Uros Bizjak writes:
> A problem arises with the code in testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/rv[1..8]p.C.
> These tests use "sizeof(..character array...) == ", but sizeof char
> array depends heavily on the value of #define STRUCTURE_SIZE_BOUNDARY.
> Targets that define this value to i.e. 32 (for performance r
Steven Bosscher writes:
> Assertions in libcpp have been deprecated since r135264:
>
> 2008-05-13 Tom Tromey
>
> PR preprocessor/22168:
> * expr.c (eval_token): Warn for use of assertions.
>
> Can this feature be removed for GCC 4.6?
It was officially deprecated in the 4.4 rel
> "Rick C. Hodgin" writes:
> > Is there an Intel-syntax compatible option for GCC or G++? And if not,
> > why not? It's so much cleaner than AT&T's.
> -masm=intel
> This question would have been more appropriate on the gcc-help mailing
> list. -Ian Lance Taylor
My apologies to everyone. I did
Steven Bosscher writes:
> It seems that there once was support for builtin functions defined by
> a front end. This is still a useful idea (see e.g. PR24777) but it
> looks like there are no frontend built-in functions anymore. At least,
> a grep for BUILT_IN_FRONTEND gives no meaningful results.
"Rick C. Hodgin" writes:
> Is there an Intel-syntax compatible option for GCC or G++? And if not,
> why not? It's so much cleaner than AT&T's.
-masm=intel
This question would have been more appropriate on the gcc-help mailing
list.
Ian
Mihai Donțu writes:
> Is there a page somewhere which details the list of changes made to gcc for
> every release? I don't seem to be able to find it anywhere on gcc.gnu.org.
> I'm
> not referring to things like http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.5/changes.html but
> something more like:
> http://www.k
Hi Steve,
> > Can you tell how you obtained the performance numbers you are using?
> > There may be a few compiler flags you could add to reduce that ratio
> > of 1.4 to something better.
> >
>
> Without knowing the compiler options, the results of any benchmark
> are meaningless.
I used
gfor
Snapshot gcc-4.5-20100812 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.5-20100812/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.5 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
Andrew J. Hutton wrote:
The annual GCC & GNU Toolchain Developers’ Summit brings together the
core development team of the GNU Compiler Collection with those working
on the other toolchain components to discuss the state of the art. We
focus on providing a vendor neutral environment to encoura
The annual GCC & GNU Toolchain Developers’ Summit brings together the
core development team of the GNU Compiler Collection with those working
on the other toolchain components to discuss the state of the art. We
focus on providing a vendor neutral environment to encourage open
dialog, technolog
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 08:47:34PM +0200, Toon Moene wrote:
> Steve Kargl wrote:
>
> ># gfc4x 9.814 9.358 8.622 9.810 Note1 9.172 8.958 9.022
>
> Column 5 compiled with -march=native -O2 -ffast-math
>
> ># Note 1: STOP DLAMC1 failure (10)
>
> That's probably because a standard compile
Steve Kargl wrote:
# gfc4x 9.814 9.358 8.622 9.810 Note1 9.172 8.958 9.022
Column 5 compiled with -march=native -O2 -ffast-math
# Note 1: STOP DLAMC1 failure (10)
That's probably because a standard compile of the LAPACK sources only
compiles {S|D}LAM* with -O0.
The code is sim
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 09:51:42AM +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve
> wrote:
> > Hi Vladimir,
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback! Very interesting.
> >
> >
> >> Intel optimization compiler team (besides researchers) is much bigger than
> >>whol
According to our records, your request has been resolved. If you have any
further questions or concerns, please reply to this email.
Phung Nguyen wrote:
> I am trying to build cross compiler for xc16x. I built successfully
> binutils 2.18; gcc 4.0 and newlib 1.18. Everything is fine when
> compiling a simple C file without any library call. It is also fine
> when making a simple call to printf like printf("Hello world").
> Howev
On 11/08/2010 23:04, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
On 08/10/2010 09:51 PM, Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve wrote:
I wrote a Fortran to C++ conversion program that I used to convert
selected
LAPACK sources. Comparing runtimes with different compilers I get:
absolute relative
ifort 11.1.072 1.790s 1.00
gfortr
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve
wrote:
> Hi Vladimir,
>
> Thanks for the feedback! Very interesting.
>
>
>> Intel optimization compiler team (besides researchers) is much bigger than
>>whole GCC community.
>
> That's a surprise to me. I have to say that the GCC community
17 matches
Mail list logo
