Hello
I held of making a patch to change this (to remove it), does Standardeze mean
something:
https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx-reflection/index.html
Kind regards
Jonny
On 29/11/2023 13:05, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 at 12:59, Jonny Grant wrote:
>>
>> Hello
>>
>> Has anyone encountered this when compiling gcc from source? libgomp doesn't
>> build due to xgcc missing
>>
>> I got latest git
Hello
Has anyone encountered this when compiling gcc from source? libgomp doesn't
build due to xgcc missing
I got latest git, did
./configure --disable-multilib
make html
It gets stuck here:
checking whether make supports nested variables... yes
/home/jonny/code/repos/gcc_tests/gcc_doc/libgomp
On 26/04/2023 00:04, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 at 20:21, Jonny Grant wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 25/04/2023 13:22, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 at 13:17, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue
On 25/04/2023 13:22, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 at 13:17, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 at 13:13, Jonny Grant wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
>>>
Hello
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
I wondered 'this_length' refers to in that example, it doesn't compile.
: In function 'main':
:13:34: error: 'this_length' undeclared (first use in this function)
13 | malloc (sizeof (struct line) + this_length);
|
On 11/07/17 09:56, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 11 July 2017 at 17:51, Jonny Grant wrote:
Hello
https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-7/changes.html
snprintf (d, sizeof d, "%#02x", x & 0xff);
^^
Should be: sizeof(d) ?
"The sizeof operator yields the size (in bytes) of
Hello
https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-7/changes.html
snprintf (d, sizeof d, "%#02x", x & 0xff);
^^
Should be: sizeof(d) ?
I'm not on this mailing list, so please cc me in any replies
Regards, Jonny
On 2 February 2015 at 23:56, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 2 February 2015 at 21:11, Jonny Grant wrote:
>> Is this a consensus agreement to rename those .C -> .cc ?
>
> No.
While I remember:
Stroustrup lists C++ extensions as .cxx and .cpp
http://www.stroustrup.com/glossar
On 03/02/15 23:20, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Jonny Grant writes:
How many minutes labor is this task?
What does it fix?
Consistency. Less important if these files are only compiled after GCC
available, to use as a testsuite. Although I understood from other
replies that other files needed
On 02/02/15 21:18, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Jonny Grant wrote:
On 01/02/15 16:34, Kevin Ingwersen (Ingwie Phoenix) wrote:
Am 01.02.2015 um 17:09 schrieb Eli Zaretskii :
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 01:55:29 +
From: Jonathan Wakely
Cc: Andrew Pinski , &quo
On 01/02/15 16:34, Kevin Ingwersen (Ingwie Phoenix) wrote:
Am 01.02.2015 um 17:09 schrieb Eli Zaretskii :
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 01:55:29 +
From: Jonathan Wakely
Cc: Andrew Pinski , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" , Jonny
Grant
These files are only compiled by GCC's own build sys
On 30/01/15 17:09, pins...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 30, 2015, at 4:22 AM, Jonny Grant wrote:
Hello
When I checked out from the trunk I saw that various files had .C
capital extension. Its not a big issue.. but I wondered if they should
be .c like regular source files?
No because they
Hello
When I checked out from the trunk I saw that various files had .C
capital extension. Its not a big issue.. but I wondered if they should
be .c like regular source files?
libitm\testsuite\libitm.c++\static_ctor.C
libitm\testsuite\libitm.c++\dropref.C
libitm\testsuite\libitm.c++\eh-1.C
libit
Dear programming language types,
I wrote this to try once again to explain what is the nature of the
problem that one would have in verifying the integrity of _any_
software toolchain, whether it is aimed ultimately at the production
of other software, or of hardware.
http://livelogic.blogspo
The following is a response to what some may think an implausible
suggestion made here:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2014-09/msg00124.html
The suggestion is that the system of education has been subverted so
that there are "unknown" physical laws which give "the unseen enemy"
whole lot, does it?
Thanks again for your helpful response. This is progress.
Ian
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 8:04 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Ian Grant
> wrote:
>> None of this is useful to me. I'm trying to make a case for why people
>> sho
e:
>> On 19 September 2014 16:21, Ian Grant wrote:
>>> Thanks. But I asked what the non-vanilla sources were. I know what
>>> the vanilla sources are, because I'm using them!
