>
>
>
> --- Comment #3 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-28 19:17
> ---
> Well, some of the structural analysis for which emit errors is done even later
> than that, so it would be naive to pretend that we can catch everything during
> parsing.
I don't understand why it is
>
>
>
> --- Comment #5 from dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu 2006-05-03
> 18:54 ---
> IMO Comment #4 does not look close enough at what is actually happening.
> IMO tree-ch is the root cause here.
>
> Given the above CFG, critical edge splitting transforms this into:
> Given t
>
>
>
> --- Comment #5 from gary at intrepid dot com 2006-05-05 16:37 ---
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > Then the real question is why do you think this is a bug?
>
> 1. it is a bug to create temporaries and assert 'volatile' on them
Why do you say that?
> 2. there is code in create_
>
>
> compile fails using mingw gcc-4.0.3
>
> using ../configure -v --enable-languages=c,c++ --with-gcc --with-gnu-ld
> --with-gnu-
> as --prefix=/mingw
>
> i get an error:
>
> make[3]: *** No rule to make target `../../gcc/objc/objc-act.c', needed by
> `s-gtype'. Stop.
> make[3]: Leaving dir
On May 15, 2006, at 9:15 PM, Bar-Tov Aharon-R53349 wrote:
hello,
something that seems like a problem (havn't found something in the
bug base).
template
class t_base
{
public:
T *ptr;
};
template
class t_derived : public t_base
{
public:
t_derived() { ptr = NULL; }
};
This is desc
>
>
>
> --- Comment #4 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-05-16 21:11 ---
> Hmm, that's interesting. When I call g++ from a Makefile I get a
> "unrecognizable insn" error but calling it directly leads to the segfault.
> I've no idea if this "unrecognizable insn" error is helpful in any w
>
>
>
> --- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-22 18:40 ---
> I get errors for both the submitter's testcase and the testcase in comment
> #1.
> With the comment #1 testcase on powerpc-linux:
>
> Is the testcase valid code? I can do a regression hunt for when the c
>
>
>
> --- Comment #6 from bero at arklinux dot org 2006-05-23 21:41 ---
> It is creative offsetof indeed -- this a "explanation" from a bit of code
> referenced to this one [while it isn't free yet, its license does allow
> posting
> bits of it online]:
> Looks like someone was despe
>
>
>
> --- Comment #19 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-24 18:58
> ---
> (In reply to comment #18)
> > it is still broken on powerpc{,64}
>
> Hi Jakub, I'm not sure exactly what is still broken. On
> powerpc-apple-darwin7.9.0, with mainline gfortran 20060512:
Darwin is
>
>
>
> --- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-24 22:18
> ---
> The bug is with
>
> Path: .
> URL: svn+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/svn/gcc/trunk
> Repository UUID: 138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4
> Revision: 114050
> Node Kind: directory
> Schedule: normal
> Last
>
>
>
> --- Comment #9 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-24 23:23
> ---
> Subject: Bug 27627
>
> Author: danglin
> Date: Wed May 24 23:23:10 2006
> New Revision: 114059
>
> URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=114059
> Log:
> PR target/27627
>
>
>
>
> --- Comment #2 from laurent at guerby dot net 2006-05-25 18:08 ---
> I'm unable to build even a C compiler to the avr target, binutils-2.16.1 +
> newlib-1.13.0 + gcc-4.1.1-prerelease I get:
avr has its own libc and is not supported by newlib.
-- Pinski
On Jun 4, 2006, at 10:12 AM, Vu Quang Cao wrote:
Hi,
I'm writing a program, which executes gcc for
compiling a C proram. Now, I need the returned code of
gcc after compiling.
This is offtopic of this channel. Also it depends on
what OS you are using?
From an unix shell script you can use $?
Length
Arrays and it is officially part of the ISO C99 language.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
>
>
> --- Comment #7 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 21:10
> ---
>
> This is still an issue. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2006-06/msg00178.html
I think this is only an issue when you have a normal multi lib x86_64 but use
--disable-multilib.
