On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Mike Dupont
wrote:
> Hi there,
> on the gcc buildfarm :
> /home/h4ck3rm1k3/experiments/gcc-build/
> I am having problems with a standard build of the gcc using the 4.5.1
> compiler.
>
> 1. ./morestack.vis:1: Error: junk at end of line, first unrecognized
> chara
Hi there,
on the gcc buildfarm :
/home/h4ck3rm1k3/experiments/gcc-build/
I am having problems with a standard build of the gcc using the 4.5.1 compiler.
1. ./morestack.vis:1: Error: junk at end of line, first unrecognized
character is `:'
h4ck3rm1k3@gcc10:~/experiments/gcc-build/x86_64-unknown-li
On Oct 20, 2012, at 20:23 , Richard Smith wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis
> wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Jordan Rose wrote:
>>> While throwing things out there, why not just optionally allow constexpr
>>> functions to coexist with non-constexpr functio
On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
>> Allow loops and the like in constexpr functions and be done with it. See my
>> comments on the C++ Extension Working Group when these (and related)
>> issues where brought up.
>
> Yes, I completely agree, but I don't think this solves the
On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis
wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Jordan Rose wrote:
>> While throwing things out there, why not just optionally allow constexpr
>> functions to coexist with non-constexpr functions of the same name, like
>> inline and non-inline?
I thi
On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Jordan Rose wrote:
> While throwing things out there, why not just optionally allow constexpr
> functions to coexist with non-constexpr functions of the same name, like
> inline and non-inline?
Or remove most of the restrictions on constexpr functions that were
On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 12:53 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
>>
>> [Crossposted to both GCC and Clang dev lists]
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> One issue facing library authors wanting to use C++11's constexpr feature is
>> that the same implementation must
Snapshot gcc-4.7-20121020 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.7-20121020/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.7 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On Oct 19, 2012, at 23:27 , Andy Gibbs wrote:
> On Saturday, October 20, 2012 7:50 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote:
>> [...snip...] Let me hypothesize a different interface:
>>
>> This stays the same...
>> constexpr int constexpr_strncmp(const char *p, const char *q, size_t n) {
>> return !n ? 0 : *
David got me past my first problem.
AIX 6.1 TL07 SP03, gcc 4.5.2 git repository on "master". Last pull was
> commit 43780738cd22a2fbea5fd7d8260a76e0c3121f43
> Author: hubicka
> Date: Sat Oct 20 14:19:12 2012 +
Here is the new error:
> /gsa/ausgsa/projects/r/ruby/bin/bash /usr/work/src/g
> Hello, I'm working with the BeagleBone and gcc-4.5.4 on Gentoo. If I
> try to compile the 3.6 kernel with CONFIG_THUMB2_KERNEL, I get:
>
> arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S:127: Error: selected processor does
> not support requested special purpose register -- `mrs r2,cpsr'
>>>
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 10:50 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Richard Smith
> wrote:
>>
>> [Crossposted to both GCC and Clang dev lists]
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> One issue facing library authors wanting to use C++11's constexpr feature
>> is that the same implementation mus
On Oct 19, 2012, at 10:51 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 10:50 PM, Chandler Carruth
> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
> [Crossposted to both GCC and Clang dev lists]
>
> Hi,
>
> One issue facing library authors wanting to use C++11's con
13 matches
Mail list logo
