On Sunday, 7 July 2019 at 09:57:33 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On Sun, 7 Jul 2019 at 08:25, Timo Sintonen via D.gnu
wrote:
My little test program is nearly working now.
Some funny things I have found:
- When not using -O2 4 extra bytes appear in front of tdata
init values. With -O2 they
My little test program is nearly working now.
Some funny things I have found:
- When not using -O2 4 extra bytes appear in front of tdata init
values. With -O2 they disappear.
- I have my own calloc where I first allocate a block with malloc
and then use memset to zero it. GCC can see this and
On Thursday, 23 May 2019 at 07:19:23 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Given the nature of the segfault your getting, I would expect
that you'd get the same problem even if the sources were in D.
It is _not_ normal for a module->importedFrom to be NULL or an
invalid pointer. Something must have gone
On Monday, 20 May 2019 at 19:12:54 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On Mon, 20 May 2019 at 20:05, Timo Sintonen via D.gnu
wrote:
On Sunday, 19 May 2019 at 18:58:09 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
> What's the system compiler version you are using? I've
> tested with both gcc-9.1 and g
On Sunday, 19 May 2019 at 18:58:09 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
What's the system compiler version you are using? I've tested
with both gcc-9.1 and gcc-8.3, not able to reproduce.
It is in the dump above (even two times ;)
GNU D (GCC) version 9.1.0 (arm-eabi)
compiled by GNU C version
On Sunday, 19 May 2019 at 14:17:05 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
I don't really expect any part of druntime to build on bare
metal. Too much depends on libc being available.
I have done this several times so I mostly know what I am doing
and I do understand that this may also be something in my lo
On Sunday, 19 May 2019 at 10:49:51 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
On Sunday, 19 May 2019 at 06:54:14 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
I am updating my toolset and libraries to GCC/GDC 9.1 release.
First impression is that druntime needs more work than with
previous versions. Many places to change and even
On Sunday, 19 May 2019 at 09:34:55 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Sun, 19 May 2019 06:54:14 + schrieb Timo Sintonen:
I am updating my toolset and libraries to GCC/GDC 9.1 release.
First impression is that druntime needs more work than with
previous versions. Many places to change and even
I am updating my toolset and libraries to GCC/GDC 9.1 release.
First impression is that druntime needs more work than with
previous versions. Many places to change and even compiler
crashes when compiling some files.
Before I look further I want to ask if there has been any testing
with this
On Saturday, 22 July 2017 at 01:11:02 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Friday, 21 July 2017 at 23:44:53 UTC, Mike wrote:
I'm getting broken binaries with -O2 and -O3. I've nailed the
culprit down to -fschedule-insns (i.e. if I add
-fno-schedule-insns to -O2 or -O3, the binary works fine).
I disassembled
On Wednesday, 31 August 2016 at 10:12:21 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
There was @disable this(this)
This prevents to use a location as argument to a function,
like:
print(timer.count). Is there any reason to have this line or
not?
I guess timer is a (enum) pointer to a struct and count is a
Vo
On Wednesday, 31 August 2016 at 10:12:21 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Wed, 31 Aug 2016 09:07:49 +
schrieb Timo Sintonen :
The original functions had force_inline attribute. The
compiler said it can not inline because the body is not
available. Is this because they are templates or is
Some thing that I have noticed in the original struct definition
struct Volatile(T) {
T raw;
nothrow:
@disable this(this);
A opAssign(A)(A a) { volatileStore(&raw, a); return a; }
T load() @property { return volatileLoad(&raw); }
alias load this;
void opOpAssi
On Sunday, 28 August 2016 at 13:26:37 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Sun, 28 Aug 2016 09:28:24 +
schrieb Timo Sintonen :
I just translated my sample program and everything seems to
work in my limited tests. Here is a simplified example of an
uart:
alias uarttype = uartreg*;
enum uarttype
On Sunday, 28 August 2016 at 08:34:15 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Sat, 27 Aug 2016 08:05:08 +
schrieb Timo Sintonen :
The Volatile!T code you posted does not show how to map such a
Volatile!T instance to a certain address. The code in 2) could
be placed into a @property, but some stuff
I updated my system to gdc master. As expected, my program that
uses shared variables to accress hardware registers did not work
any more. I took the old Volatile datatype we made some years ago
and the modified version is something like this:
struct Volatile(T) {
T raw;
nothrow:
On Monday, 7 March 2016 at 21:12:02 UTC, Taylor Hillegeist wrote:
I'm working on getting my FRDM-kl25z board up and running with
d. whatever works at this point.
