote:
Ed,
I have run into an ICE that I tracked down to this patch:
commit 02fefffe6b78c4c39169206aa40fb53f367ecba8
Author: emsr
Date: Thu Aug 1 15:25:42 2019 +
2019-08-01 Edward Smith-Rowland <3dw...@verizon.net>
Implement C++20 p
Ed,
I have run into an ICE that I tracked down to this patch:
commit 02fefffe6b78c4c39169206aa40fb53f367ecba8
Author: emsr
Date: Thu Aug 1 15:25:42 2019 +
2019-08-01 Edward Smith-Rowland <3dw...@verizon.net>
Implement C++20 p0202 - Add Constexpr Modifiers to Functions
On 8/1/19 3:45 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 01/08/19 11:47 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland via libstdc++ wrote:
On 8/1/19 6:56 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 31/07/19 10:50 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland via libstdc++ wrote:
Here is the patch for
* Implement C++20 p0202 - Add constexpr Modifiers to Function
On 01/08/19 11:47 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland via libstdc++ wrote:
On 8/1/19 6:56 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 31/07/19 10:50 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland via libstdc++ wrote:
Here is the patch for
* Implement C++20 p0202 - Add constexpr Modifiers to Functions in
and Headers.
* Implement C++20 p1
On 8/1/19 6:56 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 31/07/19 10:50 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland via libstdc++ wrote:
Here is the patch for
* Implement C++20 p0202 - Add constexpr Modifiers to Functions in
and Headers.
* Implement C++20 p1023 - constexpr comparison operators for std::array.
Relative t
On 31/07/19 10:50 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland via libstdc++ wrote:
Here is the patch for
* Implement C++20 p0202 - Add constexpr Modifiers to Functions in
and Headers.
* Implement C++20 p1023 - constexpr comparison operators for std::array.
Relative to the last effort it is rebased on more rec
Here is the patch for
* Implement C++20 p0202 - Add constexpr Modifiers to Functions in
and Headers.
* Implement C++20 p1023 - constexpr comparison operators for std::array.
Relative to the last effort it is rebased on more recent trunk and I
added to .
There's some chance that I'll have
On 7/6/19 3:55 AM, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
Blargh!
But that's fine; the result of copy is not stored in a constexpr
variable, but the function return
is static_asserted so we have sufficiently tested that std::copy is
indeed constexpr-compatible
since it appears in a function that is evaluated
On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 06:12, Ed Smith-Rowland via libstdc++
wrote:
> By my reckoning, you have a constexpr source array, an output array that
> is initialized as it must be for constexpr.?? You have to have a
> deterministic result after the copy.?? In the local array version the
> actual iterator
On 7/2/19 8:11 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
One more comment. In this:
+#if __cplusplus > 201703L \
+?? && defined(_GLIBCXX_HAVE_BUILTIN_IS_CONSTANT_EVALUATED)
+?? if (__builtin_is_constant_evaluated())
can be simplified to just:
#ifdef __cpp_lib_is_constant_evaluated
if (s
On 26/06/19 19:13 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland via libstdc++ wrote:
Here is the first of three patches for C++20 constexpr library.
?? Implement C++20 p0202 - Add constexpr Modifiers to Functions in
and Headers.
??Implement C++20 p1023 - constexpr comparison operators for std::array.
I
On 27/06/19 19:07 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
On 6/27/19 1:06 PM, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 at 19:55, Ed Smith-Rowland via libstdc++
wrote:
I don't think this will work in a constant expression:
?? /// Assign @p __new_val to @p __obj and return its previous value.
?? tem
On 6/27/19 1:06 PM, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 at 19:55, Ed Smith-Rowland via libstdc++
wrote:
I don't think this will work in a constant expression:
?? /// Assign @p __new_val to @p __obj and return its previous value.
?? template
+?? _GLIBCXX20_CONSTEXPR
?? inline
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 at 19:55, Ed Smith-Rowland via libstdc++
wrote:
> > I don't think this will work in a constant expression:
> >
> > ?? /// Assign @p __new_val to @p __obj and return its previous value.
> > ?? template
> > +?? _GLIBCXX20_CONSTEXPR
> > ?? inline _Tp
> > ?? exchange(_
On 6/27/19 11:41 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 26/06/19 19:13 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland via libstdc++ wrote:
Here is the first of three patches for C++20 constexpr library.
?? Implement C++20 p0202 - Add constexpr Modifiers to Functions
in and Headers.
??Implement C++20 p1023 - conste
On 26/06/19 19:13 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland via libstdc++ wrote:
Here is the first of three patches for C++20 constexpr library.
?? Implement C++20 p0202 - Add constexpr Modifiers to Functions in
and Headers.
??Implement C++20 p1023 - constexpr comparison operators for std::array.
I
20 matches
Mail list logo