-- Pinski
> #define NEEDS_GUARD_P(decl) (TREE_PUBLIC (decl) && (DECL_COMMON (decl) \
> || DECL_ONE_ONLY (decl) \
> || DECL_WEAK (decl) \
> ||
> (!TA
>
>
>
> --- Comment #7 from hhinnant at apple dot com 2006-06-13 21:41 ---
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > Subject: Re: lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template
> > static data
> >
> > > #define NEEDS_GUARD_P(decl) (TREE_PUBLIC (decl) && (DECL_COMMON (decl)
> >
On Jun 14, 2006, at 8:17 AM, rth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #2 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-14
15:17 ---
libgomp is a new feature, and therefore has no "regressions" per se,
and therefore any bug fix applies.
That does not matter. Please read Mark's email
> The problem turned up a week or so before I filed PR 27528, and after
> considerable rs6000 changes made by David Edelsohn.
The change just exposed a latent bug. I am trying to make sure that
you understand that and not blaming David.
Could someone please CC Richard Sandiford, if he is not alr
On Jun 26, 2006, at 9:41 AM, corsepiu at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #3 from corsepiu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-26
16:41 ---
Traceback:
=> the SEGFAULT occurs in memset.
Could it be, "static char* printed" should be initialized = 0?
Looks like reload is storing
>
>
> std::cout.width(6000);
> This program allocates 60 million bytes on the stack in the last output
> statement.
You get what you deserve really. If there are checks then it will be slow.
-- Pinski
>
>
>
> --- Comment #6 from ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de 2006-07-06
> 22:04 ---
> Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] ICE during extc++.h pch generation on Tru64
> UNIX
> V5.1B
>
> The same ICE happens on Solaris 10/x86 (i386-pc-solaris2.10).
On x86-linux-gnu with FC4 I hear, I
>
> GCC 4.1.1 fails to build on Mac OS X 10.4.6.
> 1. Extract source code.
> 2. Open Terminal.
> 3. Run ./configure --enable-threads --x-includes=/usr/X11R6
> --x-libraries=/usr/X11R6 --with-cpu=powerpc --with-mpfr=/usr/local/lib
> --with-gmp=/usr/local/lib.
> 4. Run make.
> 5. The following err
On Jul 15, 2006, at 10:45 PM, ams at gnu dot org wrote:
Because the rules in config.gcc say so:
And that is not why, but that is what is causing linux.h being included?
Again why is Linux.h being included?
-- Pinski
On Jul 16, 2006, at 12:17 AM, ams at gnu dot org wrote:
GNU and GNU/Linux are similar enough not to warrant duplication of the
code from linux.h in gnu.h.
Depends, the duplication is small anyways as linux.h is only 129 lines
(including copyright and comments).
In fact it is way wrong now any
On Jul 16, 2006, at 12:45 AM, ams at gnu dot org wrote:
That is from [gcc]/gcc/config/linux.h, I'm talking about
[gcc]/gcc/config/i386/{linux,gnu}.h. Which is also the one causing
problems without the patch I sent.
bzzz, wrong. TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS is not defined anywhere in
config/i386/linu
On Jul 16, 2006, at 1:07 AM, ams at gnu dot org wrote:
Can you please just apply the patch and close the bug?
Why it is not obvious and I say the patch is incorrect.
-- Pinski
On Jul 16, 2006, at 1:10 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
Why it is not obvious and I say the patch is incorrect.
Oh did I forget (again) to say you really should be posting
patches to the gcc-patches mailing list. If you want them
be included. And I still say the patch is incorrect. I already
On Jul 16, 2006, at 1:25 AM, ams at gnu dot org wrote:
The patch is correct, that you think that the code we use from
*/linux.h should be in */gnu.h is not related to this bug. This is
the setup we have used for almost 10 years, and I see no reason to
change it. The setup works, it minimises
eing done when the LSB
was doing its work. Standards are made to be amended. Witness how
many RFCs there are and how many make previous ones outdated.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
ay is protected and therefor if it was
allowed the user could be able to call A::_say from a place normally
not allowed to call A::_say.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 10:30 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
>
> (void *)((intptr_t)&iptr + (intptr_t)p - (intptr_t)&iptr)
>
> <==>
>
> (void *)(intptr_t)p
>
> which is guaranteed by the std
No that is not guaranteed because of:
If the result cannot be represented in the integer type,
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 10:37 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-16 18:37
> ---
> Guaranteed by 7.18.1.4.
