Re: [PATCH] libgomp: Revise libgomp/Fortran support conditionals

>> Indeed. Somehow, when I gave the agent the link and asked it to update
>> the patch it decided it made more sense to recreate the hunks manually
>> instead of just downloading the patch exactly. I thought the AIs 
>> weren't
>> so dumb.
> 
> In my opinion, humans are still responsible (and still need to be
> capable) to oversee and understand what any "AI" is doing.
> 
> And, I personally don't understand why you need "AI" to copy a patch
> file?

I don't *need* it, it's just easier that way. I'm just reducing some 
cognitive load.
And I'm capable. I just assumed it cannot trip on such a basic task, 
when the agents are capable of so much more.

What would you have done in this circumstance? Just copy pasted the 
whole mail into a .patch file?
I'm not very used to email workflows when gcc is the only project I ever 
use them for.

If you want a more impressive example, the patch for this branch was 
generated in one shot.

https://github.com/skeeto/w64devkit/pull/41

I frequently debug and patch all sorts of issues in the toolchain using 
agents. Including this one.
Even if what I suggested wasn't perfect, figuring out the cause myself 
without using an agent would have been very difficult. And at the very 
least the generated patch worked for my own circumstances.

> The good thing that I got out of this is that I learned to use your
> 'Dockerfile' locally with Podman, and learned to build Windows-hosted
> GCC, and run under Wine that one as well as the resulting 
> multi-threaded
> GCC/OpenMP executable.
> So: we're good again.  :-)

That's great. I've wasted weeks before trying to replicate this outside 
of docker before, so I can use a trunk gcc clone.
I then got an agent to write a script that does the whole process on 
Linux end-to-end, and it has spared me a ton of effort.

Maybe you'd be interested in it too.
https://gist.github.com/Peter0x44/9aca4f3be97e74dcae004a967da360a9

Thanks for everything,
Peter