It took me quite some time to figure out how to browse the different
types of trees that I am interested in.
There are still many types and components that I will need later to
finish my restrictive exception specification warning mechanic.
I've tried dumping trees but the format of the dumps isn'
I have recently been able to put in a few hours toward my restrictive
exception specification warning mechanic.
I have it warning me correctly on very basic regular code with throw,
try/catch, function calls and exception specifications.
It's also activated by -Wres (restrictive exception specifica
On 11/28/08 16:02:11, Gary Funck wrote:
>
> I'd think that somewhere in there gen_lowpart() needs to
> be called.
I posted a suggested patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-11/msg01466.html
which fixes the reported problem.
(Configuration: x86_64, GCC 4.2.3 base line)
I've run into a problem where GCSE decides to kill a
conditional jump instruction because it thinks that the
result is always false. This happens when GCSE decides
to propagate a constant that is "narrowed" [the original
mode of the constant is word_mo
When categorising a functions purity i also would like to identify the
cause of the impurity. In particular for a function that is impure i
want to categorise the impurity cause as:
* modifies global state
* modifies a function parameter
* modifies the object state (this is an extension of the fun
Kai Tietz writes:
>Hmm, yes and no. First the exception handler uses the .pdata and .xdata
>section for checking throws. But there is still the stack based exception
>mechanism as for 32-bit IIRC.
No. The mechanism is completely different. The whole point of the unwind
tables is to remove the
Hi all,
I want to use GCC to categorise "functional purity" in C++. My
definition will differ from classic functional purity. In particular:
A function is considered pure if it makes no changes to existing
memory or program state. There may be a few exceptions to this rule
such as for new/malloc i
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20081128 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20081128/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.4 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
"Cheng bin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1 : At the end of that makefile , There is a section noted as
> "Regenerating top level configury".
> It is clear what it do, but for what? Where is this piece of
> code used in building procedure?
Those pieces of code are used by developers if and
Epeidi ta pragmata einai polu sovara kai i katastasi tou Dimitri krisimi,
8a parakalousame osous exoun
omada aimatos 0- (miden arnitiko) kmporoun na dwsoun aima na perasoun apo
ena apo ola ta
nosokomeia tis xwras dinontas to onoma k to nosokomeio sto opoio paei to
aima.
Gia ton Dimitri Xourmouzia
Epeidi ta pragmata einai polu sovara kai i katastasi tou Dimitri krisimi,
8a parakalousame osous exoun
omada aimatos 0- (miden arnitiko) kmporoun na dwsoun aima na perasoun apo
ena apo ola ta
nosokomeia tis xwras dinontas to onoma k to nosokomeio sto opoio paei to
aima.
Gia ton Dimitri Xourmouzia
Hi Ross,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 27.11.2008 23:36:22:
> Kai Tietz writes:
> >Well, you mean the SEH tables on stack.
>
> No, I mean the ABI required unwind information.
So you speak about .pdata and .xdata. Well, those aren't implemented.
First step would be to teach gas to generate those
On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 7:11 AM, Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 11:14:14AM +, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> Jack Howarth wrote:
>> > On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 02:30:25PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> >> I get the following build failure on i386-apple-darwin8.11.1.
>> >
13 matches
Mail list logo