>
"These types are optional."
:)
u don't need to upload them. Also try to login before attaching
them.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 25, 2009, at 12:30 PM, "rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org" > wrote:
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-25
19:30 ---
which makes this bug ... ???
dependent on a bug you're going to file?
Most likely closing as won't fix as this
This code is undefined because of alignment requirments differences
for the structs and the union.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 3, 2009, at 6:33 PM, "dentongosnell at yahoo dot com" > wrote:
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: sparc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkg
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 6, 2009, at 6:12 PM, "mikulas at artax dot karlin dot mff dot
cuni dot cz" wrote:
Gcc became recently (4.4) very bad regarding false positive type-
punned
warnings. In previous versions, the warnings could be suppressed by
casting to
(void *), in 3.x and 4.1 i
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 6, 2009, at 6:34 PM, "mikulas at artax dot karlin dot mff dot
cuni dot cz" wrote:
--- Comment #2 from mikulas at artax dot karlin dot mff dot cuni
dot cz 2009-07-07 01:34 ---
Created an attachment (id=18146)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachm
Thus code is undefined you have an acess of a char array as a struct.
Yes you are only taking the address of an element but it is still
considered an acess by the standards.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 6, 2009, at 6:34 PM, "mikulas at artax dot karlin dot mff dot
cuni dot cz" wrote:
-
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 8, 2009, at 12:32 AM, "bastian dot schick at sciopta dot com" > wrote:
If the following code is compiled with -Os for ARM or ColdFire, the
exit
condition for the loop is removed.
Replacing *tbl++ with tbl[i] or using unsigned long instead of
volatile
unsigned
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 23, 2009, at 10:22 PM, "jim at bodwin dot us" > wrote:
Incorrect code is produced for the following source with the O2
option. In
particular, the assignment to the bitfield field2 is optimized out
of the code
entirely and regImage is left all zero. Correct cod
>
>
>
> --- Comment #2 from malitzke at metronets dot com 2005-11-14 03:58
> ---
> Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE
> process_assert_insertions_for, at tree-vrp.c:2807
>
>
> Here is another try supposedly in plain text. The first bounced at your end
> while my copy came ok.
> R
>
>
>
> --- Comment #2 from woodzltc at sources dot redhat dot com 2005-11-15
> 02:26 ---
> Hi Andrew,
>
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > Confirmed,
> > DECL_ARG_TYPE should be the reference type and the DECL_TYPE should be the
> > normal type.
> >
> > This might also fix the implicat
> --- Comment #4 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-29 03:39
> ---
> The testcase doesn't fail with gcc-4.0 and up, because after tree-ssa opts
> there isn't anything left for the RTL gcse pass to do. However, I believe the
> bug is still there in the code, it is just very much h
>
>
>
> --- Comment #6 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-12-16 18:36 ---
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > (In reply to comment #4)
> > > Too funny, the Andrew-centric view of the world :-) :-)
> > Other people do the same too. I was just the first to complain.
> >
> > There still needs
On Dec 22, 2005, at 5:38 AM, trick at icculus dot org wrote:
--- Comment #10 from trick at icculus dot org 2005-12-22 10:38
---
Maybe you could add a new variable attribute so that these warnings
could at
least be avoided in cases where the coder knows the code is correct ?
Someth
On Dec 30, 2005, at 9:31 PM, yuri at tsoft dot com wrote:
template
struct S {
static inline void exec1(A &vv) {
vv.s1<1>(1);
}
};
You are missing a template keyword.
You want:
vv.template s1<1>(1);
Otherwise you end up with (vv.s1 < 1) > 1 as there is no way for a
compiler
>
>
>
> --- Comment #9 from laurent at guerby dot net 2006-01-03 19:24 ---
> For most (if not all) s-osinte*.ads C type redeclarations, I believe it should
> be sufficient to use a record containing a
> System.Storage_Elements.Storage_Array of the C sizeof(struct), plus may be an
> alig
On Jan 11, 2006, at 8:10 PM, gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu wrote:
| I realize that once the customer specifies -fno-exceptions, all bets
| are off.
