> > - AFAICT, the cris target is saving the value of the
> > static chain register in the trampoline. How can that work
> > with recursive functions? Does the cris target PASS or FAIL
> > gcc.dg/trampoline-1.c?
>
> It should work fine, because the trampoline is supposed to be
> built on the
On 2005-03-14, at 05:20, Gary Funck wrote:
Richard Stallman wrote (in part):
What's the point of cross-jumping? It saves a certain amount of
space; it has no other benefit. All else being equal, there's no
reason not to do it. But cross-jumping abort calls interferes with
debugging. That's a go
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, J. Hart wrote:
Valgrind is an excellent product as far as it goes, but is x86 only, and
apparently lacks the sort of stack checking that Purify and Checker have.
Valgrind is currently being officially ported to several other platforms.
We hope to have AMD64/Linux and PPC32/Linu
Richard Stallman wrote (in part):
> What's the point of cross-jumping? It saves a certain amount of
> space; it has no other benefit. All else being equal, there's no
> reason not to do it. But cross-jumping abort calls interferes with
> debugging. That's a good reason not to do it.
t's get ri
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:42:18AM +0900, J. Hart wrote:
> Are there currently any other facilities in gcc for this kind of support
> for memory checkers ?
>
You may want to try -fmudflap in current 4.0 snapshots.
Diego.
Otherwise, we need to consider the merits of disabling an optimization
to make debugging easier.
Optimizing calls to `abort' doesn't offer much benefit, so I think in
this particular case it is worth disabling cross-jumping.
This is a difficult choice to make, but at
-O2, I'd
I would like to investigate the possibility of reviving Checker (checkergcc),
or providing another facility with similar capabilities. I would like to
have it be as portable as possible, as I wish to use it on a number of
different platforms. I would also like to have the sort of stack checking
t
1.firstly,i compile the binutils-2.15, it successed.
../configure -target=rs6000-ibm-aix4.3 -prefix=/opt/crosstools/
make
make install
2.secondly, i compile the gcc
../configure -target=rs6000-ibm-aix4.3 -prefix=/opt/crosstools/
-enable-languages=c
make
then it failed as follows:
../../../source/g
Reporting a smooth and successful build of gcc-3.4.3
on Red Hat Linux release 8.0 (Psyche) with kernel
2.6.11.2
[EMAIL PROTECTED] gcc-3.4.3]# ./config.guess
i686-pc-linux-gnu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] gcc-3.4.3]# gcc -v
Reading specs from
/usr/local/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.3/specs
Configured with:
Øyvind Harboe wrote:
Trampolines are strange things... :-)
- Are nested functions part of the C standard or a GCC extension?
I believe the answer is a GCC extension. I have seen evidence,
but no proof to this effect.
They are of course a gcc extension
- AFAICT, the cris target is saving the val
> The remaining 1.1 projects include:
>
> * Autovectorization Enhancements (some parts)
>
1.2 Incrementally preserve loop-closed form when vectorizing
Submitted today:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-03/msg01318.html
1.3 Improvements to peeling for alignment
Submitted today:
http://gcc
Øyvind Harboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - AFAICT, the cris target is saving the value of the
> static chain register in the trampoline. How can that work
> with recursive functions?
Every stack frame has its own trampoline.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SuSE
Ãyvind Harboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - Many backends do not support trampolines. Are trampolines
> something that is ultimately being added to the backends?
As and if the port maintainers care, I think.
> - Do (theoretical?) alternatives to trampolines exist?
> I.e. something that do
> - Are trampolines used for anything else but nested functions
> in C? I believe they are used by Ada.
<...>
> My personal uninformed opinion is that trampolines cause more trouble
> than they are worth.
Ada, Fortran and Pascal all require nested functions.
Paul
On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 09:24:19PM +0100, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> Trampolines are strange things... :-)
>
> - Are nested functions part of the C standard or a GCC extension?
> I believe the answer is a GCC extension. I have seen evidence,
> but no proof to this effect.
That is right.
> - AFAI
Trampolines are strange things... :-)
- Are nested functions part of the C standard or a GCC extension?
I believe the answer is a GCC extension. I have seen evidence,
but no proof to this effect.
- AFAICT, the cris target is saving the value of the
static chain register in the trampoline. Ho
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steven Bosscher) wrote on 13.03.05 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sunday 13 March 2005 02:07, James E Wilson wrote:
> > Richard Stallman wrote:
> > > Currently, I believe, GCC combines various calls to abort in a single
> > > function, because it knows that none of them returns.
