Re: -Wuninitialized issues

On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 20:46 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > Jeffrey A Law <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > We clearly disagree then. Though my 15+ years of working with GCC I've > > seen far more complaints about false positives than missing instances > > of this warning. > > I think that most

Re: -Wuninitialized issues

Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > Jeffrey A Law <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >>We clearly disagree then. Though my 15+ years of working with GCC I've >>seen far more complaints about false positives than missing instances >>of this warning. > > > I think that most of the false positives are of the

Re: A question about unable to generate reloads

Eric Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Such a problem is difficult to find the reason. But can you give some > suggestion about the possible matter? This is the information on my > port. Thanks a lot. > > dp-bit.c: In function `__muldf3': > dp-bit.c:957: error: unable to generate reloads for:

Re: -Wuninitialized issues

Jeffrey A Law <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > We clearly disagree then. Though my 15+ years of working with GCC I've > seen far more complaints about false positives than missing instances > of this warning. I think that most of the false positives are of the form int x, f, y; f = foo ();

Re: -Wuninitialized issues

Jeffrey A Law wrote: > On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 17:11 -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote: > > >>>Certainly if we can't prove f always returns a nonzero value, then a >>>warning should be issued. If we do prove f always returns a nonzero >>>value, then I think it becomes unclear if we should generate a warn

A question about unable to generate reloads

Hello, Such a problem is difficult to find the reason. But can you give some suggestion about the possible matter? This is the information on my port. Thanks a lot. dp-bit.c: In function `__muldf3': dp-bit.c:957: error: unable to generate reloads for: (insn 416 415 417 20 dp-bit.c:874 (set (reg:SI

Re: -Wuninitialized issues

On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 18:52 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 04:49:43PM -0700, Jeffrey A Law wrote: > > On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 23:40 -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote: > > > In reviewing the PR list, I saw several (maybe 5?) PRs about problems > > > with -Wuninitialized. > > [ ...

Re: -Wuninitialized issues

On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 17:11 -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote: > > Certainly if we can't prove f always returns a nonzero value, then a > > warning should be issued. If we do prove f always returns a nonzero > > value, then I think it becomes unclear if we should generate a warning. > > I don't think i

Re: -Wuninitialized issues

Jeffrey A Law wrote: > On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 23:40 -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote: > >>In reviewing the PR list, I saw several (maybe 5?) PRs about problems >>with -Wuninitialized. > Where I suspect we're falling down more often is not issuing warnings > because the uninitialized variable was optimiz

dump CFG and callgraph

Hi, (1) if I want to dump a gimple tree representation of a program, where should I start to look at? And I read gcc internal manual, the control flow graph information is represented by BB data structure. If I want to walk through a control flow graph, where should I start to look at? (2) Ca

Re: GccPowerpc eabi HowTo - probem with stido functions ( sprintf)

moshed (sent by Nabble.com) wrote: Following to your response I tried to add -v but doesn't succsed , maybe I locate on the wrong place. It is a gcc option. Just put it in CFLAGS, or just run gcc manually with -v added to your other command line options. also if u can replay me ragarding t

Re: -Wuninitialized issues

On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 04:49:43PM -0700, Jeffrey A Law wrote: > On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 23:40 -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote: > > In reviewing the PR list, I saw several (maybe 5?) PRs about problems > > with -Wuninitialized. > [ ... ] > After pondering this some more I almost wonder if what we need is

Re: -Wuninitialized issues

On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 23:40 -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote: > In reviewing the PR list, I saw several (maybe 5?) PRs about problems > with -Wuninitialized. [ ... ] After pondering this some more I almost wonder if what we need is a separate warning for variables which were potentially uninitialized bu

Re: -Wuninitialized issues

On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 23:40 -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote: > In reviewing the PR list, I saw several (maybe 5?) PRs about problems > with -Wuninitialized. Joys... > All of these problems related to getting confused in the optimizers in > various ways; sometimes we think things are uninitialized when

Re: resolving backslash newline whisky tango foxtrot: a proposal

Per Bothner wrote on 31/10/2005 23:12:02: > Joe Buck wrote: > > So you want the compiler to only consider '\\$" a continuation, > > Not my preference, but that is my proposal, in the interest > of compatibility. ^ Compatibility is not an absolute in this case. The two opposite

A single SVK tarball is available

I've placed an svk tarball that contains trunk/ from 3.4 onward at ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/infrastructure/svk-trunk-3.4-onward.tar.rz Note: People expecting this to be massively faster (IE 100x) at some things like annotate are going to discover that unless you have a slow network connection, i

Re: resolving backslash newline whisky tango foxtrot: a proposal

Joe Buck wrote: So you want the compiler to only consider '\\$" a continuation, Not my preference, but that is my proposal, in the interest of compatibility. but to have an unsilenceable warning about '\\ *$'? Not unsilenceable - but on-by-default. It could be silenced with an explicit -Wn

