>
>
>
> Yes I see now... a quite complicated way to express the choice logic:
>
> 1. if -fcx-limited-range is set go straight for the quick overflowing
> version.
> 2. be strict in case of ISO C99.
> 3. handle floaing poing divisions more precisely then multiplications
> else.
if you look
Wiadomość napisana w dniu 2007-01-05, o godz08:36, przez Andrew Pinski:
Thus my question to whoever looked at this code close enough is:
1. Is the FALLTHRU really OK?
yes, see above. Plus the fall through is only for non fp types.
Yes I see now... a quite complicated way to express the c
>
> Peeking at the implementation of the expand_complex_division() function
> inside tree-complex.c I have compared the conditions for satisfying
> the -fcx-limited-range and flag_isoc99
> condition. And thus I have some questions about the logics of it.
> In esp. the following lines (starting a
Peeking at the implementation of the expand_complex_division() function
inside tree-complex.c I have compared the conditions for satisfying
the -fcx-limited-range and flag_isoc99
condition. And thus I have some questions about the logics of it.
In esp. the following lines (starting at 1222 insi
> Not much. I'm convinced it would be feasible, but definitely not easy,
> so I wanted to see how much interest there was - seems like some, but
> not a lot.
Would this comprise retrofitting the support into the 4.2 branch?
--
Eric Botcazou
Hi!
Thanks a lot for fixing that in such a speedy manner.
Philippe
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 08:59:51AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 02:32:19PM +0100, Martin Reinecke wrote:
> > > /usr/bin/ld: crtbegin.o: No such file: No such file or d
I've decided to focus next on GCC 4.1.2. After GCC 4.1.2, I will focus
on GCC 4.2.0. At this point, I expect GCC 4.3 to remain in Stage 1 for
some time, while we work on GCC 4.1.2 and GCC 4.2.0. So, I've been
looking at the GCC 4.1.2 Bugzilla entries.
(I'm sure one of your New Year's resolution
"吴曦" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How can I dedicate a register for special purpose, that means,
> the dedicated register only appears in the inserted code of my own,
> but never allocated in the rest of code. I have read some doc(gcc int)
> about the register usage but still have no idea.
This
On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 17:26 -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
> Hi,
> We actually have fields that are supposed to answer this question:
> "Known to Fail" and "Known to Work". However, these fields are not
> being set in a consistent manner, and aren't being updated when the
> situation changes.
I have been
On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 12:53:16PM +0800, wrote:
> Hi,
> How can I dedicate a register for special purpose, that means,
> the dedicated register only appears in the inserted code of my own,
> but never allocated in the rest of code. I have read some doc(gcc int)
> about the register usage but
Hi,
How can I dedicate a register for special purpose, that means,
the dedicated register only appears in the inserted code of my own,
but never allocated in the rest of code. I have read some doc(gcc int)
about the register usage but still have no idea.
I would *really* appreciate any help I can
On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 12:18:53AM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > Once upon a time, the --disable-bootstrap configure option wasn't
> > necessary. "make" built gcc, and "make bootstrap" bootstrapped it.
> >
> > Is this behavior useful? Should we have it back again?
>
> Is this a genuine questio
Hi,
RMS has been bugging the Steering Committee about the the bug backlog; he
is worried about its size. In trying to put together some answers for
him, I was struggling with the fact that it is very difficult to tell,
with four open lines of development (4.0, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3), which bugs are
in wh
Here is one implementation of ELF sharable section proposal:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/generic-abi/browse_thread/thread/bca08f6560f61b0d
Several people have expressed interests. I post it here for comments.
I used OS specific values. If we get consensus, I can change those
values to gen
> Once upon a time, the --disable-bootstrap configure option wasn't
> necessary. "make" built gcc, and "make bootstrap" bootstrapped it.
>
> Is this behavior useful? Should we have it back again?