Great. Fix the problem in the front-end.
As I said before, there is still a diagnostic issue and now it is worse
with
doing that in the front-end
On Jan 15, 2006, at 8:48 PM, drab at kepler dot fjfi dot cvut dot cz
wrote:
--- Comment #9 from drab at kepler dot fjfi dot cvut dot cz
2006-01-16 01:48 ---
OK, so how about this, couldn't this be an issue?
--- opts.c.old 2006-01-15 23:36:53.0 +0100
+++ opts.c 2006
On Jan 18, 2006, at 11:19 AM, pcarlini at suse dot de wrote:
--- Comment #4 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-01-18 16:19
---
(In reply to comment #3)
const does nothing when it comes to local variables except for not
letting you
touch it in other expressions. It does nothing for op
> > int f(const int *a, int *b)
> > {
> >*b = 1;
> >return *a;
> > }
> >
> > a and b can alias and there is no way around that at all because that is
> > what the C++ standard says.
>
> In this case the compiler should warn because a could be declared "const int *
> const" and b could be
On Jul 19, 2006, at 9:19 AM, lucier at math dot purdue dot edu wrote:
I must be one hell of an atypical guy building 4.1.1, my bootstrap
on x86-64
RHEL 4.0 didn't work (PR 28066),
Well PR 28066 is not a GCC bug but a bug in an older pre-release of
binutils.
-- Pinski
>
>
>
> When executing `make bootstrap', the following error occurs.
>
> stage1/xgcc -Bstage1/ -B/usr/local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -O2 -g
> -fomit-frame-pointer -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes
> -Wmissing-prototypes -pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros
> -Wold
;
> uint64_t z = dz;
>
> It almost seems as if gcc -O in some cases compiles using a built-in
> declaration of round() that returns a 32-bit int.
Yes this is wrong code, GCC is generating for some reason lround instead of
llround.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
>
>
> --- Comment #7 from skunk at iskunk dot org 2006-07-26 20:57 ---
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > This _is_ plain ANSI C89.
>
> ISO C90 was specified. Yes, my bad, ANSI does allow whitespace before the
> "#"---but what of it? It's good practice anyhow to place the mark first, and
>
>
>
> --- Comment #2 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-07-31 17:54 ---
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > What is on line 24 in the awk file?
>
> (...)
> #
> # Usage: awk -f opt-gather.awk file1.opt [...] > outputfile
>
> function sort(ARRAY, ELEMENTS) <=== line 24
Hehe, maybe Su
>
>
>
> --- Comment #2 from bonomo at sal dot wisc dot edu 2006-08-09 19:14
> ---
> Subject: Re: internal compiler error: in find_reloads, at
> reload.c:3690
>
>
> Ah! This is not really a gcc bug then. That's a bit of
> a relief.
It is most likely a GCC bug but with the port to
>
>
>
> --- Comment #56 from whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2006-08-09 21:33
> ---
> Dorit,
>
> >This flag is needed in order to allow vectorization of reduction (summation
> >in your case) of floating-point data.
>
> OK, but this is a bd flag to require. From the computational s
> Which part of:
>
> __builtin_isunordered(nan,nan) = 1
> __builtin_isnan(nan) = 0
>
> is consistent?
Did you read what the options do because it seems like you did not and you keep
on agruing that
it is inconsistent except for the fact this is way these options are done as it
just says "allow
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 13:40 +, hosking at cs dot purdue dot edu
wrote:
>
> --- Comment #4 from hosking at cs dot purdue dot edu 2006-08-23 13:40
> ---
> Here is a stack trace showing call to resize_phi_node from execute_pre.
Do you have a testcase or is this with a modified compiler
>
>
>
> --- Comment #8 from hosking at cs dot purdue dot edu 2006-08-23 23:43
> ---
> I can send whatever traces you might need for diagnosis.
Can you provide the dump generated by -fdump-tree-pre-details?
-- Pinski
gnu and I could
not get even the reduced testcase ICEing on i686-linux-gnu.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 22:30 +, mark at codesourcery dot com wrote:
> So, that's what should be fixed.
