I am adding a new optimisation pass to GCC and I have found that I probably
need to make use of SSA's definition-finding. The problem I am having is
that the trees I am working on don't seem to be in SSA form (i.e. not
SSA_NAME nodes).
I have looked endlessly and can't find any documentation on t
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 14:49:43 -0700 (PDT), "Steve Ellcey" said
> > From: Charles Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
^
fix your mailer
> > The --tag option is added by automake-1.9 or automake-1.10, but not 1.8:
>
> Interesting, the Makefile.
On Mar 20, 2007, at 8:13 PM, Simon Brenner wrote:
Wow, lots of comments there, Mike ;-)
I could say a lot more... I thought I'd let you drag any other
details you wanted out of me. :-)
My idea was to initially just check for any not obviously safe
changes, and later in the project try to
Basile STARYNKEVITCH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It seems to me that setjmp & longjmp are (almost) never used inside the
> compiler but I don't understand why it is so.
>
> It is quite standard since a long time, and I don't understand why it should
> be avoided (as some old Changelog suggest).
"H. J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 09:19:44PM +0100, fafa wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I noticed that G++ 4.1.2 (on a Pentium 4) generates different instructions
> > for
> > lea0x0(%esi),%esi
> > or
> > lea0x0(%edi),%edi
> > with the same meaning but diff
Richard Henderson wrote
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 04:16:20PM -, Dave Korn wrote:
> > Presumably there would be no problem in just waiting
> until runtime to
> > initialise the my_malloc_hook variable dynamically instead
> of trying to
> > statically initialise it?
>
> Dunno. One could al
Richard Henderson writes:
>Dunno. One could also wait to expand *__imp_foo, for functions,
>until expanding the function call. And then this variable would
>receive the address of the import library thunk.
>
>What does VC++ do?
It seems to always use *__imp_foo except when initializing a static
> From: Charles Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> The --tag option is added by automake-1.9 or automake-1.10, but not 1.8:
Interesting, the Makefile.in in libgfortran claims to be from automake
1.9.6. If I run this automake in a tree with the old (1.4 based
libtool) I don't get any --tags options i
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Paul Brook wrote:
The problem is that I don't think writing a detailed "mission statement" is
actually going to help anything. It's either going to be gcc contributors
writing down what they're doing anyway, or something invented by the SC or
FSF. I the latter case nothing's
> Exactly. I'm viewing the mission statement as the moral equivalent of a
> constitution -- the highest guidelines that you fall back on when
> everything else fails. Your first paragraph above indicates that you view
> it similarly. But it's currently so vague that I don't imagine it's much
> u
On Thu, 21 Mar 2007, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
I think you may misunderstand the mission statement. The mission
statement is not a technical roadmap. It's a statement of general
goals. If the community has a serious disagreement, the mission
statement can sometimes help clarify matters.
[...]
T
Hello All
It seems to me that setjmp & longjmp are (almost) never used inside the
compiler but I don't understand why it is so.
It is quite standard since a long time, and I don't understand why it should
be avoided (as some old Changelog suggest).
gcc/doc/trouble.texi gives some hints about set
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 09:19:44PM +0100, fafa wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I noticed that G++ 4.1.2 (on a Pentium 4) generates different instructions
> for
> lea0x0(%esi),%esi
> or
> lea0x0(%edi),%edi
> with the same meaning but different encoding depending on the switch
> "-momit-leaf-fram
Karthikeyan M wrote:
Oh ! So the releases on http://gcc.gnu.org/releases.html are for
those who just want to use gcc and not hack it ?
Is the latest release not done from the top of the trunk ?
No; the top of the trunk is far too unstable for releasing. Release
branches are split off of tru
Hi all,
I noticed that G++ 4.1.2 (on a Pentium 4) generates different instructions
for
lea0x0(%esi),%esi
or
lea0x0(%edi),%edi
with the same meaning but different encoding depending on the switch
"-momit-leaf-frame-pointer".
If I compile and "objdump" a short function with "-O2" I
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 02:39:13PM -0400, Doug Gregor wrote:
> I suspect we would see a small increase in memory usage, because
> subcoded types would have to allocate some memory for
> TYPE_LANG_SPECIFIC to point at (it'll be only 4 bytes in most cases).
Well, that's not strictly necessary if you
Oh ! So the releases on http://gcc.gnu.org/releases.html are for
those who just want to use gcc and not hack it ?
Is the latest release not done from the top of the trunk ?
Is there any tool that I can use visualize the repository ? A tool
that shows a visualization like
http://en.wikipedia.org
On 3/21/07, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, that's true. Here, however, we have two paths in front of us:
9-bit tree codes, or some language-dependent subcodes. The benefit of
9-bit tree codes is that they're easy to understand; the benefit of
subcodes is that they might be faster
Quoting Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Steven Bosscher wrote:
Let's be fair here: A 3% hit is small compared to the cumulative
slowdown we already have in GCC 4.3 since the start of stage 1, and
negligible compared to the total slowdown we've accumulated over the
years. I know this is not
Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Let's be fair here: A 3% hit is small compared to the cumulative
> slowdown we already have in GCC 4.3 since the start of stage 1, and
> negligible compared to the total slowdown we've accumulated over the
> years. I know this is not really an argument, but let's face it:
It does not look like this is the default. I don't see any use of --tag
in the libtool config output (nor do I see where the -MD, -MP, -MF flags
are coming from).
Steve Ellcey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
% ./libtool --config | grep -e LT -e CC -e tag
LTCC="/proj/opensrc/sje/svn.libtool/build-ia64-hp-
On 3/20/07, Karthikeyan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are these macros not a part of 4.1.2 ?
I just picked up the tarball of the 4.1.2-core source.
Which release has this code ?