Is this a genuine question or some subtle attempt at mimicing Paul Eggert's
cleverness to spark you
On Tue, 2 Jan 2007, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> I would hope to retire that branch, since it has gained a lot of
> dust and also a lot of things has been renamed while merging to mainline
> making it outdated.
I assume you will update svn.html accordingly once this is done...
> At the end of stage 1 I w
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, Marco Rinaudo - Internet.bs Corp. wrote:
> I am pleased to announce 3 new GCC mirrors located in London (UK), Hong
> Kong and Toronto (CANADA), daily resync.
Thanks! These servers seem to be well connected.
> Please feel free to add the 3 mirrors to the official list of mir
Snapshot gcc-4.0-20070104 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.0-20070104/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.0 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On 1/4/07, Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Daniel Berlin wrote:
> Guys, i changed the cookie prevent this error, and to stop it from
> continually asking for logins.
I'm not sure to understand, I never had problems before...
Others have :)
> Please clear your current gcc.gnu.org b
On Thu, 4 Jan 2007, Matt Fago wrote:
>>From: drizzle drizzle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>>svn -q checkout svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk gcc_3_4_6_release
> This is checking out the latest trunk, not version 3.4. The last argument
> only changes the name of the directory name on your local machine. T
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 12:17:49PM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
> In libgcc/Makefile I find:
>
> MAKEINFO = @MAKEINFO@
>
> and
>
> PERL = @PERL@
>
> Seems like they should be always substituted, if they are going to
> always be in there, or, if they are never used, removed.
The latter; feel
>From: drizzle drizzle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>svn -q checkout svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk gcc_3_4_6_release
This is checking out the latest trunk, not version 3.4. The last argument only
changes the name of the directory name on your local machine. The 'svn://' is
what specifies the tag (in
On 1/4/07, drizzle drizzle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I configure with --enable-languages=c,c++ . Shudnt that disable gfortran ?
You are not configuring gcc 3.4.
Richard.
thanks
dz
On 1/4/07, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 1/4/07, drizzle drizzle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I configure with --enable-languages=c,c++ . Shudnt that disable gfortran ?
thanks
dz
On 1/4/07, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 1/4/07, drizzle drizzle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Still no luck so far .. I got the gcc3.4 from the gcc archive. Any way
> I can make gcc 3.4 not use
Daniel Berlin wrote:
Guys, i changed the cookie prevent this error, and to stop it from
continually asking for logins.
I'm not sure to understand, I never had problems before...
Please clear your current gcc.gnu.org bugzilla cookie from your
browser, or both this error, and getting asked fo
Guys, i changed the cookie prevent this error, and to stop it from
continually asking for logins.
Please clear your current gcc.gnu.org bugzilla cookie from your
browser, or both this error, and getting asked for logins on every
page, will continue.
-- Forwarded message --
From:
In libgcc/Makefile I find:
MAKEINFO = @MAKEINFO@
and
PERL = @PERL@
Seems like they should be always substituted, if they are going to
always be in there, or, if they are never used, removed.
On Jan 4, 2007, at 2:26 AM, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
I cannot figure out how to have a vector of strings in a GTY-ed file
F_VEC_ALLOC_P(locstr,heap);
Any clues?
Do a vec of:
struct bar {
char *field;
}
and skip the field, and add the GTY markers. Should work.
>From: drizzle drizzle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Still no luck so far .. I got the gcc3.4 from the gcc archive. Any way
>I can make gcc 3.4 not use these libraries ?
What is the exact file name and URL? I will download the same tarball and try
to build it on my fc6 box.
- M
On Jan 4, 2007, at 8:49 AM, Gowri Kumar CH wrote:
Is this one of the things which we come to know by experience?
Yes.
Is there a way to find it out from the core/code generated?
No. You'd have to have someone tell you, or read up on a UNIX
internals book or find a good C book.
I'm wond
On 1/4/07, drizzle drizzle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Still no luck so far .. I got the gcc3.4 from the gcc archive. Any way
I can make gcc 3.4 not use these libraries ?
