Re: ELF2.0: Linkable struct

ll out of the displacement range of the processor's instructions. So to support your idea the compiler would need to generate worst-case code to access any arbitrary offsets which will drag down code performance. The linker would need added optimizing steps to undo this ... it sounds like a can of worms. Best regards, Oleg Endo

Re: Building a GCC backend for the STM8

Hi, On Sun, 2024-01-28 at 04:41 +0100, Sophie 'Tyalie' Friedrich via Gcc wrote: > Hello dear people, > > I want to try building a GCC compiler backend for the STM8 > micro-controller target in order to make this wonderful architecture > more accessible. > > But as I'm fairly new in this area o

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

> I think a C++ class (or rather, class template) with inline functions is > the way to go here. gcc's optimiser will give good code, and the C++ > class will let you get nice syntax to hide the messy details. > > There is no good way to do this in C. Named address spaces would be a > possibi

Re: size of exception handling (Was: performance of exception handling)

On Tue, 2020-05-12 at 09:20 +0200, Freddie Chopin wrote: > > I actually have to build my own toolchain instead of the one provided > by ARM, because to really NOT use C++ exceptions, you have to recompile > the whole libstdc++ with `-fno-exceptions -fno-rtti` (yes, I know they > provide the "nano"

Re: Spam, bounces and gcc list removal

On Sat, 2020-03-21 at 13:08 -0700, H.J. Lu via Gcc wrote: > On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 12:40 PM Thomas Koenig via Gcc < > gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > since the change to the new list management, there has been > > > an uptick of spam getting through. Spam is bounced by my ISP, > >

Re: Parallelize the compilation using Threads

On Tue, 2019-02-12 at 15:12 +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 10:46 PM Giuliano Belinassi > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I was just wondering what API should I use to spawn threads and > > control > > its flow. Should I use OpenMP, pthreads, or something else? > > > > My poin

Re: Bit-field struct member sign extension pattern results in redundant

On Fri, 2017-08-18 at 10:29 +1200, Michael Clark wrote: >  > This one is quite interesting: > > - https://cx.rv8.io/g/WXWMTG > > It’s another target independent bug. x86 is using some LEA followed > by SAR trick with a 3 bit shift. Surely SHL 27, SAR 27 would suffice. > In any case RISC-V seems l

Re: Overwhelmed by GCC frustration

On Wed, 2017-08-16 at 19:04 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >  > LRA is easier to work with than old reload, and that makes it better > maintainable. > > Making LRA handle everything reload did is work, and someone needs to > do it. > > LRA probably needs a few more target hooks (a _few_) to gui

Re: Optimizing away deletion of null pointers with g++

On Wed, 2017-08-16 at 13:30 +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote: >  > I didn't understand why we don't already handle the easy case: > > constexpr int* ptr = nullptr; > delete ptr; > What about overriding the global delete operator with some user defined implementation?  Is there something in the C++ sta

Re: Overwhelmed by GCC frustration

On Wed, 2017-08-16 at 15:53 +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: >  > This means it's actually waste of time to work on these > backends.  The code will finally end up in the dustbin as cc0 > backends are considered undesired ballast that has to be > "jettisoned". > > "Deprecate all cc0" is just a nice

Re: Overwhelmed by GCC frustration

On Mon, 2017-07-31 at 15:25 +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > Around 2010, someone who used a code snipped that I published in > a wiki, reported that the code didn't work and hang in an > endless loop.  Soon I found out that it was due to some GCC > problem, and I got interested in fixing the compi

Re: Volatile Memory accesses in Branch Delay Slots

On Tue, 2017-07-25 at 10:47 +0200, Jakob Wenzel wrote: >  > jr's delay slot is not filled. However, if the declaration of a is  > changed to `extern int a`, the delay slot is filled with the sw. > > The function responsible for this behavior seems to be  > resource_conflicts_p in reorg.c. Sadly, I

Re: Linux and Windows generate different binaries

On Sun, 2017-07-16 at 17:32 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 11:54:43PM +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote: > > > > On Sun, 16 Jul 2017, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > > > > I am well aware, and that is not what I asked.  If we would use > > > stable sorts everywhere > > H

Re: Missed optimization with const member

On Wed, 2017-07-05 at 12:14 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >  > No, that would be undefined behaviour. The data member is defined as > const, so it's not possible to write to that member without undefined > behaviour. A variable defined with a const type is not the same as a > variable accessed thro

