hi im newbie to Linux platform .
i just want to convert my jni application to linux .
its workikikg n fine in windows XP.
But unsatisfiedlinkerror thrown by JVm in Linux .
Im sendin gu all the code plz analyze it ..
---
package demo;
public class Sample6 {
p
On Nov 21, 2007, at 16:34, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>Did you mean to send this to the list? If so, feel free to reply
>there.
Indeed, I did. I now Cc-ed the list as well.
>>Here's the first few lines of a-textio.adb disassembly:
>>Dump of assembler code for function ada__text_io__put_line:
>>0x800
Snapshot gcc-4.2-20071121 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.2-20071121/
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/branches
I recently compiled the entire Debian archive (around 6500 packages
that need to be compiled) on SPARC using trunk to identify new issues
before GCC 4.3 is released. I compiled the archive twice, once with
default optimization levels specified by packages and once with
optimization set to -O3.
I
Shaun Jackman wrote:
I have also noticed that a series of
p = buf; *p++; *p++ *p++;
get's optimized to
buf[0]; buf[1]; buf[2];
which may be faster on some architectures, but loading constants is
quite expensive on the AVR.
Phew, I just tried this:
extern unsig
> Do you have any test cases? I'm pretty sure this works, at least in
> the usual cases.
They're going to be hard to construct since they are sensitive to such
things as the number of registers saved.
> A wild guess says that you're doing this in Ada. It may be something
> specific to the neste
On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 03:56:02PM -0500, Richard Kenner wrote:
> When that option is enabled, STACK_BOUNDARY is set to 64.
>
> But when you look at arm_expand_prologue, it appears that very little
> effort is made to respect that alignment. Three specific cases I see
> are the IS_NESTED case of
When that option is enabled, STACK_BOUNDARY is set to 64.
But when you look at arm_expand_prologue, it appears that very little
effort is made to respect that alignment. Three specific cases I see
are the IS_NESTED case of pushing ip_rtx and, the lack of checking the
size of args_to_push, and no
(cc'ing gcc@gcc.gnu.org)
On Nov 21, 2007 2:38 AM, Wouter van Gulik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also consider the fuse bit get routine. This scheme gives more knowledge
> to the compiler, unfortunately gcc fails to see the loading of r31 can
> done once:
>
> using this:
>
> ===
