Re: changing the SPARC default

Alexey Starovoytov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi, > > The default architecture for GCC SPARC is V7. > What do gcc sparc developers think about changing it to V8PLUS? > > Few things to consider: > - v7 is legacy > . used in old Sun's sun4c systems > . 32-bit only > . no integer mul

Re: Ada subtypes and base types

On Mar 16, 2006, at 05:09, Robert Dewar wrote: Not quite right. If you have an uninitialized variable, the value is invalid and may be out of bounds, but this is a bounded error situation, not an erroneous program. So the possible effects are definitely NOT unbounded, and the use of such valu

Re: changing the SPARC default

> 1st choice (the best): > - change the default for all sparc platforms > > 2nd: > - change the default for Solaris 7+ and linux > > 3rd (100% safe): > - change the default for Solaris 10+ > > Also 64-bit Linux doesn't have to mean 64-bit (v9) gcc compiler, > so at the same time it would be good

Re: aapcs apcs-gnu

Quoting Paul Brook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: On Wednesday 15 March 2006 05:20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, what is the difference beetween this abi? The standard arm procedure call is the first one. What is introduced in the apcs-gnu? Is there some documentation about the last one? "apcs-gnu"

changing the SPARC default

Hi, The default architecture for GCC SPARC is V7. What do gcc sparc developers think about changing it to V8PLUS? Few things to consider: - v7 is legacy . used in old Sun's sun4c systems . 32-bit only . no integer mul/div insns - first 64-bit SPARC was made in 1995 . I guess it

Re: Ada subtypes and base types

Laurent GUERBY wrote: On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 15:31 -0700, Jeffrey A Law wrote: On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 20:08 +0100, Waldek Hebisch wrote: What do you mean by "abuse"? TYPE_MAX_VALUE means maximal value allowed by given type. As long as you're *absolutely* clear that a variable with a restricte

new cctools, 590.36 for Darwin

I've uploaded cctools-590.36 to and the source for it as Their md5 checksums are: MD5 (cctools-590.36.dmg) = 36232fb9525ef5101ed9089db7083d4d MD5 (cctools-590.36.tar

Re: Ada subtypes and base types

On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 15:31 -0700, Jeffrey A Law wrote: > On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 20:08 +0100, Waldek Hebisch wrote: > > > What do you mean by "abuse"? TYPE_MAX_VALUE means maximal value > > allowed by given type. > As long as you're *absolutely* clear that a variable with a > restricted range can

Re: gcc: poor log() performance on Intel x86_64

Torsten Rohlfing writes: > Andrew Haley wrote: > > > > When I run the two binaries on the exact same box and time them, I get > > > the following outputs: > > > > > > time ./testlog64 > > > 13.264u 0.000s 0:13.26 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w > > > > > > time ./testlog32 > > > 6.960u 0.0

Re: Ada subtypes and base types

Hi, On Mon, 13 Mar 2006, Jeffrey A Law wrote: > > What do you mean by "abuse"? TYPE_MAX_VALUE means maximal value > > allowed by given type. > As long as you're *absolutely* clear that a variable with a > restricted range can never hold a value outside that the > restricted range in a conformin

Re: gcc: poor log() performance on Intel x86_64

Andrew Haley wrote: > When I run the two binaries on the exact same box and time them, I get > the following outputs: > > time ./testlog64 > 13.264u 0.000s 0:13.26 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w > > time ./testlog32 > 6.960u 0.004s 0:06.96 100.0%0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w You have weird hardware. [

Re: aapcs apcs-gnu

On Wednesday 15 March 2006 05:20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi all, > what is the difference beetween this abi? > The standard arm procedure call is the first one. What is introduced in the > apcs-gnu? Is there some documentation about the last one? "apcs-gnu" is the pre-EABI calling convention.

Re: gcc: poor log() performance on Intel x86_64

Torsten Rohlfing writes: > Greetings. > > I am experiencing a major performance problem with the log() function on > the x86_64 platform. It can be illustrated with the following little > test program: > > testlog.cxx=== > #include > > main() > { > float f = 0; >