The issue is when i try to specify hey this struct is over
here! using:
__gshared SIM_MemMap * SIMY = cast(SIM_MemMap *)
0
On Saturday, 6 February 2016 at 21:58:17 UTC, Dan Olson wrote:
Hi Iain, Johannes. I'm asking here because I don't expect
anybody else is playing with thumb instructions.
Both GDC and LDC have version ARM_Thumb defined for original
thumb (call it thumb-1) and thumb-2. But there is no way to
On Saturday, 30 May 2015 at 16:55:14 UTC, denizzzka wrote:
Hi!
I am tried to use step-by-step instructions from wiki
(http://wiki.dlang.org/Bare_Metal_ARM_Cortex-M_GDC_Cross_Compiler)
to build toolchain on Debian GNU/Linux 8 and got this error
after execute "make -j4 all-target-libgcc":
I
People have been asking a build script Here is one I have
written. This was originally ment to build gdc in a virtual
machine but I did not get this to work in a vm. There were always
missing something or some issues like 32/64 bit mismatch.
This script gets the current head of gdc, loads the req
On Friday, 20 February 2015 at 19:51:16 UTC, Henri Sundelin wrote:
Hi Timo,
Thanks for the info! I looked the minlibd, the biggest question
for me is whether it targets too small devices, taking out the
most of phobos functionality in the process? What are your
ultimate goals?
While my pers
On Wednesday, 18 February 2015 at 13:07:12 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 18 February 2015 at 12:34, Timo Sintonen via D.gnu
wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 February 2015 at 12:12:04 UTC, Iain Buclaw
wrote:
You can't throw without a GC allocation currently. I'm open
to
suggestions a
On Wednesday, 18 February 2015 at 12:12:04 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
You can't throw without a GC allocation currently. I'm open to
suggestions and patches welcome.
See here:
https://github.com/D-Programming-GDC/GDC/blob/master/libphobos/libdruntime/gcc/deh.d#L152
Iain.
I was just goimg
On Tuesday, 17 February 2015 at 22:07:38 UTC, Henri Sundelin
wrote:
Hello folks,
I'm trying to evaluate a possibility to use D for an embedded
case. We want to use the same application base from the high
end to the low end. In this case high end means full Linux
server, and low end must be a
I have been trying to compile multilib for cortex-m0/m3/m4
I added this to gcc/config/arm/t-arm-elf:
MULTILIB_OPTIONS += mcpu=cortex-m0/mcpu=cortex-m3/mcpu=cortex-m4
mfloat-abi=hard mfpu=fpv4-sp-d16
MULTILIB_DIRNAMES += cortex-m0 cortex-m3 cortex-m4
MULTILIB_REQUIRED += mcpu=cortex-m0
MULTIL
This came to my mind while reading the other list.
Compiling gdc automatically enables compiling c++. This is
natural because gdc is made with c++.
When making a cross compiler only host c++ is needed, not the
target one. C++ for the target is still built and it also
requires target libc (or ne
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 14:47:57 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Sun, 17 Aug 2014 14:36:53 +
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
But the register corruption is still an issue. My tls function
clearly uses r3 and does not save it.