Re: new cctools, 590.12 for Darwin

dir/gcc/xgcc version 4.1.0 20051030 (experimental) +/Volumes/export/gcc/gcc-svn/head/objdir/gcc/xgcc version 4.1.0 20051031 (experimental) Next to check link times on libjava ;) Andreas

Re: resolving backslash newline whisky tango foxtrot: a proposal

On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 11:35:45AM -0800, Per Bothner wrote: > Joe Buck wrote: > >On Sat, Oct 29, 2005 at 03:45:33AM -0700, Per Bothner wrote: > > > >>1. Change the behavior (back) so only '\\$', not '\\ *$', causes a > >> line to be continued. > > >The problem with your item #1 is that there is

Re: GPL question

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005, Florian Weimer wrote: >> If I compile source code using GCC, that does not require me to >> open-source the resulting program under the GPL, correct? > Compiling a program with GCC does not by itself cause the resulting > executable to be covered by the GNU General Public Licen

Re: resolving backslash newline whisky tango foxtrot: a proposal

Joe Buck wrote: On Sat, Oct 29, 2005 at 03:45:33AM -0700, Per Bothner wrote: 1. Change the behavior (back) so only '\\$', not '\\ *$', causes a line to be continued. The problem with your item #1 is that there is then no way of flagging code that won't work with the large numbers of produc

Re: GPL question

* dfhgjwetgtry: > If I compile source code using GCC, that does not require me to > open-source the resulting program under the GPL, correct? Compiling a program with GCC does not by itself cause the resulting executable to be covered by the GNU General Public License. This does not however inva

GPL question

If I compile source code using GCC, that does not require me to open-source the resulting program under the GPL, correct? -- Sent from the gcc - General forum at Nabble.com: http://www.nabble.com/GPL-question-t472890.html#a1287328

Re: Update on GCC moving to svn

* Joe Buck: > Well, maybe. But what about a revision that modifies code and that > also modifies the WWW to describe the code modification? If everything > were in the same subversion repository, it could be one change. Only if you check out a common parent directory, which is probably not a co

Re: [libgfortran] Patch to handle statically linked libgfortran

On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 12:24:56PM +0100, FX Coudert wrote: > I added a test for the testsuite, conditionnal on a new effective > target. Could someone OK this part? How does the test in check_effective_target_static_libgfortran check for use of static libgfortran? Shouldn't it pass -static or s

Re: resolving backslash newline whisky tango foxtrot: a proposal

On Sat, Oct 29, 2005 at 03:45:33AM -0700, Per Bothner wrote: > Rather than adding new flags, I'd think I'd prefer: > > 1. Change the behavior (back) so only '\\$', not '\\ *$', causes a >line to be continued. > 2. Make -Wcomment more useful to it only warns when it might matter: >The follo

Re: Update on GCC moving to svn

On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 05:31:51PM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > Per se there doesn't seem to be as much of an advantage for wwwdocs > as we had for gcc (no branches, most changes only to one or two files, > no need for binary regression search, no tagging,...) so it's not > urgent. Well, maybe.

Re: Bootstrapping of gcc-4.1 completly broken on mips-sgi-irix6.5

> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > See: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24514 Most people don't have access to MIPS IRIX so it is hard to figure out what is going on. Giving the backtrace of where the trap happens might help figure it out but it might not

Bootstrapping of gcc-4.1 completly broken on mips-sgi-irix6.5

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 See: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24514 Rainer - -- Rainer Emrich TECOSIM GmbH Im Eichsfeld 3 65428 Rüsselsheim Phone: +49(0)6142/8272 12 Mobile: +49(0)163/56 949 20 Fax.: +49(0)6142/8272 49 Web: www.tecosim.com -BEGIN PGP SIGN

Re: [gfortran] gfortran options and cc1 warnings

What should "gfortran -fdollar-ok a.f b.c" do, if -fdollar-ok if a fortran-only option? It shouldn't pass -fdollar-ok to cc1, IMHO. I'm not sure about how other languages handle that. Trying to mix java and C gives: $ gcj -c Example.java a.c -Wredundant-modifiers cc1: warning: command line

Re: [gfortran] gfortran options and cc1 warnings

New version of the patch attached (this time), to answer Joseph's remark. Original questions still apply, including: What should "gfortran -fdollar-ok a.f b.c" do, if -fdollar-ok if a fortran-only option? FX 2005-10-31 Francois-Xavier Coudert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR fortran/18452

Re: [gfortran] gfortran options and cc1 warnings

On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 01:20:48PM +0100, FX Coudert wrote: > New version of the patch attached, to answer Joseph's remark. Actually, no :-) > What should "gfortran -fdollar-ok a.f b.c" do, if -fdollar-ok if a > fortran-only option? It shouldn't pass -fdollar-ok to cc1, IMHO.