4.2 or 4.3
You should never try to be doing real development work on GCC against
anything but the development trunk (
On Mar 20, 2007, at 11:23 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
As for configure scripts... autoconf -j is long overdue ;-)
Is that the option to compile autoconf stuff into fast running
efficient code? :-)
But seriously, I think we need to press autoconf into generating 100x
faster code 90% of th
> I think that should already be the default. Try running ./libtool
> --config and look for the value of CC. That value should match (modulo
> whitespace) the command line that is actually used.
>
> Andreas.
It does not look like this is the default. I don't see any use of --tag
in the libtool
Steve Ellcey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> While attempting to build libgfortran with the latest libtool I got the
> following error:
>
> if /bin/sh ./libtool --mode=compile
> /proj/opensrc/sje/svn.libtool/build-ia64-hp-hpux11.23-trunk/obj_gcc/./gcc/xgcc
> -B/proj/opensrc/sje/svn.libtool/build-i
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 04:16:20PM -, Dave Korn wrote:
> Presumably there would be no problem in just waiting until runtime to
> initialise the my_malloc_hook variable dynamically instead of trying to
> statically initialise it?
Dunno. One could also wait to expand *__imp_foo, for functions
Richard Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 21.03.2007 17:09:26:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 01:11:36PM +0100, Kai Tietz wrote:
> > #include
> > void *(my_malloc_hook)(size_t) = malloc;
> >
> > GCC tells me, that malloc isn't a constant symbol. Clear malloc is
defined
> > by using the attribu
On 21 March 2007 16:09, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 01:11:36PM +0100, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> #include
>> void *(my_malloc_hook)(size_t) = malloc;
>>
>> GCC tells me, that malloc isn't a constant symbol. Clear malloc is defined
>> by using the attribute dllimport, because it c
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 01:11:36PM +0100, Kai Tietz wrote:
> #include
> void *(my_malloc_hook)(size_t) = malloc;
>
> GCC tells me, that malloc isn't a constant symbol. Clear malloc is defined
> by using the attribute dllimport, because it comes out of the MSVCRT and
> has the name "__imp__mallo
Nicholas Nethercote <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
>
> > GCC is a very ambitious compiler:
> >
> > - it supports a lot of platforms
> > - it supports a lot of languages
> >
> > However, most users do not use most of those combinations. The
> > probl
On 3/21/07, wonsubkim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have some problems in global register allocation phase.
I have described some simple architecture using machine description and target
macro file. I use gnu GCC version 4.1.1.
But, "can't combine" message is printed out in *.c.37.greg file in g
While attempting to build libgfortran with the latest libtool I got the
following error:
if /bin/sh ./libtool --mode=compile
/proj/opensrc/sje/svn.libtool/build-ia64-hp-hpux11.23-trunk/obj_gcc/./gcc/xgcc
-B/proj/opensrc/sje/svn.libtool/build-ia64-hp-hpux11.23-trunk/obj_gcc/./gcc/
-B/proj/opens
Stephen Torri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a hard time reading the template errors I get from GCC. I was
> wondering if there is a flag for the compiler so that instead of getting
> output like below. I know I failed to present this snapshot in a
> preformatted output. This was deliberate
I have a hard time reading the template errors I get from GCC. I was
wondering if there is a flag for the compiler so that instead of getting
output like below. I know I failed to present this snapshot in a
preformatted output. This was deliberate to show how hard is to read
this on a terminal wind
While running the testsuite (for the first time in a few weeks), xgcc no
longer seems to find the libc include files in /prefix for a bfin-elf
target. It appears that while building libraries, we're careful to pass
"-isystem /opt/uClinux/bfin-elf/bfin-elf/include -isystem
/opt/uClinux/bfin-elf
/external_source/gnu/gcc-3.3.3/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/unsorted/udivmod4.c
: In function `main':
/external_source/gnu/gcc-3.3.3/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/unsorted/udivmod4.c
:56: error: unrecognizable insn:
(insn 208 207 209 5 0x0 (set (reg:SI 3 r3)
(const_string "")) -1 (nil)
(
Hello,
I stumbled over the following problem in current gcc trunk version for
minw32. If I try something like:
#include
void *(my_malloc_hook)(size_t) = malloc;
GCC tells me, that malloc isn't a constant symbol. Clear malloc is defined
by using the attribute dllimport, because it comes out of
> On Mar 20, 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kenner) wrote:
>
> > infringes our copyright
>
> > Patent law
>
> Please be careful to not spread the confusion that already exists
> between these unrelated laws.
Sorry: if I said "patent" anywhere in my message it was a typo for
"copyright". Opps
Mohan, will you please copmment on this? Perhaps mingw is working
properly, but Cygwin support has rotted.
Thanks,
Andrew.
Brian Dessent writes:
> Christian Joensson wrote:
>
> > /usr/local/src/branch/objdir/gcc/gcj
> > -B/usr/local/src/branch/objdir/i686-pc-cygwin/libjava/
> > -B/usr/loc
Christian Joensson wrote:
> /usr/local/src/branch/objdir/gcc/gcj
> -B/usr/local/src/branch/objdir/i686-pc-cygwin/libjava/
> -B/usr/local/src/branch/objdir/gcc/ -ffloat-store -fomit-frame-pointer
> -g -O2 -o jv-convert.exe --main=gnu.gcj.convert.Convert -shared-libgcc
> -L/usr/local/src/branch/obj
This is on
Windows XP Pro/SP2 cygwin Pentium M processor 2.13GHz system with packages:
binutils 20060817-1 2.17.50 20060817
bison2.3-1 2.3
cygwin 1.5.24-2
dejagnu 20021217-2 1.4.2.x
expect 20030128-1 5.26
g
41 matches
Mail list logo