Johannes, do you know the arm calling system? Is it
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 14:47:57 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Sun, 17 Aug 2014 14:36:53 +
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 13:59:03 UTC, Artur Skawina via
D.gnu wrote:
> On 08/17/14 15:44, Timo Sintonen via D.gnu wrote:
>
>> I am compiling
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 13:59:03 UTC, Artur Skawina via
D.gnu wrote:
On 08/17/14 15:44, Timo Sintonen via D.gnu wrote:
I am compiling for arm and I am sorry I misinterpreted the
optimized code. Actually the code is correct but it still does
not work.
The problem is that the call to get
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 11:35:33 UTC, Artur Skawina via
D.gnu wrote:
It works for me:
import volat; // module w/ the last Volatile(T)
implementation.
struct uartreg {
Volatile!int sr;
Volatile!int dr;
Volatile!int brr;
Volatile!int cr1;
Volatile
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 07:57:15 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
This seems to work.
This does not work with member functions
struct uartreg {
Volatile!int sr;
Volatile!int dr;
Volatile!int brr;
Volatile!int cr1;
Volatile!int cr2;
Volatile!int cr3;
Volatile!int
On Saturday, 16 August 2014 at 20:01:06 UTC, Artur Skawina via
D.gnu wrote:
On 08/16/14 20:40, Artur Skawina wrote:
How can I use this with struct members ?
One possibility would be to declare all members as
`Volatile!...`, or
I did not like that required dereference in the previous
versio
On Saturday, 16 August 2014 at 09:59:03 UTC, Artur Skawina via
D.gnu wrote:
On 08/16/14 09:33, Johannes Pfau via D.gnu wrote:
https://github.com/D-Programming-GDC/GDC/pull/82
[Only noticed this accidentally; using a mailing list
instead of some web forum would increase visibility...]
enum va
On Saturday, 16 August 2014 at 07:36:07 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Iain recently pushed a commit to put zero initializers into
bss, so
that's intentional:
http://bugzilla.gdcproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=139
But I understand your point that it should be in rodata
instead, you'll
have to discuss
On Thursday, 14 August 2014 at 19:05:46 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Thu, 14 Aug 2014 17:53:32 +
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
On Thursday, 14 August 2014 at 17:13:23 UTC, Johannes Pfau
wrote:
> Am Thu, 14 Aug 2014 10:07:04 +0000
> schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
>
>
On Thursday, 14 August 2014 at 17:13:23 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Thu, 14 Aug 2014 10:07:04 +
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
I have been looking at object files to see if I can reduce the
memory usage for minimum systems. There are two things I have
noticed:
1. In the data seg
I have been looking at object files to see if I can reduce the
memory usage for minimum systems. There are two things I have
noticed:
1. In the data segment there is some source code as ascii text
from a template in gcc/atomics.d . This is in the actual data
segment and not in debug info segm
On Wednesday, 23 July 2014 at 05:41:53 UTC, Iain Buclaw via D.gnu
wrote:
On 23 Jul 2014 06:25, "Timo Sintonen via D.gnu"
First forget D and try to build a C only toolset. If this
works then
build c++
I'd skip step one and just go straight to building C++ first.
Given that
g
On Tuesday, 22 July 2014 at 22:13:15 UTC, John Carter wrote:
So for various reasons I see potential to use a gdc on an
Altera FPGA with a nios2 softcore running embedded linux.
Given gdc on linux exists, gdc arm port exists, gcc nios2 back
end exists
Leaves me wondering... how hard could
On Tuesday, 24 June 2014 at 14:14:18 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
I think we should at least try to bring this to the main
newsgroup,
I told you this is not going to work. The decision seems to be
made even when the conversion is still going on. Lets just make
this into gdc so we can continue t
On Sunday, 13 July 2014 at 11:17:29 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
via D.gnu wrote:
Yes, I'm interested principally in cross-compiling, both for
linux-on-ARM and bare-metal ARM.
You may also have a look at my minlibd:
https://bitbucket.org/timosi/minlibd
There is a minimun libdruntime suitab
On Thursday, 10 July 2014 at 23:54:08 UTC, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling via D.gnu wrote:
On 08/07/14 17:58, Iain Buclaw via D.gnu wrote:
My stance at the moment is that DFLAGS should be recognised by
the
build tool, not the compiler.