Re: Post-Mont-Tremblant mailing

On Sat, Oct 29, 2005 at 11:12:07AM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > The Post-Mont-Tremblant WG14 mailing is now available from the WG14 > website. Particular points of note: > > * The current decimal FP draft is now N1150 (no longer N1107 which is the > version mentioned in svn.html); I don't wh

Re: .cvsignore still needed?

On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 09:47:59AM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote: > On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 15:19 +0100, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > [...] > > >> ./.cvsignore > > >> > > >> Shouldn't we delete all of them? > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > I thought i fixed

Re: .cvsignore still needed?

> "Dan" == Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Shall I issue a simple "svn rm" or do you want to do some other magic? Dan> Just svn rm them all The ones in libjava/classpath come from upstream imports. They will most likely just show up again next time we import Classpath. Tom

Re: [gfortran] gfortran options and cc1 warnings

On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 12:51:40AM +0100, FX Coudert wrote: >This is a patch proposal about PR fortran/18452. In short, to preprocess >fortran source files, gfortran calls cc1 with its own options, which >gives warnings like: > >$ gfortran -fdollar-ok a.F90 >cc1: warning: command line option "-fd

Re: Update on GCC moving to svn

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Sun, 16 Oct 2005, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > I should probably note again that i don't plan to convert wwwdocs to svn > > right now, because the checkout scripts are a bit hard to follow, etc. > > Per se there doesn't seem to be as much of an advant

Re: Update on GCC moving to svn

On Sun, 16 Oct 2005, Daniel Berlin wrote: > I should probably note again that i don't plan to convert wwwdocs to svn > right now, because the checkout scripts are a bit hard to follow, etc. Per se there doesn't seem to be as much of an advantage for wwwdocs as we had for gcc (no branches, most c

Re: .cvsignore still needed?

On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 15:19 +0100, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > [...] > >> ./.cvsignore > >> > >> Shouldn't we delete all of them? > > > > Yes. > > > > I thought i fixed cvs2svn to remove them, but apparently missed some > > cases where they were added.

Re: The comment start symbol for arm assembler

On Monday 31 October 2005 07:32, Hanzac Chen wrote: > On 10/31/05, Hanzac Chen wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Is the comment symbol for arm "@"? But the intermediate code > > (assembler code) generated by GCC 4.1.0 (gcc-4.1-20051022) can't be > > assembled by the latest release of binutils (binutils-2.16.

Re: .cvsignore still needed?

Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [...] >> ./.cvsignore >> >> Shouldn't we delete all of them? > > Yes. > > I thought i fixed cvs2svn to remove them, but apparently missed some > cases where they were added. Shall I issue a simple "svn rm" or do you want to do some other magic? Andrea

Re: picoChip port contribution

Hi all, Can someone give me a rough indication of when this contribution might be reviewed, please? Since submitting the patch, I have got DejaGNU working with my simulator, so once I've ironed out a few problems this has highlighted, I'll submit some test results to the test-results mailing

Re: .cvsignore still needed?

> ./gcc/.cvsignore > ./libstdc++-v3/.cvsignore > ./zlib/.cvsignore > ./libobjc/.cvsignore > ./intl/.cvsignore > ./libgfortran/.cvsignore > ./libmudflap/.cvsignore > ./boehm-gc/.cvsignore > ./fastjar/.cvsignore > ./libffi/.cvsignore > ./libssp/.cvsignore > ./libjava/libltdl/.cvsignore > ./libjava/g

Bug in install of gfortran for gcc-4.0.2

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 if [ -f f951 ] ; then \ if [ -f gfortran-cross ] ; then \ rm -f /appl/shared/gcc/Linux/i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-4.0.2/bin/gfortran; \ /usr/bin/install -c gfortran-cross /appl/shared/gcc/Linux/i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-4.0.2/bin/gfortran; \ chmod

Re: [gfortran] gfortran options and cc1 warnings

New version of the patch attached, to answer Joseph's remark. Original questions still apply, including: What should "gfortran -fdollar-ok a.f b.c" do, if -fdollar-ok if a fortran-only option? FX

new cctools, 590.12 for Darwin

I've uploaded cctools-590.12 to and the source for it as Their md5 checksums are: 410dd3c1471d31e24a193c674432a7f5 cctools-590.12.tar.bz2 0043796eff1b3187f5e7b4db6e

.cvsignore still needed?

I see the following files in my subversion directory: ./gcc/.cvsignore ./libstdc++-v3/.cvsignore ./zlib/.cvsignore ./libobjc/.cvsignore ./intl/.cvsignore ./libgfortran/.cvsignore ./libmudflap/.cvsignore ./boehm-gc/.cvsignore ./fastjar/.cvsignore ./libffi/.cvsignore ./libssp/.cvsignore ./libjava/l