Re: Missed optimization with const member

Hi, On Wed, 2017-07-05 at 02:02 +0200, Geza Herman wrote: >  > Here's what happens: in callInitA(), an Object put onto the stack (which  > has a const member variable, initialized to 0). Then somefunction called  > (which is intentionally not defined). Then ~Object() is called, which  > has an "if

Re: Converting to LRA (calling all maintainers)

On Fri, 2016-09-16 at 16:25 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 02:53:16PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > > > Under traps for the unwary -- LRA requires the target to not use > > the old  > > cc0 condition code handling... > I added this now, thanks Jeff. > > > > > ANd yes, I

Re: Two suggestions for gcc C compiler to extend C language (by WD Smith)

On Tue, 2016-07-26 at 10:37 -0400, Warren D Smith wrote: > Also, I know on some machines to access a byte you have to get a word > (larger than 8 bits) > from memory, do shifts and masks. So clearly you already do that > inside gcc. > It therefore is trivial for you to do uint4_t also, because it

Re: Machine constraints list

On Sun, 2016-05-08 at 15:27 -0700, David Wohlferd wrote: > Looking at the v6 release criteria > (https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-6/criteria.html) there are about a dozen > supported platforms. > > Looking at the Machine Constraints docs > (https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Machine-Constraints.html), t

Re: Bug maintenance

On Sun, 2016-05-08 at 15:03 -0700, David Wohlferd wrote: > On 4/28/2016 9:41 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: > > On 04/28/2016 01:35 AM, David Wohlferd wrote: > > > As part of the work I've done on inline asm, I've been looking > > > thru the > > > bugs for it. There appear to be a number that have been f

Re: Undefined C++ Atomic Symbol on sh-rtems

On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 14:15 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote: > Since I stated that, we decided to use the 6.1 branch for a while. > So I decided to look at config/sh/linux.h and see what it was doing. > Copying if on the 6.1 branch seemed liked an option. But it only > appears to address SH3 and SH1 fo

Re: Undefined C++ Atomic Symbol on sh-rtems

On Sun, 2016-04-17 at 13:33 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote: > Thanks for the quick and thorough reply. > > This doesn't happen with GCC 4.9 which we are using on our newest > release branch. With any luck your work will be in gcc 7 before we > make another release branch. That's probably because of

Re: Undefined C++ Atomic Symbol on sh-rtems

Hi, On Sat, 2016-04-16 at 18:58 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote: > I am hoping the solution to this is obvious to someone > more familiar with the C++ libraries. Recently the > sh4 BSP for RTEMS began to have undefined symbols > like this when linking a C++ test: > > /data/home/joel/rtems-4.11-work/t

Re: SH runtime switchable atomics - proposed design

On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 20:22 -0500, Rich Felker wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 08:08:18AM +0900, Oleg Endo wrote: > > On Tue, 2016-01-19 at 15:28 -0500, Rich Felker wrote: > > > I've been working on the new version of runtime-selected SH > > > atomics > >

Re: SH runtime switchable atomics - proposed design

On Tue, 2016-01-19 at 15:28 -0500, Rich Felker wrote: > I've been working on the new version of runtime-selected SH atomics > for musl, and I think what I've got might be appropriate for GCC's > generated atomics too. I know Oleg was not very excited about doing > this on the gcc side from a cost/b

Re: Multiprecision Arithmetic Builtins

On Mon, 2015-09-21 at 14:42 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 09/21/2015 08:09 AM, Oleg Endo wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I was thinking of adding some SH specific builtin functions for the > > addc, subc and negc instructions. > > > > Are there any

Multiprecision Arithmetic Builtins

Hi all, I was thinking of adding some SH specific builtin functions for the addc, subc and negc instructions. Are there any plans to add clang's target independent multiprecision arithmetic builtins (http://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html) to GCC? A while ago clang's checked arithm

Re: Deprecate SH5/SH64

On Tue, 2015-08-18 at 12:41 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 08/18/2015 11:11 AM, David Edelsohn wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Oleg Endo > > wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Kaz and I have been discussing the SH5/SH64 status, which is part > &

Deprecate SH5/SH64

Hi all, Kaz and I have been discussing the SH5/SH64 status, which is part of the SH port, every now and then. To our knowledge, there is no real hardware available as of today and we don't think there are any real users for a SH5/SH64 toolchain out there. Moreover, the SH5/SH64 parts of the S

Re: Does GCC generate LDRD/STRD (Register) forms?