I wonder if John's specific concern may be to do with how dmd
u
On Sunday, 29 June 2014 at 08:21:34 UTC, Iain Buclaw via D.gnu
wrote:
On 29 June 2014 08:16, Timo Sintonen via D.gnu
wrote:
I tried to build my cross compiler from current head.
I got "lvalue required as left operand of assignment" in
d-objfile.cc lines
1717 and 2107.
Hi Timo,
I tried to build my cross compiler from current head.
I got "lvalue required as left operand of assignment" in
d-objfile.cc lines 1717 and 2107.
To keep this thread going, I had a quick look at the reference
material of the dip and picked some thoughts.
In some languages volatile has a stronger meaning, like
guaranteeing an atomic access. In some languages it may not
guarantee anything.
In this proposal volatile is only for optimizat
I did not yet read the dip but here are some of my thoughts:
At the old days peripherals were simple. An uart might have a
control register, a status register and a data register, 8 bit
each. It just did not matter how they were accessed. Now a
peripheral like usb or ethernet may have tens of
Now I got the exceptions to work.
I have not been able to find how to control the libgcc build
process. The configure script seems not to know that I give
different defaults for the compiler in --with switches. Configure
still assumes the compiler defaults arm mode although it is in
thumb mod
On Saturday, 8 March 2014 at 09:12:49 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Saturday, 8 March 2014 at 08:09:29 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
Why do you need synchronized? Are you building some kind of
multithreading library?
I don't need it yet. I'm just exploring features of D and
trying to le
On Friday, 7 March 2014 at 18:41:35 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> To make sure that libgcc
> is built correctly for Cortex-M4 you have to specify
> "--with-arch=armv7e-m --with-cpu=cortex-m4 --with-mode=thumb
> --with-tune=" when configuring gcc/gdc.
>
Gcc build fails with these. It will take time
On Saturday, 8 March 2014 at 07:52:10 UTC, Mike wrote:
I'm getting an ICE in d-target.cc/critsecsize when I create a
synchronized block. Looking at the source code, it's pretty
obvious why - my target (ARM Cortex-M bare metal) isn't any of
the ones listed:
if (global.params.isWindows)
...
On Sunday, 2 March 2014 at 15:36:01 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
To make sure that libgcc
is built correctly for Cortex-M4 you have to specify
"--with-arch=armv7e-m --with-cpu=cortex-m4 --with-mode=thumb
--with-tune=" when configuring gcc/gdc.
(And I don't see these flags mentioned in
https://bitb
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 12:53:14 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
However, someone also had this problem on this german site:
http://www.mikrocontroller.net/topic/312956
and the solution was that -mcpu alone was not good enough, he
had to specify -march flags as well so please double-check your
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 10:49:57 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 09:24:40 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 08:56:26 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
There is nothing interesting in the assembly, only this wrong
call.
This form of instruction is just missing in
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 07:53:45 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 07:26:16 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
I investigated this a little. It seems that the processor
gets a fault interrupt when calling _Unwind_RaiseException
in _d_throw. The status bits indicate an invalid
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 02:59:37 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Friday, 28 February 2014 at 21:18:05 UTC, Timo Sintonen
wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 January 2014 at 19:13:36 UTC, Timo Sintonen
wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 January 2014 at 15:52:25 UTC, Johannes Pfau
wrote:
Stupid question, but are C
On Wednesday, 8 January 2014 at 19:13:36 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 January 2014 at 15:52:25 UTC, Johannes Pfau
wrote:
Stupid question, but are C++ exceptions working for you? I
think we
don't change anything inthe compiler related to exception
handling, so
if C++ worke
On Saturday, 1 February 2014 at 02:30:30 UTC, Mike wrote:
I'm trying to build a GDC cross-compiler for arm-none-eabi. I
get usable binaries, but my procedure always ends in the
following:
/usr/bin/install -c -m 644 unwind.h
/home/mike/gdc-arm-none-eabi-test/lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/4.8.2/include
On Wednesday, 8 January 2014 at 15:52:25 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Stupid question, but are C++ exceptions working for you? I
think we
don't change anything inthe compiler related to exception
handling, so
if C++ worked and D didn't it could only be a problem with the
runtime
code?
