Hi all,
I am trying to install gcc 3.2 in a Linux machine (x86, Fedora core 5), it
already have gcc 4.1.0 installed. (i.e. I am compiling with gcc 4.1.0)
I am getting the below error message while compiling, can u please help me.
Is there any problem with gcc in backward compatibility?
Thanks in
Looking at the std::string comparison operators, they all seem to be
using std::string::compare directly even in cases where the string
lengths must match. Comparing the string lengths before the
std::string::compare call in std::string::operator==/!= would avoid
doing a byte-for-byte comparison i
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:19:09 -0300, Rodolfo Lima wrote
> In my first example, the target type is the type of the address
> expression,
It cannot be treated as the target in paragraph 1 of section 13.4 (ISO/IEC
14882:2003).
Again, here is the list of possible targets:
1. an object or reference be
"Ling-hua Tseng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu na mensagem
> What is the `target' in your program?
> The answer is NOTHING.
> So the set of overloaded functions is empty at beginning.
In my first example, the target type is the type of the address expression,
i.e., the type of the source. I'll re
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 19:25:38 -0300, Rodolfo Lima wrote
> If I understand this correctly, when we have the following declarations:
>
> template void foo() {}
> void foo() {}
>
> The overload set for "&foo" at first contains all "void foo()"
> and "void foo()". Then, because of the presence of t
> The function template `std::make_pair<>()' is an example.
> You can directly call it without <>.
> Since &print is not a call expression, C++ compilers cannot determine it
> by
> function arguments.
You're right, I forgot that rather trivial example. But what I'm trying to
achieve is the corre
On 19 July 2007 20:38, tbp wrote:
> On 7/19/07, Dave Korn wrote:
>> Bogus codegen is the inevitable result of bogus code. Garbage in,
>> garbage out.
>>
>> BTW, the const indexing is completely undefined too.
> That's the kind of answer i'd get from gcc-help and at that point i'd
> be none
On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 04:41:50PM +0200, Indu Bhagat wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need to study 16-bit binaries (Intel based architecture) for
> research purposes.I will appreciate if someone could let me know some
> details of the project on "Porting GCC to Intel 16-bit architecture".
> Particularly,
>
>
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> The link on gcc.gnu.org for the GCC 4.1 status refers to an email about
> GCC 4.2
Thanks for this report. I did some digging (to find the correct link),
and it seems this was introduced with revision 1.619 of index.html.
This patch restores the lat
On 7/19/07, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bogus codegen is the inevitable result of bogus code. Garbage in, garbage
out.
BTW, the const indexing is completely undefined too.
That's the kind of answer i'd get from gcc-help and at that point i'd
be none wiser because i already know th
On 7/19/07, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Of course, if any then the array indexing variant is fixed. It would be nice
to see a complete testcase with a pessimization, maybe you can file
a bugreport about this?
By essence they're hard to trigger in small testcases (that's not
wher
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:45:31 -0300, Rodolfo Schulz de Lima wrote
> &print is not a call expression the same way &print<5> isn't, but
> the latter is resolved correctly.
It's because you have specified it explicitly.
> I cannot see how a template function can be instantiated without <>,
> since it
On 7/19/07, tbp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/19/07, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, I always used the array variant, but you should be able to do
[snip]
> if you need to (why does the array form not work for you?)
Because if you bench in some non trivial program, on x86/x86
On 19 July 2007 14:08, tbp wrote:
> I have that usual heavy duty 3 fp components class that needs to be
> reasonably efficient and takes this form for g++
> struct vec_t {
> float x,y,z;
> const float &operator()(const uint_t i) const { return *(&x + i); }
> float &operator()(con
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, tbp wrote:
On 7/19/07, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, I always used the array variant, but you should be able to do
[snip]
if you need to (why does the array form not work for you?)
Because if you bench in some non trivial program, on x86/x86-64 at
lea
On 7/19/07, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, I always used the array variant, but you should be able to do
[snip]
if you need to (why does the array form not work for you?)
Because if you bench in some non trivial program, on x86/x86-64 at
least, those variations (struct { flo
Ling-hua Tseng escreveu:
Since the sub-expression `&print' is not a call expression,
the overload resolution mechanism will not select the non-template version
first.
&print is not a call expression the same way &print<5> isn't, but the
latter is resolved correctly.