>>
>> The non-vanilla sources are everything else. That should be pretty obvious.
&g
ible in a very
crude form. By the end of the period I knew that the design of
sophisticated digital systems was the perfect field of activity for
the Mathematical Engineer."
[1] Edsger W. Dijkstra. EWD1303
https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD13xx/EWD1303
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:35 PM, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
>> From: gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of
>> Ian Grant
>>
>> And can anyone tell me what are the 'non-vanilla' sources?
>
> "Vanilla source" ref
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 9:37 PM, Joe Buck wrote:
> (delurking)
> Ah, this is commonly called the Thompson hack, since Ken Thompson
> actually produced a successful demo:
How do you know Thompson's attempt was the first instance? The
document I refer to in the blog is the "Unknown Air Force Repor
In case it isn't obvious, what I am interested in is how easily we can
know the problem of infeasibly large binaries isn't an instance of
this one:
http://livelogic.blogspot.com/2014/08/beware-insiduous-penetrator-my-son.html
Ian
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 8:32 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> ian3@jaguar:~/usr/libexec/gcc$ size i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.9.0/{cc1,f951}
>>text databssdechexfilename
>> 14965183 23708 74494415733835 f0144b
>> i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1
>> 15882830
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 18 September 2014 23:46, Ian Grant wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Tobias Ulmer wrote:
> Have you compared the binaries using size(1) instead of ls(1)?
Actually, when I look at the output of size I realise
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 18 September 2014 23:46, Ian Grant wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Tobias Ulmer wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 01:26:48PM -0400, Ian Grant wrote:
>>>> I can compile the first stage OK, and
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Tobias Ulmer wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 01:26:48PM -0400, Ian Grant wrote:
>> I can compile the first stage OK, and the binaries are quite modest:
>>
>> -rwxr-xr-x 1 ian ian 17.2M Sep 6 03:47 prev-gcc/cc1
>> -rwxr-xr-x 1 i
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Ian Grant wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Tobias Ulmer wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 01:26:48PM -0400, Ian Grant wrote:
>> > The reason I'm doing this is that I want to understand why the total
>> > s
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>>> Please don't call it "the Intel library", that doesn't mean anything.
>> Doesn't it? How did you know what 'it' was then? Or is that a stupid
>> question? This identity concept is much slipperier than it seems at
>> first, isn't it?
> You in
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Sep 2014, Ian Grant wrote:
>
>> And is there any way to disable the Intel library?
> --disable-libcilkrts (same as the other libs)
> If it explicitly doesn't support your system, I am a bit surpri
The reason I'm doing this is that I want to understand why the total
size of the binaries grew from around 10MB (gcc v 4.5) to over 70MB in
4.9
I can compile the first stage OK, and the binaries are quite modest:
-rwxr-xr-x 1 ian ian 17.2M Sep 6 03:47 prev-gcc/cc1
-rwxr-xr-x 1 ian ian 1.2
The reason I'm doing this is that I want to understand why the total
size of the binaries grew from around 10MB (gcc v 4.5) to over 70MB in
4.9
I can compile the first stage OK, and the binaries are quite modest:
-rwxr-xr-x 1 ian ian 17.2M Sep 6 03:47 prev-gcc/cc1
-rwxr-xr-x 1 ian ian 1.2
gt; Can anyone clear this up?
>>>>
>>>> The errors are coming from an assembler file that is not part of the
>>>> GCC sources. Are those instructions valid for Thumb2? I don't know.
>>>> If they are valid, then the issue is with the assembl
ng from an assembler file that is not part of the
>>> GCC sources. Are those instructions valid for Thumb2? I don't know.
>>> If they are valid, then the issue is with the assembler, which is not
>>> part of GCC; check the version of the GNU b
s with the assembler, which is not
> part of GCC; check the version of the GNU binutils that you have
> installed. If those instructions are not valid, then you need to
> change your source.
Thanks Ian. I'm using binutils-2.22-r1. Do you happen to know which
version of binutils should support thumb2?