I have
On Sunday, 5 January 2014 at 10:21:36 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
On Sunday, 5 January 2014 at 10:06:48 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
I should really start pushing my local ARM changes upstream.
Here's a
fix for the EABI unwinder:
https://github.com/jpf91/GDC/c
On Sunday, 5 January 2014 at 10:06:48 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
I should really start pushing my local ARM changes upstream.
Here's a
fix for the EABI unwinder:
https://github.com/jpf91/GDC/commit/262e432e95cbe31a6764cd337f64022a56011eda
IIRC I also thought the code in gcc/deh.d wasn't correct
On Thursday, 2 January 2014 at 06:54:18 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
I have fond one thing that confuses me. I have defined
ARM_EABI_UNWINDER but gcc/deh.d has checks for
GNU_ARM_EABI_Unwinder. Is this what I should have? When using
this I get an error in line 116: static assert ( 8 == 4 ) is
On Friday, 3 January 2014 at 18:14:58 UTC, Mike wrote:
I ran into a problem recently that resulted in a segmentation
fault in my program whenever I called a member function of one
of my classes. Sometimes it occurred and sometimes it didn't
depending on the order of certain things in my code.
I have fond one thing that confuses me. I have defined
ARM_EABI_UNWINDER but gcc/deh.d has checks for
GNU_ARM_EABI_Unwinder. Is this what I should have? When using
this I get an error in line 116: static assert ( 8 == 4 ) is
false.
On Wednesday, 1 January 2014 at 15:19:01 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 1 Jan 2014 14:05, "Timo Sintonen"
wrote:
I started to update minlibd with gdc head from last saturday.
While
testing if exceptions work, the program just stops and does not
reach catch
or abort.
Before inv
I started to update minlibd with gdc head from last saturday.
While testing if exceptions work, the program just stops and does
not reach catch or abort.
Before investigating further, I want to ask the status of arm
exceptions: are they known to work, known not to work or is the
status just u
On Sunday, 22 December 2013 at 10:51:19 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Sunday, 22 December 2013 at 10:00:28 UTC, Johannes Pfau
wrote:
If I declare global variables in D as...
__gshared int GlobalDataVar = 2;
__gshared int GlobalBssVar;
... these get put in .data and .bss respectively, and I know
what to
On Sunday, 22 December 2013 at 02:01:15 UTC, Mike wrote:
I need to make a startup procedure for my ARM Cortex-M
platform. In C/C++ this includs copying the .data segment to
RAM and initializing the .bss segment to 0.
If I declare global variables in D as...
__gshared int GlobalDataVar = 2;
_
On Saturday, 21 December 2013 at 09:35:33 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Saturday, 21 December 2013 at 08:51:11 UTC, Johannes Pfau
wrote:
Am Sat, 21 Dec 2013 02:58:49 +0100
schrieb "Mike" :
On Saturday, 21 December 2013 at 00:07:17 UTC, Mike wrote:
I should probably add that if I remove my object.d file
On Friday, 20 December 2013 at 19:14:43 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
On Friday, 20 December 2013 at 15:03:52 UTC, Mike wrote:
Two questions:
1) These are defined in my object.d, so why is it saying only
object.d can define these types?
2) Why is there exactly two instances of each error message
On Friday, 20 December 2013 at 15:03:52 UTC, Mike wrote:
Two questions:
1) These are defined in my object.d, so why is it saying only
object.d can define these types?
2) Why is there exactly two instances of each error message?
Again, here's my build line:
arm-none-eabi-gdc -march=armv7e-m -m
On Sunday, 10 November 2013 at 09:20:11 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
In case you need a workaround right now:
shared struct Register //Also working without shared here
{
size_t a;
}
shared(Register*) reg = cast(shared(Register*))0xFFDDCCAA;
void main()
Now returning to my original problem.