Except that means introducing a language hook which
is only to be useful in one place.
The other way of fixing this is not to call fold if
we have a MINUS_EXPR with the 2nd operand as 1, we
ju
On Sun, 2006-09-03 at 19:35 +, lindevel at gmx dot net wrote:
> assert_testcase.cpp: In function ‘int main()’:
> assert_testcase.cpp:16: error: ‘debug(((const char*)"Some
> string"))’ has type ‘void’ and is not a
> throw-expression
That says to me that the expression `debug("Some string")' ha
On Sun, 2006-09-03 at 20:08 +, lindevel at gmx dot net wrote:
>
> --- Comment #4 from lindevel at gmx dot net 2006-09-03 20:08 ---
> You proved ##c++ wrong! They bet that I would be ignored. ;)
>
> The thing is that a void itself is not invalid. Using (expr ? void : void)
> works as
On Wed, 2006-09-06 at 14:19 +, bunk at stusta dot de wrote:
>
> --- Comment #4 from bunk at stusta dot de 2006-09-06 14:19 ---
> Note:
> "checking host system type... powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu" is obviously wrong
No it is not.
-- Pinski
oid function() {
> printf("%c", x);
You need either B::x or this->x to make the access of x as dependent.
Please also read http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.4/changes.html which talks about this
and many
other changes that might affect your code.
And maybe http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0/changes.html
and http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.1/changes.html
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
ation is non-existant. */
> > + if (!optimize)
> > +return 0;
>
> Perhaps
>
> if (!flag_tree_ter)
> return 0;
>
> would be more accurate?
Well -f{no-,}tree-ter can be still passed and you will get it wrong,
what about:
if (!optimize || !flag_tree_ter)
return 0;
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
t bug and
should be filed separately.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
>
>
> --- Comment #6 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2006-09-20
> 23:49 ---
> Does anyone know why we don't run this test at lp64 on powerpc? I find that on
> powerpc-apple-darwin8 the following changes allow...
>
> make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix'{-m32
On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 17:05 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-22 17:05
> ---
> (In reply to comment #13)
> > Yet another test case from Anton we don't catch. Will they never end?!?! ;)
> I bet a beer or a shot of
On Tue, 2006-09-26 at 04:44 +, acahalan at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> Although it wouldn't work for the example code, extending the aliasing
> behavior
> of (char*) to (void*) would fix the problem for LOTS of code out in the wild.
> People normally use a (void*) when they want a generic pointe
>
>
>
> --- Comment #5 from sebor at roguewave dot com 2006-09-26 18:56 ---
> You mean something like: if (is_pointer (p)) delete p;
>
> I suppose that could happen but why should it be any different than other
> non-sensical but lexically valid constructs with undefined behavior that
>
>
>
> --- Comment #8 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 23:51
> ---
> Isn't this handled by -ftrapv?
No because sizeof is unsigned and -ftrapv only deals with signed types.
-- Pinski
>
>
>
> --- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-29 22:04 ---
> Is:
> extern void abort (void);
>
> struct S { struct S *s; } s;
> struct T { struct T *t; } t;
>
> static inline void
> foo (void *s)
> {
> struct T *p = s;
> __builtin_memcpy (&p->t, &t.t, sizeof (t.
On Sun, 2006-10-01 at 05:32 +, acahalan at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> --- Comment #9 from acahalan at gmail dot com 2006-10-01 05:32 ---
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > This is definitely firmly in the class of "extension to the language that
> > requires a thorough proposal to be presen
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 05:00 +, seongbae dot park at gmail dot com
wrote:
> With 4.1.0 i686-unknown-linux-gnu target:
>
> # gcc -O2 m.c -S
try -O2 -msse2, you get:
_Z8todoubledd:
subl$12, %esp
fldl24(%esp)
faddl 16(%esp)
fstpl (%esp)
movsd
x since that would mean double
the amount of processes in the process table. Maybe Linux needs this
problem if it still exists. I know Linux threads had this problem but I
forget if NTPL does.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
On Fri, 2006-10-06 at 03:04 +, kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> It is unclear to me where you intend to put this function.
