On Thu, 19 Jun 2008, Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote:
> [...] I believe some work could be done (maybe even on mainline) to
> activate -Wc++-compat during bootstrap as a warning only, (not an
> error). E.g.:
>
> #pragma GCC diagnostic warning "-Wc++-compat"
>
> This would help clean up some of the eas
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008, Doug Gregor wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 2:01 AM, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As I promised at the summit today, I have created the branch
> > gcc-in-cxx (I originally said gcc-in-c++, but I decided that it was
> > better to avoid possible meta-characte
Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Could a C++ maintainer please review this patch to turn most pedwarns
into permerrors.
This patch is OK, with minor nits below. Thanks for working on this!
The interesting cases are:
* when 'main' is declared without a return type. I split one case into
a permerror an
Hi,
Here is the AVX patch for x86-64 psABI proposed at gcc submmit 2008.
H.J.
---
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 6:49 PM, Jan Hubicka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 07:49:12AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> > > I guess we all agree on passing variadic arguments on stack (that is
>> > >
Snapshot gcc-4.2-20080618 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.2-20080618/
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
Hi,
Hi,
Everyone else is creating branches today, so let me join the club and
announce a new branch: rtl-fud-branch. The purpose of the branch is to
implement factored use-def chains for RTL. The goal is to have this
ready for GCC 4.4.
Gr.
Steven
Index: svn.html
=
Hello:
We are specialized in new network products, including switch, firewall,
router, GBIC,SFP,WIC,cables etc... We provide high quality products and the
most reasonable price with professional services to our customers. So if you
are interested in any of our products, please contact with
On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 14:01 -0700, Le-Chun Wu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As part of our thread safety annotation/analysis effort, we created
> about 17 new test cases that we would like to add to the gcc
> testsuite. Should we create a new sub-directory under testsuite/g++.dg
> (say, for example, g++.dg/thr
Hi,
I have created the branch "thread-annotations" that contains the
implementation of the thread safety annotations and analysis
(described in http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddqtfwhb_0c49t6zgr). I
have committed the initial implementation and a set of new test cases
to the branch. I've also create
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-6.c (test for errors, line 5)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-6.c (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-7.c (test for errors, line 5)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-7.c (test for excess errors)
>
> These look like they were caused by one of your patches.
Yes, the
> FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-6.c (test for errors, line 5)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-6.c (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-7.c (test for errors, line 5)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-7.c (test for excess errors)
These look like they were caused by one of your patches.
This is on i686-linu
On Jun 18, 2008, at 6:58 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
someone has proposed a patch to allow static linkage of libgfortran
into fortran programs on darwin. One of the Darwin maintainers
should review this since it touches the gcc/config/x-darwin
file. FYI.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-06/msg00362.ht
wwwdocs isn't branched, but there should be a version of
codingconventions.html with the conventions being followed for the use of
C++ on the branch. (Parts of the libstdc++ coding style may be relevant.)
I think a more conservative approach is needed to being buildable with a
range of version
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 09:41:26AM -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 08:51:24PM -0700, Karen Shaeffer wrote:
> > I see your point. My sticking point is that the process is actually
> > running on a physical machine.
>
> And that's the problem. You, like many C programmers, have in
Hi,
On 2008-06-17 23:01, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> As I promised at the summit today, I have created the branch
> gcc-in-cxx (I originally said gcc-in-c++, but I decided that it was
> better to avoid possible meta-characters). The goal of this branch is
> to develop a version of gcc which is comp
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 08:51:24PM -0700, Karen Shaeffer wrote:
> I see your point. My sticking point is that the process is actually
> running on a physical machine.
And that's the problem. You, like many C programmers, have in your head a
physical machine model where pointer variables are physi
[ I dropped gcc-patches from this reply. ]
Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 6/18/08 2:01 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> As I promised at the summit today, I have created the branch
>> gcc-in-cxx (I originally said gcc-in-c++, but I decided that it was
>> better to avoid possible met
On 6/18/08 2:01 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
As I promised at the summit today, I have created the branch
gcc-in-cxx (I originally said gcc-in-c++, but I decided that it was
better to avoid possible meta-characters). The goal of this branch is
to develop a version of gcc which is compiled with C+
Hi,
Hahaha! I know, I have been getting an education here. I
really appreciate everyone's patience on this issue. I
have assimilated all the excellent comments and understand
my own laziness has caused my confusion. Thank you all.
Karen
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 11:20:00AM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 2:01 AM, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As I promised at the summit today, I have created the branch
> gcc-in-cxx (I originally said gcc-in-c++, but I decided that it was
> better to avoid possible meta-characters). The goal of this branch is
> to develop a v
Hi!
Karen Shaeffer wrote:
I see your point. My sticking point is that the process is actually
running on a physical machine. And the addresses, although virtual,
do translate to a unique physical memory location. And, the value
stored in that location cannot be 0 and 5 at the same time. And my
c
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 12:40 AM, Jay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ah, I didn't realize any C or C++ code could be configured for other than a
> specific processor but I guess that makes sense -- it is Makefile, config.h,
> and such that are being modified, not the .o files, and they might be the
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> my intention is to add a pass at the Gimple (maybe SSA) level. The
> current problem is that I would like to generate code that saves the
> contents of the stack to a different memory location. Is there a way to
> access stack pointer and stack size (and the direction in
Karen Shaeffer wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 11:01:31AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>>
>>> output ~~
>>> $ const_ints
>>> const int ic = 0 *cip = 5 *ip = 5
>>> &ic = 0xbfbd72a0cip =
Hi Luke,
thank you very much for your answer!
I don't know anything about GIMPLE, but I can address this issue. It
sounds like you are proposing to checkpoint (via copying) the entire
stack eagerly at the time you enter a transaction, in order to avoid
transactional instrumentation of stack acc
25 matches
Mail list logo
