On 1/18/24 16:45, LIU Hao wrote:
在 2024-01-19 00:01, JonY via Mingw-w64-public 写道:
On 1/18/24 12:46, JonY wrote:
Attached patch OK?
Changes unsigned int to unsigned long to match __gdtoa due to gcc
becoming more strict with pointer types.
Attached v2 patch, removed #ifdef and made the type
Am Mi., 17. Jan. 2024 um 21:46 Uhr schrieb Biswapriyo Nath
:
>
> Could you explain what the issue was and how this patch resolves it?
Sorry I don't remember anymore. I was experimenting with TinyCC, but
there were too many problems, so I stopped it.
Best regards
Oleg Tolmatcev
_
在 2024-01-19 00:01, JonY via Mingw-w64-public 写道:
On 1/18/24 12:46, JonY wrote:
Attached patch OK?
Changes unsigned int to unsigned long to match __gdtoa due to gcc becoming more strict with
pointer types.
Attached v2 patch, removed #ifdef and made the type Ulong like the prototype.
The v
On 1/18/24 12:46, JonY wrote:
Attached patch OK?
Changes unsigned int to unsigned long to match __gdtoa due to gcc
becoming more strict with pointer types.
Attached v2 patch, removed #ifdef and made the type Ulong like the
prototype.
From 1415ff7f9b835e9ea39864c9625ec6fb72682918 Mon Sep 17 0
在 2024-01-18 20:55, Martin Storsjö 写道:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2024, JonY via Mingw-w64-public wrote:
Attached patch OK?
Changes unsigned int to unsigned long to match __gdtoa due to gcc becoming more strict with
pointer types.
The change is most probably ok, but can you quote the actual warning/err
On Thu, 18 Jan 2024, JonY via Mingw-w64-public wrote:
Attached patch OK?
Changes unsigned int to unsigned long to match __gdtoa due to gcc becoming
more strict with pointer types.
The change is most probably ok, but can you quote the actual warning/error
that it fixes - I don't quite see wh
Attached patch OK?
Changes unsigned int to unsigned long to match __gdtoa due to gcc
becoming more strict with pointer types.From b73262a164978a1733777e6628c00c3672794dea Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jonathan Yong <10wa...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:42:51 +
Subject: [PATCH] __pfo
