Hello Maciej,
thank you for looking at this code! The change looks obviously correct to me.
Regards
Pip
On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 3:16 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> Remove an LD subdirectory configuration error:
>
> *** ld does not support target wasm32-unknown-none
> *** see ld/configure.tgt for
oach.
Bootstrapped, but "make check" produces errors which appear unrelated
to this patch.
2018-09-18 Pip Cet
PR 87104
* config/i386/i386.h (TARGET_FUSE_TEST_AND_BRANCH): Add.
* config/i386/i386.md (test to and peephole2s): Don't use for
TARGET_FUSE_TE
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 11:05 AM Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Sorry for the slow reply.
Not a problem at all. Thank you for responding!
> Pip Cet via Gcc-patches writes:
> > I'm working on the AVR cc0 -> CCmode conversion (bug#92729). One
> > problem is that the cmpe
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 6:12 PM Jeff Law wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-08-06 at 12:42 +0000, Pip Cet via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > I've bootstrapped and run the test suite with the patch, without
> > differences.
> So it looks like Richard has given you some feedback and you'v
reg:SI (op:SI ... ...)))
(clobber (scratch:QI))])
as a new insn for that example. This appears to work.
I've bootstrapped and run the test suite with the patch, without differences.
From 788bf691aed9f27e1719a6c2e61b12f2a24e6b5d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pip Cet
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:02 PM Tom Tromey wrote:
> This patch changes gcc's spell checker to prefer simple case changes
> when possible.
>
> I tested this using the self-tests. A new self-test is also included.
I think that's great, but it should be mentioned in the comment that
the distance fu
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:21 PM Pip Cet wrote:
> IIRC, minimum string alignment does not satisfy the triangle
> inequality anyway, so test_metric_conditions should probably not
> pretend to test it...
I did remember correctly, though of course that should have been
"optimal st
On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 5:06 PM David Malcolm wrote:
> On Sat, 2020-05-30 at 13:40 +0000, Pip Cet via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > I think we should just omit the triangle inequality test from the
> > self-test, as in the attached patch.
>
> I like the idea,
Thanks!
> but ca
David Malcolm writes:
> On Sat, 2020-05-30 at 18:51 +0000, Pip Cet wrote:
>> How's this?
>
> Thanks; looks good to me. Hopefully this doesn't clash with Tom's
> patch.
It doesn't, but I hope I got the commit message right this time.
(I don't have git
