Mark Mitchell wrote:
My guess is that it's OK to include the Sun code, since it's in the
public domain.
This may just be nit-picking, but the above notice doesn't put the code
into the public domain. Sun still owns the copyright of the software.
Actually notices at the start of files have ve
Please Cc: me on replies.
* Joseph S. Myers wrote on Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 02:10:51AM CET:
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2006, Steve Ellcey wrote:
>
> > So when we finally do move to a newer libtool we will move to the
> > unreleased libtool main line? I guess I was assuming we would move to a
>
> Yes, unles
Paul Brook wrote:
On Saturday 18 March 2006 17:56, Vladimir N. Makarov wrote:
I've created a branch for my allocator project which is called Yet
Another Register Allocator (or YARA - yet another recursive acronim).
I am think I reached the point when my work on a public branch can
be made
On Saturday 18 March 2006 17:56, Vladimir N. Makarov wrote:
> I've created a branch for my allocator project which is called Yet
> Another Register Allocator (or YARA - yet another recursive acronim).
>
> I am think I reached the point when my work on a public branch can
> be made. I am focuse
I've created a branch for my allocator project which is called Yet
Another Register Allocator (or YARA - yet another recursive acronim).
I am think I reached the point when my work on a public branch can
be made. I am focused only on x86 right now. So YARA will work only
for x86 and probably
Snapshot gcc-4.2-20060318 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.2-20060318/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.2 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
Hi,
I want to profile an application in linux. I used -pg option and
profiled the data with gprof. Here I am getting the resolution in
seconds only. but I wants in terms of milliseconds and microseconds.
can anybody help me. or any other options and tools available.
Jayaraj
philips research india
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 12:51 -0700, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
> I'm not suggesting the FEs deduce more types and track ranges;
> that would be rather absurd. What I'm saying is that exposing
> these types outside the FE is most likely costing you both on
> the compile-time side and on the run-time side.
