(please do cc me to preserve thread, i am subscribed digest, thank you)
https://bugs.libre-soc.org/show_bug.cgi?id=615
summary: Libre-SOC needs an assembly syntax for SVP64 which is acceptable
for all parties, gcc and binutils primarily.
background: the Libre-SOC team, funded by NLnet, is adding
https://libre-riscv.org/nlnet_2019_gcc/
Long story short, caveats first:
* this is not recruitment
* it is not a job offer either (so cannot go on the FSF page)
* i asked on irc and contacted the steering committee but did not receive a
response
* the deadline is Oct 1st so there is time pressure
russell, good to hear from you.
can i recommend, that although this is a really wide set of
cross-posting on a discussion that underpins pretty much everything
(except gnu/hurd and minix) because it's linux kernel, that, just as
steve kindly advised, we keep this to e.g.
cross-dis...@lists.linaro.
[apologies, trying again, after sending the requested "not-a-spammer" message.]
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 07:15:34PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>Hi folks,
>
>Following on from the founding of the cross-distro ARM mailing list,
>I'd like to propose an ARM summit at this year's Linux Plumbers
>confe
On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 08:16:04PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Sunday, May 15, 2005, at 04:11 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
> wrote:
> > *click* - so you you... ooo :)
> >
> > holy cow.
> >
> > you looked at valarray,
>
> No, not really
On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 02:43:57PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Sunday, May 15, 2005, at 01:01 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
> wrote:
> >unfortunately, integration of aspex's proprietary tool-chain - written
> >in modula-2 - is extremely unlikely to ever be integrat
On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 02:43:57PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> See google("OpenMP") for what I mean by OpenMP.
ah _ha_ *grin*.
this is _very_ significant for the parallel processor project
i have been asked about.
On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 02:04:40PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Sunday, May 15, 2005, at 01:14 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
> wrote:
> > i think you may find that a less stringent goal - of doing
> > "outsourcing" - may result in an intermediate useable comprom
On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 02:49:29PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Sunday, May 15, 2005, at 03:55 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
> wrote:
> >the list archives are suffering from exactly the same problem that i
> >am - spam
>
> This is massively off-topic for this list.
sorry.
On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 11:50:02AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> See the OpenMP work and the autovectorization work for some ideas on
> how we are progressing gcc to deal with hardware like this. To the
> extent technologies like that can make it perform well, I think that is
> the direction gcc
On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 11:50:02AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> how we are progressing gcc to deal with hardware like this. To the
> extent technologies like that can make it perform well, I think that is
> the direction gcc is headed, beyond that, if you are interested in
> doing the work, you'
mike, hi, thank you for replying.
[my response is going direct to list to my original post because i am not
subscribed on-list.]
unfortunately, integration of aspex's proprietary tool-chain - written
in modula-2 - is extremely unlikely to ever be integrated into gcc.
secondly, the code it genera
re-sent due to it being classified as spam by the gnu.org ml server :)
- Forwarded message from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: has gcc been reworked so that code/temp
hi,
i came to the gcc lists looking to email people about a particular
matter [to follow] and noted that the list archives are suffering
from exactly the same problem that i am - spam that's going via
collab.net.
can i recommend to everyone that you contact collab.net and
get them to deal with it
14 matches
Mail list logo