I tested various loops and it seems that write to a variable is
not volatile even if the variable is marked shared. If I write to
a variable several times in a loop, all but the last write are
optimized out. The only write is put after the loop.
Read work
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 11:21:03 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
For the time being, use gcc-4.9-20131013.tar.bz2 snapshot -
that is the
last build I've done here (currently all my time is being used
up on D
2.064).
Feel free to send patches though (see this two line change here:
http://gcc.g
I tried to build gdc with the latest heads of gcc and gdc
Lots of warnings along the build and the it stops here:
../../gcc/gcc/d/d-objfile.cc:2031:52: error: no matching function
for call to 'symtab_node::symtab_node(cgraph_node*&)'
symtab_add_to_same_comdat_group ((symtab_node) thunk_nod
On Thursday, 22 August 2013 at 19:19:08 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
On Thursday, 22 August 2013 at 15:11:15 UTC, Johannes Pfau
wrote:
Am Tue, 20 Aug 2013 18:40:09 +0200
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
I just updated my arm cross compiler to the latest head of
gdc and gcc. Now I get this
On Thursday, 22 August 2013 at 15:11:15 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Tue, 20 Aug 2013 18:40:09 +0200
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
I just updated my arm cross compiler to the latest head of gdc
and gcc. Now I get this every time when I try to compile a
file that has a class:
interna
I just updated my arm cross compiler to the latest head of gdc
and gcc. Now I get this every time when I try to compile a file
that has a class:
internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
0x99b39f crash_signal
../../gcc/gcc/toplev.c:335
0x8413ec tree_check
../../gcc/gcc/tree.h:
On Monday, 13 May 2013 at 20:21:55 UTC, Mr. Anonymous wrote:
Will this minimum runtime environment work on Windows, too?
I'd like to try that out.
I see no reason why this would not work. The only thing that is
needed is a working cross compiler.
I have not heard of gdc cross compilers for
On Sunday, 12 May 2013 at 15:27:04 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 12 May 2013 15:41, Rel wrote:
Benjamin Thaut, yes I know. but here is an example, if I add a
class to
the code like that:
module main;
extern (C) void* _Dmodule_ref = null;
extern (C) void printf(const char*, ...);
extern (C) v
On Sunday, 5 May 2013 at 10:56:53 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On May 4, 2013 6:40 PM, "teachop" wrote:
Looking for help / advice getting D running in an embedded
system. The
compiler building for gdc and newlib went smoothly (mostly)
thanks to this
web page:
http://gdcproject.org/wiki/Cross%2
Gcc head has turned to version 4.9. This causes the setup-gcc
script in gdc to fail. In addition, the version number string in
gcc is no more in gcc/version.c but in gcc/BASE-VER. Setup-gcc
still works when manually forced to version 4.8.
On Friday, 8 March 2013 at 18:16:18 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> > Yet not all attributes that GCC offers actually make sense
> > to have
> > in D. We certainly need to have a review of each one and
> > discuss
> > what is most important to have. Also defining our own
> > unique
> > attributes
On Tuesday, 22 January 2013 at 17:02:58 UTC, Freddie Chopin wrote:
Any chance for adding any example that could be used to verify
that everything works correctly? It does not matter for which
microcontroller it would be, just anything for a start (;
I will add something when I have time. I ha
By request I have put my minimum library work visible at
bitbucket.org/timosi/minlibd. It contains now the library. I hope
it will contain other things for program development too, like
makefiles and linker scripts and of course, documentation.
On Wednesday, 9 January 2013 at 08:31:01 UTC, Freddie Chopin
wrote:
but actually I was hoping I could "drop" GDC into a linaro
distribution of ARM bare-metal toolchain -
launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded - it's a 4.7.x version, I don't
know how big problem that is... So I haven't yet tried
com
On Tuesday, 8 January 2013 at 20:42:07 UTC, Freddie Chopin wrote:
You should definetely post that to github or somewhere
(dropbox, ...)! I'd be really interested to see the files (and
maybe some details about strange things you need to do to get
whole toolchain compiled), but I cannot see your
There are hundreds of ARM processors from several vendors from
megahertz to gigahertz and from kilobytes to gigabytes. When we
talk about ARMs it should be good to mention what kind of ARM we
are using.
