On 03/04/2016 09:33 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 04/03/16 16:21, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/04/2016 08:05 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
does that mean that the shift amount should be DImode?
Seems like a more flexible approach would be for the midend to be able
to handle these things...
Or macroize f
On 4 March 2016 at 20:10, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> There were 2 projects:
Thanks! I updated the wiki.
Cheers,
Manuel.
Hi!
I am interested to work on Gimple FE project for gsoc16. I would like
to know the scope of the project for gsoc. Also anyone like to mentor
me for the project?
Thanks and Regards,
Prasad Ghangal
On 5 March 2016 at 01:28, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> Tobias, Maxim, or anyone else,
>
> For the projects accepted in 2015, if you send me the relevant info
> (project title, student name, mentor name, a link to some webpage,
> blog, wiki or a mailing list post describing the project), I will tak
Tobias, Maxim, or anyone else,
For the projects accepted in 2015, if you send me the relevant info
(project title, student name, mentor name, a link to some webpage,
blog, wiki or a mailing list post describing the project), I will take
care of updating our wiki. This helps potential applicants to
On 4 March 2016 at 19:36, David Malcolm wrote:
> Those caret locations look wrong to me - they don't seem to be
> underlining the pertinent source. Is that what the patched compiler is
> printing, or did things get messed up somewhere via email?
Probably Gmail sucks at sending plain text. It suc
On Wed, 2016-02-24 at 17:56 +0530, Prasad Ghangal wrote:
> Thanks Prathamesh and Joseph for your suggestions.
>
> Here is my updated patch :
>
> for test cases:
>
> const int array[5] = {1, 2, 3};
> const int array1[3] = {1, 2, 3, 6};
> const int array2[4] = {1, 2, 3, 6, 89};
> c
On 04/03/16 16:21, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/04/2016 08:05 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
does that mean that the shift amount should be DImode?
Seems like a more flexible approach would be for the midend to be able
to handle these things...
Or macroize for all integer modes?
That's probably worth ex
On 03/04/2016 08:05 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
does that mean that the shift amount should be DImode?
Seems like a more flexible approach would be for the midend to be able
to handle these things...
Or macroize for all integer modes?
That's probably worth exploring. I wouldn't be at all surpris
On 04/03/16 15:12, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 04/03/16 15:07, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 02:48:21PM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Although there are case where we hit the same problem:
unsigned long
f3 (unsigned long bit_addr)
{
unsigned long bitnumb = bit_addr & 63;
On 04/03/16 15:07, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 02:48:21PM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Although there are case where we hit the same problem:
unsigned long
f3 (unsigned long bit_addr)
{
unsigned long bitnumb = bit_addr & 63;
return (1L << bitnumb);
}
combine will tr
On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 02:48:21PM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> Although there are case where we hit the same problem:
> unsigned long
> f3 (unsigned long bit_addr)
> {
> unsigned long bitnumb = bit_addr & 63;
> return (1L << bitnumb);
> }
>
> combine will try to match:
> (set (reg:DI 78)
>
On March 4, 2016 3:48:21 PM GMT+01:00, Kyrill Tkachov
wrote:
>
>On 04/03/16 14:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>>
>> On 04/03/16 11:59, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 10:51:24AM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
So I'm trying to create a define_insn to match something like:
On 04/03/16 14:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 04/03/16 11:59, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 10:51:24AM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
So I'm trying to create a define_insn to match something like:
[(set (match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "=r")
(ashift:SI
(ma
On 04/03/16 11:59, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 10:51:24AM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
So I'm trying to create a define_insn to match something like:
[(set (match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "=r")
(ashift:SI
(match_operand:SI 1 "register_operand" "r")
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:27:00AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > We were thinking on making a function attribute that ensures that non
> > necessary registers, or stack frames used by the function will be correctly
> > cleared before returning.
> > We think in implementing for x86_64 as a firs
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 10:51:24AM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> So I'm trying to create a define_insn to match something like:
> [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "=r")
> (ashift:SI
> (match_operand:SI 1 "register_operand" "r")
> (and:QI
> (match_operand:QI 2
17 matches
Mail list logo