On 07 Jul 2015, at 13:52, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Anmol Paralkar (anmparal) > wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Does GCC generate LDRD/STRD (Register) forms [A8.8.74/A8.8.211 per ARMv7-A >> & ARMv7-R ARM]? >> >> Based on various attempts to write code to get GCC to generate a

Re: Allocation of hotness of data structure with respect to the top of stack.

On 07 Jul 2015, at 04:49, Jeff Law wrote: > On 07/05/2015 05:11 AM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote: >> All: >> >> I am wondering allocation of hot data structure closer to the top of >> the stack increases the performance of the application. The data >> structure are identified as hot and cold data s

Re: rtx_cost of insns

On 29 Jun 2015, at 16:46, Alan Modra wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 01:28:39PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote: >> Perhaps the best thing to do is to use the OUTER code to spot the >> specific case where you've got a SET and return non-zero in that case. > > That's exactly the path I've been fo

Re: [RFC] Combine related fail of gcc.target/powerpc/ti_math1.c

On Thu, 2015-05-21 at 11:59 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 05/21/2015 11:44 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:34:14AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote: > >> Actually, I believe that the way CA is modeled at the moment is dangerous. > >> It's not a 64-bit value, but a

Re: pre_modify/post_modify with scaled register

On Sun, 2015-05-17 at 11:09 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 05/17/2015 10:21 AM, Jon Beniston wrote: > > Hi, > > > > The gccint docs for pre_modify/post_modify say that the address modifier > > must be one of three forms: > > > > (plus:m x z), (minus:m x z), or (plus:m x i), where z is an index registe

Re: [gsoc] Generic addressing mode selection

On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 09:43 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 03/26/2015 08:32 AM, Erik Varga wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I've submitted my proposal to the GSoC website, it can be found here: [1] > > After hearing some ideas from Oleg, I decided to go with working on > > detecting and optimizing a few spe

Re: [gsoc] Generic addressing mode selection

On Mon, 2015-03-23 at 20:10 +0100, Erik Varga wrote: > On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 10:10 PM, Oleg Endo wrote: > > The PBQP approach is indeed very tempting, but there > > are a lot more things to it than just the solver. To get good > > improvements of the generated code, the

Re: [gsoc] Generic addressing mode selection

nterested in mentoring this project for GSoC? Is > there anything similar currently being worked on? I think Oleg Endo > has started implementing such a pass a while ago (mentioned in > PR56590). > > Best regards, > Erik > > [1] http://sydney.edu.au/engineering/it/~scholz/pub

Re: GSoc-2015: Modular GCC (RFC on refactoring)

On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 22:31 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > I'm not a big fan of keeping the FOR_EACH_blah style iterator and would > prefer to use real C++ iterators. But it ought to give you some ideas > about how to start breaking these things out. BTW I've tried to propose to start doing that (us

Re: How to update reg_dead notes

On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 19:23 +0100, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > > The latest pass which runs before the crash is .split5, i.e. > recog.c::pass_split_for_shorten_branches which executes > split_all_insns_noflow > which in turn reads: > > /* Same as split_all_insns, but do not expect CFG to be ava

Re: How to update reg_dead notes

On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 16:59 +0100, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: It doesn't really answer your question, but just as a side note, the following ... > + struct register_pass_info insert_before_bbro = > +{ > + notes_bbro_pass, /* pass */ > + "bbro", /* re

Re: Unrolling factor heuristics for Loop Unrolling

On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 10:09 +, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote: > Hello All: > > The Loop unrolling without good unrolling factor heuristics becomes the > performance bottleneck. The Unrolling factor heuristics based on minimum > Initiation interval is quite useful with respect to better ILP. The

Re: Rename C files to .c in GCC source

On Sat, 2015-02-07 at 23:17 +, Jonny Grant wrote: > 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 tes

Re: volatile access optimization (C++ / x86_64)

On Sat, 2014-12-27 at 09:51 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > > On 27/12/14 16:02, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote: > >> > >> In the case of volatile variables, the external interface in > >> question is the one at the point where that address is implemented