And the function templa
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 12:59:09 -0300, Rodolfo Schulz de Lima wrote
> Hi, the code below doesn't compile with gcc-4.2, with the following error:
>
> test.cpp: In function int main():
> test.cpp:19: error: no matching function for call to
> call()
>
> It compiles and runs fine with Visual Studio
On 7/19/07, tbp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have that usual heavy duty 3 fp components class that needs to be
reasonably efficient and takes this form for g++
struct vec_t {
float x,y,z;
const float &operator()(const uint_t i) const { return *(&x + i); }
float &operator()
Hi, the code below doesn't compile with gcc-4.2, with the following error:
test.cpp: In function ‘int main()’:
test.cpp:19: error: no matching function for call to ‘call(overloaded function type>)’
It compiles and runs fine with Visual Studio 2005. I think the compiler
should see that if I'm c
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:38:50 +0800, Ling-hua Tseng wrote
> It's not a bug.
> When you are using class template, the `total template
> specialization' may be wrote by someone. Since the C++ compiler
> expect anything, you should to use one of the following 3 solutions:
^^^ cannot exp
It's not a bug.
When you are using class template, the `total template specialization' may
be wrote by someone.
Since the C++ compiler expect anything, you should to use one of the
following 3 solutions:
1. use `this->Baz()' instead of `Baz()'.
2. write `using Foo::Baz();' in the derived clas
Thanks a lot.
I also found a warning message about this if I used the `bridge pattern' (aka
pimpl idiom) in my code.
For example, here are 2 files:
==
// interface.hxx
#include
struct TestImpl;
class Test {
public:
Test();
~Test();
void foo();
private:
std:
Hi, I've found strange behavior, possibly a bug, but more likely a
problem with my understanding. Here's the code:
template class Foo {
public:
void Baz() {}
};
template class Bar : public Foo {
public:
void Bum() { Baz(); }
};
(I know it doesn't make much sense, I reduced the pro
On 19 July 2007 16:03, Daniel Verkamp wrote:
> Indu Bhagat wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I need to study 16-bit binaries (Intel based architecture) for
>> research purposes.I will appreciate if someone could let me know some
>> details of the project on "Porting GCC to Intel 16-bit architecture".
>> Partic
Indu Bhagat wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need to study 16-bit binaries (Intel based architecture) for
> research purposes.I will appreciate if someone could let me know some
> details of the project on "Porting GCC to Intel 16-bit architecture".
> Particularly,
>
> 1) Support level : few words on the unsuppo
Hi,
I need to study 16-bit binaries (Intel based architecture) for
research purposes.I will appreciate if someone could let me know some
details of the project on "Porting GCC to Intel 16-bit architecture".
Particularly,
1) Support level : few words on the unsupported stuff and basic
assumptions
Razya,
Many of the tests fail on AIX as well.
David
FAIL: gcc.dg/matrix/matrix-1.c scan-ipa-dump-times Flattened 3 dimensions
1
FAIL: gcc.dg/matrix/matrix-2.c scan-ipa-dump-times Flattened 2 dimensions
1
FAIL: gcc.dg/matrix/matrix-3.c scan-ipa-dump-times Flattened 2 dimensions
1
FAIL: g
I have that usual heavy duty 3 fp components class that needs to be
reasonably efficient and takes this form for g++
struct vec_t {
float x,y,z;
const float &operator()(const uint_t i) const { return *(&x + i); }
float &operator()(const uint_t i) { return *(&x + i); } // <-
Ling-hua Tseng wrote:
> If I compile this file with g++ 4.2 by the following command:
> g++ -c test.cxx
> and then use this command to check symbol:
> nm test.o
> I cannot find the global varible `test' in symbol table:
This was an intentional change as part of the overhaul of C++ visibility
Here is the example program:
==
// test.cxx
#include
#include
namespace {
template
struct transformValue {
size_t operator()(const T &x) const
{
return x + 10;
}
};
}
extern std::map > *test;
std::map > *test;
==
If I compile this file with g++ 4.2 by the f
Ayal Zaks/Haifa/IBM wrote on 15/07/2007 09:32:10:
> > Is anyone else seeing failures on the gcc.dg/matrix tests? I am
getting
> > the following failures on IA64 HP-UX:
> >
> Hope Razya can help spot the cause, after she returns from vacation
> later this week.
> Ayal.
>
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/matr
On 7/18/07, Seongbae Park (박성배, 朴成培) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/18/07, Sunzir Deepur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So basically I want to assume the maximum vcg file that is created
> is a function of the optimizations and not a function of the source file..
Why?
There's no guarantee,
althou
33 matches
Mail list logo
