Mike Stump writes:
>> We currently only support constant integer
>> widths <= 2*HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT, and the assert is correctly
>> triggering if we try to build a wider constant.
>
> Can you give me a concrete example of what will fail with the constant
> 0 generated by:
>
> return GEN_I
On Thu, 8 Mar 2012, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> The manual claims a future version of G++ will support a hybrid
> instantiation model, which I don't think is still planned, and
> describes extern templates as an extension when they are in C++11.
>
> * doc/extend.texi (Template Instantiation):
Hi,
That won't catch something like
int i;
static_cast(i);
which is also a useless cast, because i is already an int lvalue; not
all lvalues are derived from references. Note that something like
static_cast(42);
is not a useless cast, because it turns a prvalue into an xvalue.
Agreed. In o
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 10:50 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Since we must use reg64 in %fs:(%reg) memory operand like
>
> movq x@gottpoff(%rip),%reg64;
> mov %fs:(%reg64),%reg
>
> this patch optimizes x32 TLS IE load and store by wrapping
> %reg64 inside of UNSPEC when Pmode ==
On Mar 18, 2012, at 3:16 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Mike Stump writes:
>>> We currently only support constant integer
>>> widths <= 2*HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT, and the assert is correctly
>>> triggering if we try to build a wider constant.
>>
>> Can you give me a concrete example of what will f
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012, Tom G. Christensen wrote:
> Latest results for 4.6.x
>
> -tgc
>
> Testresults for 4.6.2:
> hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11
> i386-pc-solaris2.8
> i686-pc-linux-gnu
> powerpc-apple-darwin8.11.0
> sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (2)
> x86_64-apple-darwin10.8.0
> x86_64-apple-darwin11.
Dear All,
Please find attached a fix for PR41600 plus some. It is reasonably
straightforward but the following should be noted:
(i) gfc_get_vptr_from_expr exploits that seeming fact that tracing
back any class expression through TREE_OPERAND 0 eventually gets one
back to the class expression. I
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> I am testing this patch. OK for trunk if it passes all tests?
>
> No, force_reg will generate a pseudo, so this conversion is valid only
> for !can_create_pseudo ().
>
> At least for *tls_initial_exec_x32_store, you will need a temporary to
On Fri, 9 Mar 2012, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> Per the DWARF web site
>
> http://dwarfstd.org/Download.php
>
> the correct names of the various versions of the DWARF standard appear
> to be either "DWARF Version N" or "DWARF N", rather than e.g. "DWARF2",
> "DWARF-2", "dwarf2", or whatever. Thi
On 03/18/2012 03:00 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Fri, 9 Mar 2012, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
Per the DWARF web site
http://dwarfstd.org/Download.php
the correct names of the various versions of the DWARF standard appear
to be either "DWARF Version N" or "DWARF N", rather than e.g. "DWARF2",
"DWAR
Dear Paul,
thanks for the patch.
Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
+ /* Transfer the selector typespec to the associate name. */
+
+ copy_ts_from_selector_to_associate (gfc_expr *expr1, gfc_expr *expr2)
+ {
I think it is not obvious which type spec is which. Maybe you could
add a "(expr1)" and "(ex
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> Apart from the above, at least invoke.texi does not define what an x32
>> environment is. Shouldn't that done somewhere (before this terminology
>> is used)?
> I am not sure where to put it. In any case, here is a patch to update
> GCC 4.7.0 changes with lin
Now that G++ supports it we can use a NSDMI for std::list::_M_size to
avoid needing conditional compilation to set it in the constructors.
I think the attached patch is an improvement so I plan to commit it to
trunk soon unless I hear objections.
* include/bits/stl_list.h (list::_M_size):
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 6:12 PM, William J. Schmidt
wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Now that we're into stage 1 again, I'd like to submit the first round of
> changes for dominator-based strength reduction, which will address
> issues from PR22586, PR35308, PR46556, and perhaps others. I'm
> attaching tw
On Sun, 2012-03-18 at 18:19 -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 6:12 PM, William J. Schmidt
> wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Now that we're into stage 1 again, I'd like to submit the first round of
> > changes for dominator-based strength reduction, which will address
> > issues f
I knew I was forgetting something: bootstrapped and tested with no
additional regressions on powerpc64-linux-gnu...
On Sun, 2012-03-18 at 20:38 -0500, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-03-18 at 18:19 -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 6:12 PM, William J. Schmidt
> > w
Updated doc/invoke.texi and submitted.
Thanks,
-Sri.
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 11:58 PM, wrote:
>
> Ok for google branches after updating the doc/invoke.texi file.
>
> David
>
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/5825054/
17 matches
Mail list logo
