Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
Hello All.
Denys Vlasenko wrote:
On Saturday 22 March 2008 11:14, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
* on the positive side, GCC is still doing well and alive
Why Intel and MS compilers are surpassing it?
Honestly, I never coded last years on any Microsoft systems (exc
> Anyone knows how to update the following in MAINTAINERS?
>
> libgcj Bryce McKinlay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> The reason I am asking is that I just got
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: host mx3.redhat.com[66.187.233.32] said:
> 550 5.2.1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... Mailbox disabl
This list is for development of gcc, not gcc users. In future gcc-help, or
some other arm specific list is the correct place to ask such questions.
> As far as I can tell, there is no way to declare
> that a particular function pointer will point at
> plain ARM code or at Thumb code. I'm more
> t
As far as I can tell, there is no way to declare
that a particular function pointer will point at
plain ARM code or at Thumb code. I'm more
than a little surprised actually, so maybe I just
missed something. How can I do this?
Some background: The function is in ROM.
I'm using a linker script to g
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Richard Guenther wrote:
> GCC 4.4 stage1 started at Feb 18th and will end two month after that,
> Apr 21st. Stage2 will end two month after that, Jun 23th. After
> stage3 ends at Aug 18th we will go into regresion and documentation
> fixes only and process with releasing after
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> GCC 4.3.1 is due no later than 2008-05-05, but if a workaround for the
> x86 direction flag issue is agreed and committed soon then 4.3.1-rc1
> may come around a week after such a workaround is committed to the
> branch, with the release following about
Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
Aaron Gray wrote:
* what is the proportion of cross-compilation? I have no real clue.
I would suppose that during all the GCC runs in the last month, only a
minority was cross-compilation (for some embedded systems). Of these,
what are the favorite target machines
Aaron Gray wrote:
* what is the proportion of cross-compilation? I have no real clue.
I would suppose that during all the GCC runs in the last month, only a
minority was cross-compilation (for some embedded systems). Of these,
what are the favorite target machines & systems. I really don't kn
Aaron Gray wrote:
* what is the proportion of cross-compilation? I have no real clue.
I would suppose that during all the GCC runs in the last month, only a
minority was cross-compilation (for some embedded systems). Of these,
what are the favorite target machines & systems. I really don't kn
* what is the proportion of cross-compilation? I have no real clue. I
would suppose that during all the GCC runs in the last month, only a
minority was cross-compilation (for some embedded systems). Of these, what
are the favorite target machines & systems. I really don't know this one
(maybe
Andrew Pinski wrote:
Here are some answers from a PS3 prosective.
The mean code size is around 200 million lines or so. The final
binary results anywhere between 20 Megs to 40 Megs.
Are you sure of that figure? 200MLOC for a single program? That is huge!
Even for all the software installed
Here are some answers from a PS3 prosective.
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 12:15 PM, Basile STARYNKEVITCH
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * about X thousands developers run GCC at least once in the last
> month (I would imagine X is more than 100, ie more 100K developers are
> using GCC)
Right now all o
Hello All.
Denys Vlasenko wrote:
On Saturday 22 March 2008 11:14, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
* on the positive side, GCC is still doing well and alive
I did not meant that everything is perfect. But I would not qualify GCC
as a sick or dead project. This is why I wrote "doing well & alive"
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 7:16 PM, Denys Vlasenko
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 22 March 2008 11:14, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> > Actually you ask an interesting & difficult question. Some thoughts from
> > somebody who works on GCC for more than a year but still considers
> > himsel
On Saturday 22 March 2008 11:14, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> Actually you ask an interesting & difficult question. Some thoughts from
> somebody who works on GCC for more than a year but still considers
> himself a newbie:
>
> * my impression is that nobody understands fully the GCC compiler.
Anyone knows how to update the following in MAINTAINERS?
libgcj Bryce McKinlay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The reason I am asking is that I just got
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: host mx3.redhat.com[66.187.233.32] said:
550 5.2.1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... Mailbox disabled for this reci
On 22/03/2008, 梁�� <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Any advice to be invovled in development of gcc ?
> Thank you very much.
> Sorry for disturbing.
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GettingStarted
My advice would be:
* Narrowly focus on what you are truly interested in: front-end,
middle-end, back-end.
Hello All
LiangKun 梁堃 wrote:
Hello, everyone :
I am learning compiler techniques. I want a live example. I also want to do my
contributions to open source. So I turn to gcc.
Last year I have added some instruction templates to one specific gcc
backend as a task in work.
I have read a little of
I noticed on the wiki, that it says "Another way of getting a clean
build in the meantime is to only enable C and Fortran. " But this is
not true, building libgfortran is broken. It causes an ICE while
building f2c_specifics.F90 on i686-linux-gnu.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] libgfortran]$
/home/pinskia/sr
Hello, everyone :
I am learning compiler techniques. I want a live example. I also want to do my
contributions to open source. So I turn to gcc.
Last year I have added some instruction templates to one specific gcc
backend as a task in work.
I have read a little of "Using and Porting GCC".
But st
20 matches
Mail list logo