> If it is in the gfortran frontend, I will outright reject
> the patch and lobby to have it removed if anyone applies.
It should be in darwin.c in the back-end. C
On Sat, 2006-10-14 at 17:52 +, h dot b dot furuseth at usit dot uio
dot no wrote:
> > Also you forgot one thing '%' does not have to match up with the ANSI
> > character set so it could be negative in signed char which means char
> > (which could default to signed char) would be different.
>
>
On Sat, 2006-10-14 at 18:25 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-14 18:25
> ---
> DR 224 says this is invalid code
Sorry valid code.
-- Pinski
On Sun, 2006-10-15 at 03:24 +, gcc-bugzilla at kayari dot org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #13 from gcc-bugzilla at kayari dot org 2006-10-15 03:24
> ---
> If this ever gets fixed (which I hope it does) then maybe it should depend on
> -std=c++98 so this continues to work by default, or it
> Additionally, link times are much longer than with 3.4.6
Link times are usually a binutils issue unless you are comparing
with the same version of binutils.
-- Pinski
> Thus, two options present themself: ditch automake generated targets, do it
> manually as everywhere else or tweak the Makefile.am to touch libgomp.info
> before invoking `missing makeinfo`.
>
> Preferences?
This only matters when building from SVN. I say we should just require makeinfo
and f
On 2/27/07, Shaun Jackman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
$ avr-gcc -mmcu=atmega64 -g -O2 -Wall -Wextra -Werror -Os -I.. -I.
I submitted http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30984 for this
bug. It is a generic issue.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
On 9 Mar 2007 23:00:55 -, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Other than that, more precise alias information
can cause more register pressure, too.
Fix the register allocator instead of complaining about this issue. I
am sorry but if people want a compiler which wo
p with both sides of the function having this hazard.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
are not expecting this behavor but that is not our fault you are
depening on undefined behavior.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
On 23 Mar 2007 05:01:00 -, spark at gcc dot gnu dot org
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problematic STRIP_SIGN_NOPS() call is from fold_unary()
which is called from try_combine_conversion() in tree-ssa-pre.c.
STRIP_SIGN_NOPS() is called with the expression:
No, STRIP_SIGN_NOPS is correct, j
On 3/23/07, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 23 Mar 2007 05:01:00 -, spark at gcc dot gnu dot org
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problematic STRIP_SIGN_NOPS() call is from fold_unary()
> which is called from try_combine_conversion() in tree-ssa-pre.c.
>
&
On 17 Jul 2007 05:15:47 -, cnstar9988 at gmail dot com
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- Comment #18 from cnstar9988 at gmail dot com 2007-07-17 05:15 ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> Did you copy all of the libraries including the 64bit ones?
hp 11.11(pa8800), supports both 32 and 64b
On 17 Jul 2007 10:24:12 -, jensseidel at users dot sf dot net
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
An Open MPI related discussion about atomic operations happened
the last days, because architecture specific assembler code failed again
for some exotic platforms.
And that is the reason why GCC added a
nstall page already, see:
http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html#x-x-solaris2
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
On 25 Jul 2007 08:40:09 -, dorit at gcc dot gnu dot org
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
In the meantime, would you please try this patch?:
Of course after my patch for PR 16660, the patch here should be
changed to just return true always.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
On 26 Jul 2007 13:57:41 -, manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think that is a sensible feature request, am I missing something Andrew?
memset with a zero size is valid code.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
On 6 Aug 2007 12:42:18 -, pluto at agmk dot net
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> moreover i'm wondering why gcc uses movdqa for unaligned loads?
Because __m128i is assumed to be aligned.
-- Pinski
d g77 was removed. So this could go either as a
regression or really a new feature. Also why does this program use
con anyways, shouldn't it just use the default units which are
connected to stdio/stdout anyways as they might not be connected to
the console anyways?
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
quot;i386-dis.c" ICE is most likely PR 22371.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
eally should be fixing GCC and not changing binutils. And I already
mentioned this is most likely PR 22371 and that you should be filing
bug reports about these two errors/ICEs.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
1 - 100 of 465 matches
Mail list logo