Re: ViewVC is broken on your web site

On Wed, 2014-08-06 at 21:34 +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote: > Hi, > > On 08/06/2014 09:19 PM, David Gero wrote: > > Wow. What an amazingly unintuitive widget. I looked all over the page > > for a "Next 25 files" button. A "Go To" button that doesn't talk about > > next 25 files meant nothing. ViewVC

Re: gcc.gnu.org/simtest-howto.html (was: Question for ARM person re asm_fprintf)(

On Aug 4, 2014, at 6:00 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Wed, 23 Jul 2014, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: >> The page is >> unfortunately out of date (e.g. binutils+sim now lives in the >> same git repo) but it gives you the idea. > > Sooo, any volunteer to up

Re: [GSoC] Question about unit tests

On Wed, 2014-06-25 at 20:25 +0600, Roman Gareev wrote: > Dear gcc contributors, > > could you please answer a few questions about unit tests? Is it > possible to use them in gcc? Or maybe there is some analogue? I would > be very grateful for your comments. In GCC we have a DejaGnu based test sui

Forward declaration style

Hi all, I was always wondering why this the way it is. E.g. consider gcc/output.h: /* Assemble the integer constant X into an object of SIZE bytes. ALIGN is the alignment of the integer in bits. Return 1 if we were able to output the constant, otherwise 0. If FORCE is nonzero the consta

Re: iq2000-elf: wide-int fallout (was: we are starting the wide int merge)

On Fri, 2014-05-09 at 00:48 +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > [...] > > Just found this for iq2000: > > g++ -c -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -DCROSS_DIRECTORY_STRUCTURE -fno-exceptions > -fno-rtti -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -W -Wall -Wno-narrowing > -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wmissing-format-attribut

Re: sh-*-* Fails to Compile on FreeBSD

On May 1, 2014, at 11:17 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > On 5/1/2014 3:29 PM, Oleg Endo wrote: >> On 01 May 2014, at 22:08, Joel Sherrill wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> gcc-4.8.2 targeting sh-*-* fails to compile on >>> FreeBSD 10 which is usi

Re: sh-*-* Fails to Compile on FreeBSD

On 01 May 2014, at 22:08, Joel Sherrill wrote: > Hi > > gcc-4.8.2 targeting sh-*-* fails to compile on > FreeBSD 10 which is using clang. I am hoping someone > has some ideas about these. Yes, I've noticed and mentioned this already a while ago: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-12/msg00036.html

Re: [RL78] Questions about code-generation

On Sun, 2014-03-16 at 17:22 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote: > This is similar to what I had to do for msp430 - I made a new > constraint that was what general_operand would have done if it allowed > volatile MEMs, and used that for instructions where a volatile's > volatileness wouldn't be broken. Maybe

Re: [RL78] Questions about code-generation

On Sun, 2014-03-16 at 19:48 +0100, Richard Hulme wrote: > On 10/03/14 22:37, DJ Delorie wrote: > > > > The use of "volatile" disables many of GCC's optimizations. I > > consider this a bug in GCC, but at the moment it needs to be "fixed" > > in the backends on a case-by-case basis. > > > > Hi, >

Re: [RL78] Questions about code-generation

DJ, On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 20:17 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote: > > Ah, that certainly explains a lot. How exactly would the fixing be > > done? Is there an example I could look at for one of the other processors? > > No, RL78 is the first that uses this scheme. I'm curious. Have you tried out othe

Re: Oleg Endo appointed co-maintainer of SH port

On Fri, 2013-12-06 at 09:05 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote: > I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has > appointed Oleg Endo as co-maintainer of the SH port. > > Please join me in congratulating Oleg on his new role. > Oleg, please update your

Re: C++ std headers and malloc, realloc poisoning

On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 18:11 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 12:05:23PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > > On 12/05/2013 10:59 AM, Oleg Endo wrote: > > >On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 10:45 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > > >>A simple workaround would be

Re: C++ std headers and malloc, realloc poisoning

On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 10:45 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 12/04/2013 04:03 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > I think the most important reason is that we want to handle out of mem > > cases consistently, so instead of malloc etc. we want users to use xmalloc > > etc. that guarantee non-NULL returned

C++ std headers and malloc, realloc poisoning

Hello, Earlier this the following was committed: 2013-06-20 Oleg Endo Jason Merrill * system.h: Include as well as . ... so that things like could be included after including system.h. Some days ago I've tried building an SH cross-GCC on OSX 10.9 with the l

Re: [RFC] Detect most integer overflows.