3.4 doesn't use gmp or mpfr, gfortran introduces this dependency but it
appears with 4.0 or newer only.
Richard.
Still no luck so far .. I got the gcc3.4 from the gcc archive. Any way
I can make gcc 3.4 not use these libraries ?
thanks
dz
On 1/4/07, Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 07:25:03PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> In case you still get the warning after trying that, I
On 2007-01-04 10:42:35 -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
> It is an annoying problem that MPFR and GMP follow inconsistent rules.
Yes, but this problem is not only between MPFR and GMP. Even if MPFR
chose the GMP rules, there would be problems with other software. I
don't know any software other than GMP tha
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 07:25:03PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> In case you still get the warning after trying that, I think that one
> can get the same kind of problems when the ABI is incorrect, e.g. a
> 32-bit GMP library in /usr/lib, a 64-bit GMP library in /usr/local/lib
> and a MPFR build
On 2007-01-04 19:09:23 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2007-01-04 12:54:34 -0500, drizzle drizzle wrote:
> [configure warning due to different libgmp and gmp.h versions]
>
> Yes (now this test is much more reliable in MPFR 2.2.1). You may have
> the following problem (quoted from MPFR's INSTALL
> drizzle drizzle wrote:
>And as matt suggested if mpfr is not needed by 3.4, how can I
>configure it that way. --disable -mpfr did not help.
MPFR should not have _anything_ to do with any gcc prior to 4.x. Where did you
get gcc 3.4? A tarball from a gnu mirror or somewhere else? I think either t
On 2007-01-04 12:54:34 -0500, drizzle drizzle wrote:
> I am wondering if my all my troubles stem from mpfr not being
> installed properly ..
> When I configure mpfr I get the following warning. Cud this be an issue ?
>
> checking if gmp.h version and libgmp version are the same... (4.2.1/4.1.4)
>
I am wondering if my all my troubles stem from mpfr not being
installed properly ..
When I configure mpfr I get the following warning. Cud this be an issue ?
checking if gmp.h version and libgmp version are the same... (4.2.1/4.1.4) no
configure: WARNING: 'gmp.h' and 'libgmp' seems to have differ
Please does anyone know the answer to the following questions?
1. The operating system (OS) schedules tasks, but gnat allow us to set
schedule policies such as Round Robin, then how does gnat tell the OS to
start doing Round Robin scheduling?
2. If someone wants to write a new scheduling pol
Hi andrew,
You just overflowed your stack. Increase the stack size for the program
by using limit/ulimit or use dynamic allocated memory.
Thanks for the quick reply. By changing the size of the stack the
error goes away.
Is this one of the things which we come to know by experience?
Or
Is ther
On 2007-01-03 22:19:16 -0500, drizzle drizzle wrote:
> Not 4.3 but 3.4 yes the older version. And I built and installed mpfr
> and gmp. gmp4.1 and mpfr 2.2. I dont have a /usr/local/lib64 on my
> system. Did my mpfr/gmp install incorrecly ?
