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.
next prev parent 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).