On Sun, 2013-10-27 at 07:48 +0100, Ondřej Bílka wrote: > On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 01:50:14AM +0200, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 09:29:12PM +0200, Ondřej Bílka wrote: > > > Hi, as I brainstormed how prevent possible overflows in memory allocation > > > I > > > came with h

Re: Inefficiencies in large integers

On Sun, 2013-08-18 at 00:55 -0400, Asm Twiddler wrote: > Hello all, > > I'm not sure whether this has been posted before, but gcc creates > slightly inefficient code for large integers in several cases: > I'm not sure what the actual question is. Bug reports and enhancement suggestions of that k

Re: Pointer arithmetic

On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 09:37 -0700, Hendrik Greving wrote: > On a machine with ABI ILP32LL64: > > (insn 123 122 124 (nil) (set (reg:SI 392) > (mem:SI (plus:SI (reg/v:SI 386) > (reg/v:SI 349)) [0 sec 0 space 0, cmsmode 0 S4 A32])) -1 (nil) > (nil)) > > If we support legi

Re: why cross out cout make result different?

Hello, This mailing list is for the development of GCC, not for using it. gcc-help might be more appropriate for this kind of question, although it doesn't seem to be GCC related. Please do not send any follow ups to gcc@gcc.gnu.org On Fri, 2013-08-02 at 18:25 -0700, eric lin wrote: > > I have t

Re: AVR-gcc shift optimization

Hi, On Thu, 2013-08-01 at 21:23 -0400, Asm Twiddler wrote: > Hello all. > > The current implementation produces non-optimal code for large shifts > that aren't a multiple of eight when operating on long integers (4 > bytes). > All such shifts are broken down into a slow loop shift. > For example,

Re: List of typos.

On Mon, 2013-07-08 at 16:12 +0200, Ondřej Bílka wrote: > On Sun, Jul 07, 2013 at 09:57:05PM +0200, Oleg Endo wrote: > > On Sun, 2013-07-07 at 19:54 +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > > > Ondrej Bilka schrieb: > > > > > > > http://kam.mff.cuni.cz/~ondra/

Re: List of typos.

On Sun, 2013-07-07 at 19:54 +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > Ondrej Bilka schrieb: > > > http://kam.mff.cuni.cz/~ondra/gcc_misspell.patch > Below are some other hunks that look suspicious... (trying not to duplicate the things already mentioned by others) - * 1) It means that finalizers, and al

Re: Loop induction variable optimization question

On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 10:07 -0700, Steve Ellcey wrote: > I have a loop induction variable question involving post increment. > If I have this loop: > > [...] > My question is is: why (and where) did ivopts decide to move the > post-increments above the usages in the first loop? In my case > (MIP

Re: Buzilla SVN commit messages

On Sun, 2013-05-12 at 12:33 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 12 May 2013 11:38, Oleg Endo wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I've noticed that for some reason SVN commit messages stopped showing up > > in Bugzilla PRs a while ago (before the Bugzilla 4.4 update). > &

Buzilla SVN commit messages

Hi, I've noticed that for some reason SVN commit messages stopped showing up in Bugzilla PRs a while ago (before the Bugzilla 4.4 update). What I usually put into the commit message goes like ... PR target/57108 * gcc.target/sh/pr57108.c: Move this test case to ... * gcc.

Re: Calculating cosinus/sinus

Hi, This question is not appropriate for this mailing list. Please take any further discussions to the gcc-help mailing list. On Sat, 2013-05-11 at 11:15 +0200, jacob navia wrote: > Hi > > When caculating the cos/sinus, gcc generates a call to a complicated > routine that takes several thousand

Re: Help for my Master thesis

Hello, On Fri, 2013-03-29 at 20:35 +, Kiefmann Bernhard wrote: > Dear Ladies and Gentlemen! > > My name is Bernhard Kiefmann and I'm writing my Master's thesis with > the topic "the suitability of the GNU C compiler used in safety-related > areas". I can imagine that it could be important t