I don't think MPFR install libs in .../lib64 (everytime
See the disassembly of the
unoptimized & optimized executables
produced by GCC!!! :)
run.out (inside of the attachment):
#!/bin/sh
cat $0
echo ""
gcc --version
#
# Unoptimized
#
gcc -Wall -S arr.c # to see arr.s
m
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 08:59:51AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 02:32:19PM +0100, Martin Reinecke wrote:
/usr/bin/ld: crtbegin.o: No such file: No such file or directory
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
This probably happens because the
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 08:59:51AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 02:32:19PM +0100, Martin Reinecke wrote:
> > /usr/bin/ld: crtbegin.o: No such file: No such file or directory
> > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> >
> > This probably happens because the crt*.o files
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 02:32:19PM +0100, Martin Reinecke wrote:
> /usr/bin/ld: crtbegin.o: No such file: No such file or directory
> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
>
> This probably happens because the crt*.o files are no longer placed into
> /lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.3.0/
> but rather i
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 04:19:17PM +1100, Ben Elliston wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-01-03 at 23:28 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> > Right now the libgcc configuration is completely tied up with
> > gcc/Makefile. As parts of the configuration process move from
> > gcc/config/ to libgcc/config/ (or l
n/ugcc --enable-languages=c++,fortran
--enable-checking=release
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.3.0 20070104 (experimental)
/afs/mpa/data/martin/ugcc/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.3.0/cc1 -quiet -v
bla.c -quiet -dumpbase bla.c -mtune=generic -auxbase bla -version -o
/tmp/cc1cwpGv.s
ignoring nonex
On 1/4/07, Richard Sandiford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Richard Guenther" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 1/4/07, Richard Sandiford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> it sounds like that would eliminate most
"Richard Guenther" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 1/4/07, Richard Sandiford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> it sounds like that would eliminate most of the problem. Certainly,
>> >> making -INT_MIN evaluat
Le Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 05:39:23AM -0500, Andrew Pinski écrivait/wrote:
> First sorry about the first email.
> > As a simple example, if I add (inside trunk rev.101317) at the end of
> > gcc/stringpool.c just before the last #include "gt-stringpool.h"
> >
> > typedef char* basilestring_t;
> >
On 1/4/07, Richard Sandiford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> it sounds like that would eliminate most of the problem. Certainly,
>> making -INT_MIN evaluate to INT_MIN, when expressed like that, is an
>> easy thing
>
> Greetings,
> I'm running gcc on the latest Ubuntu(Edgy) and I get segfault with the
> following program:
>
>
>
You just overflowed your stack. Increase the stack size for the program
by using limit/ulimit or use dynamic allocated memory.
This question is more appropriate for gcc-help@ r
On 2007-01-03 20:11:35 -0500, drizzle drizzle wrote:
> Installed mpfr and gmp and verified mpfr.h and gmp.h exist in
> /usr/local/include and libmpfr.a , libgmp.so etc exists in
> /usr/local/lib
I assume you got MPFR 2.2.1. You can try to rebuild MPFR with
--enable-shared, in case you have another
Greetings,
I'm running gcc on the latest Ubuntu(Edgy) and I get segfault with the
following program:
#include
#include
#define SIZE (INT_MAX>>3)
int main()
{
int arr[SIZE];
printf("%d\n",SIZE);
return 0;
}
bash$ gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 20060928 (prerelease) (Ubu
Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> it sounds like that would eliminate most of the problem. Certainly,
>> making -INT_MIN evaluate to INT_MIN, when expressed like that, is an
>> easy thing to do; that's just a guarantee about constant folding.
>
First sorry about the first email.
> As a simple example, if I add (inside trunk rev.101317) at the end of
> gcc/stringpool.c just before the last #include "gt-stringpool.h"
>
> typedef char* basilestring_t;
> DEF_VEC_P (basilestring_t);
> DEF_VEC_ALLOC_P (basilestring_t,heap);
> static VE
Le Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 05:30:37AM -0500, Andrew Pinski écrivait/wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hello All,
> >
> > I cannot figure out how to have a vector of strings in a GTY-ed file
> >
> > As a simple example, if I add (inside trunk rev.101317) at the end of
> > gcc/stringpool.c just before the last #i
>
>
> Hello All,
>
> I cannot figure out how to have a vector of strings in a GTY-ed file
>
> As a simple example, if I add (inside trunk rev.101317) at the end of
> gcc/stringpool.c just before the last #include "gt-stringpool.h"
>
> typedef char* basilestring_t;
> DEF_VEC_P (basilestrin
Hello All,
I cannot figure out how to have a vector of strings in a GTY-ed file
As a simple example, if I add (inside trunk rev.101317) at the end of
gcc/stringpool.c just before the last #include "gt-stringpool.h"
typedef char* basilestring_t;
DEF_VEC_P (basilestring_t);
DEF_VEC_ALLOC_P
59 matches
Mail list logo
