Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "777770".
Did you mean:
377770
2009 Jul 23
0
[LLVMdev] proposed new rule for getelementptr
Hi Dan,
Thanks for reply, it seems that
Dan Gohman wrote:
> On Jul 23, 2009, at 1:59 AM, Mark Shannon wrote:
>
>> Hi Dan,
>>
>> What you are proposing is a major change in the semantics of llvm.
>>
>> You are taking certain uses of an instruction that have well defined
>> behaviour and undefining them.
>>
>> Have you made any estimate of how
2009 Jul 23
2
[LLVMdev] proposed new rule for getelementptr
On Jul 23, 2009, at 1:59 AM, Mark Shannon wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> What you are proposing is a major change in the semantics of llvm.
>
> You are taking certain uses of an instruction that have well defined
> behaviour and undefining them.
>
> Have you made any estimate of how many peoples' code this may or may
> not
> break?
>
> I think this is a *very* bad
2015 Jun 16
0
Processed: raise severity of GCC 5 triggered build failures to important
...'
> severity 777766 important
Bug #777766 [src:adun.app] adun.app: ftbfs with GCC-5
Severity set to 'important' from 'normal'
> severity 777767 important
Bug #777767 [src:afnix] afnix: ftbfs with GCC-5
Severity set to 'important' from 'normal'
> severity 777770 important
Bug #777770 [src:analitza] analitza: ftbfs with GCC-5
Severity set to 'important' from 'normal'
> severity 777771 important
Bug #777771 [src:ants] ants: ftbfs with GCC-5
Severity set to 'important' from 'normal'
> severity 777772 important
Bug #777772...