Re: Comparing compile times and binary size for GCC compiling a few GCC releases

Hi, On Sat, 2013-03-16 at 19:44 +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote: > * cc1 for GCC 4.8.0 has a much larger .bss section than previous releases But according to the table that followed ... > cc1 binary size: > textdatabss dec hex filename > 6460157 374800

Re: Modeling predicate registers with more than one bit

Hi, On Thu, 2013-02-28 at 11:10 +, Paulo Matos wrote: > Hello, > > I am looking at how to correctly model in GCC predicate registers that > have more than one bit and the value set into to the predicate register > after a comparison depends on the size of the comparison. > > I have looked in

Re: [rant?] g++ bug (missing uninitialized warning), bug reporting, bug searching

On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 13:22 -0800, Bruno Nery wrote: > Twenty two might be a more manageable number, but still... why do we > need an account to report a bug? This issue has been raised just recently on the gcc-help mailing list. See the thread: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2012-10/threads.html#

Re: [rant?] g++ bug (missing uninitialized warning), bug reporting, bug searching

Hello, On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 12:18 -0800, Bruno Nery wrote: > Howdy, > > The following piece of code: > > === snip === > #include > > struct warnme > { > bool member_; > warnme(bool member) : member_(member_) {} > }; > > int main() > { > warnme wm(true); > std::cout << wm.memb

Re: BSD licensed code OK in test suite?

On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 15:12 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > On 11/07/2012 03:08 PM, Oleg Endo wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 14:59 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > >> On 11/07/2012 02:47 PM, Oleg Endo wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> In PR 24129 we

Re: BSD licensed code OK in test suite?

On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 14:59 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > On 11/07/2012 02:47 PM, Oleg Endo wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > In PR 24129 we've got a test case that originated from some BSD licensed > > code. Is it OK to add this test case 1:1 into the c torture tests? > &g

BSD licensed code OK in test suite?

Hi all, In PR 24129 we've got a test case that originated from some BSD licensed code. Is it OK to add this test case 1:1 into the c torture tests? Or is a disclaimer required such as found in gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr20527-1.c ? Thanks, Oleg

Re: Feature request: Attribute to delay evaluation of function argument

On Sun, 2012-11-04 at 18:08 +1100, Clinton Mead wrote: > Hi Oleg > > Could you explain how you get around the following: > > (1) Doesn't the non-overloaded operator&& return 'bool', not > 'TriBool'? Yes, by default it takes bool on both sides and returns bool. > How can it be made to return 'T

Re: Feature request: Attribute to delay evaluation of function argument

On Sun, 2012-11-04 at 11:02 +1100, Clinton Mead wrote: > Hi All > > This is a feature request. To explain, lets say I want to create a > TriBool type, like so: > > enum TriBool { False, True, Unknown }; > > I now want to implement operator&&. I want operator&& to short > circuit, i.e. if the fir

Re: detecting integer overflows

On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 01:09 -0600, Michael Buro wrote: > Recently I came across http://embed.cs.utah.edu/ioc/ which describes a > sophisticated integer overflow checker for Clang. The reported results > obtained by analyzing C/C++ open source projects make a convincing > case for implementing such

Re: Proposing switch -fsmart-pointers

On Sat, 2012-10-06 at 20:59 +0200, _ wrote: > Now obviously you can't put stl everywhere. > I don't see kernel and low level C or C++ libs using boost or stl. any > time soon. > Afterall. No reasonable library uses it either due to binary > incompatibilities. It seems that your proposed fix to th

Using C++ - Problem with

Hello, I'm currently playing around with an RTL pass and started using C++. When including I get the following: /usr/include/c++/4.6/cstdlib:76:8: error: attempt to use poisoned "calloc" /usr/include/c++/4.6/cstdlib:83:8: error: attempt to use poisoned "malloc" /usr/include/c++/4.6/cstdlib:89:8:

Re: Contributing and GCC GPL

On Thu, 2012-08-09 at 17:54 +0100, Aaron Gray wrote: > Hi, > > I have developed several patches for GCC and am wondering as a purely > open source non commercial developer whether there are any issues > regarding getting patches into GCC. Do I need to sign an agreement at > all ? > Depending on

Re: Double word left shift optimisation

On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 10:51 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Jon Beniston > wrote: > > > > I'd like to try to optimise double word left shifts of sign/zero extended > > operands if a widening multiply instruction is available. For the following > > code: > > > > l