- Grant
ot currently support thumb2:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/beagleboard/P52fgMDzp8A/vupzuh71vdYJ
However, this indicates that thumb2 has been supported since 4.3:
http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.3/changes.html
Can anyone clear this up?
- Grant
Jonathan Wakely wrote, On 26/09/11 09:57:
[.]
Feel free to request a new option in Bugzilla to suppress the note,
that's the right place for this discussion.
Good point. I've created a ticket:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50643
Regards, Jon
Georg-Johann Lay wrote, On 01/08/11 09:40:
Jon Grant wrote:
[.]
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2011-07/msg00106.html
CCed Gerald, I think he cares for that kind of things.
If he does not answer (it's vacation time) file a PR so that it won't be
forgotten.
Johann
Thank you. I fille
Jonathan Wakely wrote, On 26/09/11 09:53:
On 26 September 2011 09:32, Jon Grant wrote:
[.]
bool invalid = (NULL == p);
Why is that preferable?
It would be clearer IMHO what was happening.
I expect this depends on what the standard allows then.
4.12 Boolean conversions [conv.bool]
1
Hi Jonathan
Jonathan Wakely wrote, On 24/09/11 15:55:
On 24 September 2011 15:40, Jon Grant wrote:
It's kind of re-iterating the command line options, that the user will
choose to be aware of already. I don't recall seeing that text output before
about ~1 year ago.
It was there
Hello
Jonathan Wakely wrote, On 26/09/11 08:10:
On 26 September 2011 05:29, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Jon Grant writes:
Currently gcc, and g++ don't give a warning when a pointer was
converted to a bool, in the same way it is for other types.
At least in C++, it's not really true
Hello
I am looking for a gcc option to give a warning when parameter names
don't match between the prototype in C, and the definition. Could
someone point me to the option if there is one please.
Example provided below, where "offset" miss-spelt "offest". (I found
-Wstrict-prototypes, but t
Hello
Currently gcc, and g++ don't give a warning when a pointer was converted
to a bool, in the same way it is for other types.
Could I ask for opinion on this, and if I should create a bug ticket.
Please find below output from compilation, and attachments showing the
two tests.
gcc (Ubun
Jonathan Wakely wrote, On 19/09/11 19:40:
On 19 September 2011 18:59, Jon Grant wrote:
Hello
I noticed that when compiling C files with GCC and using the -Werror
option, I see this additional output:
cc1.exe: warnings being treated as errors
./src/main.c: In function 'main':
./src
Hello
I noticed that when compiling C files with GCC and using the -Werror
option, I see this additional output:
cc1.exe: warnings being treated as errors
./src/main.c: In function 'main':
./src/main.c:41:15: error: unused variable 'hello'
Is the "cc1" line output needed? Just wondering if it co
Hello
Georg-Johann Lay wrote, On 08/07/11 19:08:
[.]
I can confirm that it's hardly readable on some systems.
I use Opera and several FF versions, some worse, some a bit less worse.
IMO it's definitely to small, I already thought about complaining, too.
Johann
Could I ask, what would be the
Hello
I have a build with a lot of structures in a big-endian style layout.
[I recognise that bit-fields are not portable due to their ordering
not being locally MSB first like the regular bit shift operation <<
is.i.e.(1<<2) == 4 ]
typedef struct reg32 {
union {
Hello
I'm using latest Firefox looking at the onlinedocs with a default
Firefox install, default font sizes, no change in zoom level.
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Variable-Attributes.html
The monospace text is tiny, e.g.:
struct foo { int x[2]
__attribute__ ((aligned (8))); };
Ian Lance Taylor wrote, On 03/07/11 05:27:
Jon Grant writes:
[.]
Another reply for this old thread. I wondered, if collect2 is
possibly not needed in normal use on GNU/Linux, could GCC be
configured to call ld directly in those cases to save launching
another binary.
collect2 is needed if
On 2 February 2010 22:47, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Jon writes:
>
>> Is there a way to get collect2 to save the temporary .c file it
>> generates to have a look at it? I believe it may be the __main()
>> function, with the -debug option it gives the attached
>> gplusplus_collect2_log.txt, looking
Dave Korn wrote, On 07/05/11 16:01:
On 06/05/2011 09:00, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Ian Lance Taylor writes:
The difference is that with -E the -o option is passed to cc1, whereas
without it the -o option is passed to the assembler or the linker. The
GNU assembler and linker both have the usual Un
Gerald Pfeifer wrote, On 08/05/11 14:02:
On Fri, 6 May 2011, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
I would propose to clarify as:
"To ensure that GCC finds the GNU assembler (or the GNU linker),"
I see no harm in that change, Gerald, what do you think?