My interest is stm32f4 but everything I have done should be
useful in the whole cortex-m s
I have some memory mapped hardware in my arm controller.
I define struct regs to describe the registers and __gshared
regs* p to point to the actual address.
I have a loop like: while (p.status==0) {...}
The body of the loop does not touch status and so gdc optimizer
does not evaluate status a
On Saturday, 17 November 2012 at 23:08:04 UTC, maarten van damme
wrote:
Why is so much built in to druntime? creating classes, AA's,
Is it normal? does c++ do the same thing?
Why wasn't opted for making opIndex overloadable with other
objects so
AA's could be moved out of druntime and in p
On Monday, 12 November 2012 at 08:31:32 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Sun, 11 Nov 2012 17:38:08 -0800
schrieb Dan Olson :
Even a simple D module with just a extern(C) function depends
on
something in druntime, so I have to get part of that to build
first.
_Dmodule_ref?
You can just decla
I have been able to make a minimum library, link it with my test
program and run the program in my arm cortex-m4 controller board.
Some features are disabled and many features are still untested.
The library does not yet have threads and memory management is
done with gcstub. My test program su
On Monday, 5 November 2012 at 10:33:40 UTC, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling wrote:
This is configured with
../gcc-4.7-4.7.2/src/configure --enable-languages=d
--disable-multilib --disable-libgomp --disable-libmudflap
--disable-libquadmath --disable-libquadmath-support
--disable-lto --disable-nls
I have started to make a minimum libdruntime. First I compiled
object and now I am adding files one by one when needed.
The compiler generates lots of library calls. So far I have found
these flags to get the code smaller and to reduce library calls:
-fno-assert -fno-invariants and -fno-bouns-ch
Making gcc with more than -j2 always fails for me at some random
point. The process generates lots of config files and libraries
that are needed later in a compilation. These files may not be in
dependencies. Maybe that would be too complicated, the files
should be in place anyway if the proces
On Tuesday, 23 October 2012 at 16:37:11 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
Are there any patches required to build a
cross-gdc?
Before compiling gcc-package there should be binutils and libc
for the target installed. Binutils is the gnu binutils package
and as libc I have used newlib, which is a light
On Sunday, 21 October 2012 at 13:14:25 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
If you compiled gdc - it should have also include libphobos in
the
build... unless you did something strange and omitted it. :)
The old update script did it wrong sometimes. When the sources
were parallel, like /usr/local/src/gcc
On Saturday, 20 October 2012 at 18:40:51 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
BTW: Here's the dmd commit which introduced betterc:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/707949edc30f245a68145bef619f6f02b85e39ab
but right now it only disables moduleinfo generation, afaics.
This is only in d
On Saturday, 20 October 2012 at 14:35:44 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
I recently did a project on the STM32F0-Discovery board.
After having used a nice arm-none-eabi-*/openocd toolchain I
wonder what is needed to build a cross-gdc.
As these devices are really short on Flash and RAM I would've
only
On Saturday, 20 October 2012 at 09:40:28 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Quick question, what is defined in your phobos-vers-syms file?
(This
will be located in the libphobos / libdruntime build directory).
Regards
NoSystem
@DCFG_NEARBYINT@
@DCFG_TGAMMA@
@DCFG_NAN@
GNU_Need_exp2
GNU_Need_log2
Nobody has used GDC/D/druntime on a system without OS afaik. So
you
have to pioneer ;-)
So I have to try it on my own...
* Create your own, simple runtime library. There's no real
documentation on the minimum interface a runtime must
implement (the
compiler calls back into the runtime)
1 - 100 of 104 matches
Mail list logo
