public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net>
To: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
Cc: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>,
	GCC Development <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
	"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
	Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
	Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, testsuite]: Test compat _Complex varargs passing
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 20:20:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <D425092C-7586-4CAD-B873-41FAFB7C9E87@comcast.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFULd4awMpupam7zgaP6Y9zX9KPgfY5mHvZftf0W9JpVzA+2+w@mail.gmail.com>

On Sep 8, 2016, at 1:53 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 4 Sep 2016, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> 
>>> It looks that different handling of _Complex char, _Complex short and
>>> _Complex float is there on purpose. Is (was?) there a limitation in a
>>> c language standard that prevents passing of these arguments as
>>> varargs?
>> 
>> Well, ISO C doesn't define complex integers at all.  But it's deliberate
>> (see DR#206) that _Complex float doesn't promote to _Complex double in
>> variable arguments.  And there is nothing in ISO C to stop _Complex float
>> being passed in variable arguments.
>> 
>> For all these types including the complex integer ones: given that the
>> front end doesn't promote them, they should be usable in variable
>> arguments.
> 
> Attached patch adds various _Complex variable arguments tests to
> scalar-by-value-4 and scalar-return-4 tests. These tests previously
> erroneously claimed that these argument types are unsupported as
> variable arguments.
> 
> 2016-09-08  Uros Bizjak  <ubizjak@gmail.com>
> 
>    * gcc.dg/compat/scalar-by-value-4_x.c: Also test passing of
>    variable arguments.
>    * gcc.dg/compat/scalar-by-value-4_y.c (testva##NAME): New.
>    * gcc.dg/compat/scalar-by-value-4_main.c: Update description comment.
>    * gcc.dg/compat/scalar-return-4_x.c: Also test returning of
>    variable argument.
>    * gcc.dg/compat/scalar-return-4_y.c (testva##NAME): New.
>    * gcc.dg/compat/scalar-return-4_main.c: Update description comment.
> 
> Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu {,-m32}.
> 
> OK for mainline?

Ok.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-09-12 20:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-08  9:09 Uros Bizjak
2016-09-12 20:20 ` Mike Stump [this message]
2016-09-12 20:58 ` Jeff Law

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=D425092C-7586-4CAD-B873-41FAFB7C9E87@comcast.net \
    --to=mikestump@comcast.net \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=rth@twiddle.net \
    --cc=ubizjak@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).