Mark Mitchell wrote:
Jason Merrill wrote:
On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 11:49:05 -0800, Mark Mitchell
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
IMO, if these are C++-only, it's relatively easy to deprecate these
extension -- but I'd like to hear from Jason and Nathan, and also the
user
community before we do that. Of
> From: Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Paul Schlie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | > From: Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | > |Paul Schlie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | > | Thank you. In essence, I've intentionally defined the question of x^y's
> | > | value about x=y->0 as a con
Razya Ladelsky wrote:
Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 11/03/2005 04:55:38:
Daniel Berlin wrote:
As for why the new name doesn't work, it's not clear from the above.
I'd need to see the assembly and the error.
:)
Likewise. I assume these functions have only internal linkage? Or that
Jason Merrill wrote:
On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 11:49:05 -0800, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
IMO, if these are C++-only, it's relatively easy to deprecate these
extension -- but I'd like to hear from Jason and Nathan, and also the user
community before we do that. Of all the extensions we've
On Sat, Mar 12, 2005 at 06:30:00PM +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote:
> Anyway, that seems to be very much the wrong tool to me. For stuff like
> thes, you'd really want a tool that understands C, so it can make a
> certain modification for certain syntactical places.
I don't see why. If the source
Snapshot gcc-4.1-20050313 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.1-20050313/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.1 CVS branch
with the following options: -D2005-03-13 17:43 UTC
You'll
On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 15:26 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | On 2005-03-12 02:59:46 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> | > You probably noticed that in the polynomial expansion, you are using
> | > an integer power -- which everybody agrees on yield
On Sunday 13 March 2005 16:53, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> Sure you could.
> You can come up with your own way to mangle the addition you are making
> to the name based on how you versioned (IE what parameters you have
> removed/made constant, and their values), so that it would merge
> properly when pu
On Sunday 13 March 2005 16:31, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > bl operator<<.585
>
> ^^^
>
> You are using the demangled name instead of the mangled one, which is
> where your problem comes from.
Right. But the mangled name is not available at this point.
> Mark should be able t
On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 16:42 +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Sunday 13 March 2005 16:31, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > > bl operator<<.585
> >
> > ^^^
> >
> > You are using the demangled name instead of the mangled one, which is
> > where your problem comes from.
>
> Right. B
On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 10:54 +0200, Razya Ladelsky wrote:
> Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 11/03/2005 04:55:38:
>
> > Daniel Berlin wrote:
> >
> > > As for why the new name doesn't work, it's not clear from the above.
> > > I'd need to see the assembly and the error.
> > > :)
> >
> >
Paul Schlie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > From: Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| > |Paul Schlie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | Thank you. In essence, I've intentionally defined the question of x^y's
| > | value about x=y->0 as a constrained "bivariate" function, to where only
| > | the
On Mar 13, 2005, at 12:55 AM, Aaron W. LaFramboise wrote:
Also, it might be nice to have a record of negative build reports. For
instance, the build status page might have section for negative builds
listing reports of failed builds that might serve as a quick means to
determine the health of a br
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 11:49:22AM -0800, Fariborz Jahanian wrote:
> Thanks Andrew. Yes, standard actually mentions this that I missed.
It's also doc'd here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Static-Definitions.html#Static-Definitions
jon
Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 2005-03-12 02:59:46 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > You probably noticed that in the polynomial expansion, you are using
| > an integer power -- which everybody agrees on yield 1 at the limit.
| >
| > I'm tlaking about 0^0, when you look at the
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
in some standard C program. Could/does gcc 4.0 generate special code,
taking into account the fact that 6.0 is a small integer?
Ah, that does already: have a look to builtins.c, expand_builtin_pow in
particular.
Paolo.
On 2005-03-12 02:59:46 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> You probably noticed that in the polynomial expansion, you are using
> an integer power -- which everybody agrees on yield 1 at the limit.
>
> I'm tlaking about 0^0, when you look at the limit of function x^y
> -- which is closer to cpow() tg
On 2005-03-10 18:05:24 +0100, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> >BTW, couldn't it be used when compiling C programs too?
> >Is there anything planned?
> >
> Can be used as any other __builtin_*: just call it ;)
But this wouldn't be portable. I mean:
double x, y;
...
y = pow(x, 6
I've added my ACATS/bugzilla table into the the GCC wiki, if we find
something missing let me know.
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/ACATS
Laurent
Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 11/03/2005 04:55:38:
> Daniel Berlin wrote:
>
> > As for why the new name doesn't work, it's not clear from the above.
> > I'd need to see the assembly and the error.
> > :)
>
> Likewise. I assume these functions have only internal linkage? Or that
37 matches
Mail list logo