Re: Add corollary extension

On Thu, 2012-06-28 at 18:08 -0400, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > How would you handle: > > isSystemClosed = true; By adding one line to inv_bool struct inv_bool { bool& b; operator bool() const { return !b; } inv_bool& operator = (bool _b) { b = !_b; return *this; } }; Cheers, Oleg

Re: "self" keyword

On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 16:34 -0400, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > David, > > Well, I probably don't have a NEED for it. I've gotten along for 25+ > years without it. :-) > > However, what prompted my inquiry is using it would've saved me tracking > down a few bugs in recent weeks. Some prior code wa

Re: Is it possible to make gcc detect whether printf prints floating point numbers?

On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 16:54 +0800, Bin.Cheng wrote: > Hi all, > In micro-controller applications, code size is critical and the size > problem is worse if library is linked. > For example, most c programs call printf to format output data, that > means floating point code get linked even the progra

Re: Switching to C++ by default in 4.8

On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 06:03 +0800, Chiheng Xu wrote: > > > Sorry, I don't know what is the benefit of const ivars. I didn't say there's a benefit of using const ivars in this hypothetical case. It's just another possible option of doing certain things. > But if you use "tree->code" instead of "

Re: Switching to C++ by default in 4.8

On Mon, 2012-04-16 at 04:11 +0800, Chiheng Xu wrote: > On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Chiheng Xu wrote: > > > > And I want to say that tree/gimple/rtl are compiler's data(or state), > > not compiler's text(or logic), the most important thing about them is > > how to access their fields. > > >

Re: Updated GCC vs Clang diagnostics [Was: Switching to C++ by default in 4.8]

On Fri, 2012-04-13 at 10:29 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > There is some repeat here. Over 13 years ago, people were screaming > to have line wrapping by default -- because the diagnostic > messages related to templates were just too long and too awful. > I implemented line wrapping for g++ and

Re: Switch statement case range

On Sun, 2012-04-08 at 09:07 -0700, Rick Hodgin wrote: > Thank you! > > I'd like to find out some day exactly how much I _don't_ know. :-) > Knock yourself out ;) http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/C-Extensions.html Cheers, Oleg

RE: Question about Tree_function_versioning

On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 22:51 +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: > I have another question along the same lines. Is it possible to tell > gcc to never delete a certain function even if it is never called in > the executable? > "__attribute__ ((used))" maybe? Cheers, Oleg

Re: GSoC :Project Idea(Before final Submission) for review and feedback

Please reply in CC to the GCC mailing list, so others can follow the discussion. On Sun, 2012-03-25 at 09:21 +0530, Subrata Biswas wrote: > On 25 March 2012 03:59, Oleg Endo wrote: > > > > I might be misunderstanding the idea... > > Let's assume you've got a progra

Re: GSoC :Project Idea(Before final Submission) for review and feedback

On Sat, 2012-03-24 at 11:45 +0530, Subrata Biswas wrote: > Dear All, > I am a MTech student at Indain Institute of Technology, Roorkee. I > want to do my GSoC12 project under your guidance. I am writing this > mail for a basic review and feedback on my project idea before formal > submission. > >

Re: About GCJ compiler

On Sat, 2012-03-17 at 13:36 +0900, Mao Ito wrote: > To whom may it concern, > > Nice to meet you. I am Mao Ito and a graduate student at the University > of Wisconsin-Madison. I am working on a course project. My topic is > something like "High Performance Architecture for Java Programming > Langu

Re: reverse conditionnal jump

On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 14:49 +0100, BELBACHIR Selim wrote: > Hi, > > I'm still developping a new private target backend (gcc4.5.2) and I > noticed something strange in the assembler generated for conditionnal > jump. > > I'm not sure whether it can help you in this particular case, but you might

Re: C++11 no longer experimental

On Sun, 2011-10-30 at 14:14 +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > + C++0x was the working name of a new ISO C++ standard, which then > + was released in 2011 as C++11 and introduces a host of new features > + into the standard C++ language and library. This project seeks to >implement new C++0x fe

Combine Pass Behavior

Hi all, I'm currently trying to find the best way to solve PR 49263 and I've ran into some questions regarding the combine pass. Summary of the story: The SH machine description has a pattern that is supposed to generate the "tst #imm, r0" instruction as a combination of an and and a comparison,