Agreed. Things would have been different twenty years
Hello. thank you for your reply.
Jonathan Wakely wrote, On 05/05/11 22:47:
On 5 May 2011 22:30, Jon Grant wrote:
Hello
Just looking at this page:
http://gcc.gnu.org/faq.html#gas
I saw this text "(the GNU loader)". Is this really an alternative name
for gas? I've not see
Hello
Is it expected that more than one -o option should be allowed by GCC
on command line? The later -o option overriding earlier. I had
expected the parameter checking to detect this duplication of options.
gcc (Ubuntu 4.4.3-4ubuntu5) 4.4.3
$ gcc -W -Wall -o main main.c -omup.o
$ ls
main.c m
Hello
Just looking at this page:
http://gcc.gnu.org/faq.html#gas
I saw this text "(the GNU loader)". Is this really an alternative name
for gas? I've not seen it called GNU loader elsewhere. I was wondering
if the text could just be removed.
Please keep my email address in any replies.
Best re
Hello Ian
Thank you for the quick reply with explanations.
2010/1/19 Ian Lance Taylor :
> Jon Grant writes:
>
>> Any easy way to evaluate and reduce command lines? Consider this:
>>
>> /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.3.3/../../../../lib/crt1.o
>>
>> Is a
2010/1/19 Jon Grant :
> I should add, I'm not on this mailing list, so please include my email
> address in any replies.
Also I notice lots of duplicate parameters:
Is this directory really needed twice?
-L/usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.3.3 -L/usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.3.3
also
I should add, I'm not on this mailing list, so please include my email
address in any replies.
Cheers, Jon
Hello
gcc -o t -### test.c
Any easy way to evaluate and reduce command lines? Consider this:
/usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.3.3/../../../../lib/crt1.o
Is actually the same as: /usr/lib/crt1.o -- which is much clearer!
I'm using Ubuntu 9.04.
Cheers, Jon
$ gcc -o t -### test.c
Using built-in
Hi Manuel, Karl,
Thank you for your replies.
[...]
> You are expecting that the CSS large/small/x-small/etc match those of
> TeX. They are not matched. I don't know what formula TeX uses but
> Firefox uses a lookup table that is available here:
>
> http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla/source/layout/st
Hi Karl,
Thank you for your reply
[..]
> If some examples use @example and some examples use @smallexample, the
> resulting inconsistency looks quite bad as well (in both printed manuals
> and HTML).
>
> I doubt the GCC folks want to research and rewrite their examples to use
> shorter lines (so
Hi Karl,
Thanks for your reply.
> Does @smallexample come out as 8pt or so? It definitely looks
> smaller than 10pt on my screen.
>
> It comes out as whatever your browser tells it to, hopefully depending
> on what font size you have set. This is why different users see
> different thi
Hello Karl,
Thanks for your reply.
> >> I see in the HTML this is the code causing the small font:
> >>
> >> pre.smallexample { font-size:smaller }
>
> I don't know of any way to say "use a slightly smaller font" in
> HTML/CSS. That is, this is what CSS provides, afaik.
>
> The re
Hello
I noticed that in the default Firefox3 configuration on my 1280x1024 display
your code samples on this page are tiny, and v.hard to read:
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Inline.html
I see in the HTML this is the code causing the small font:
pre.smallexample { font-size:smaller }
Would
overriding the
default CFLAGS-initfini.s. I'll submit a patch.
Thanks,
Dwayne
--
Dwayne Grant McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Lotus Notes: Dwayne McConnell/Austin/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
another way to resolve the problem than -fno-unit-at-a-time?
Thanks,
Dwayne
--
Dwayne Grant McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Lotus Notes: Dwayne McConnell/Austin/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
65 matches
Mail list logo
