2009/9/1 Michael Matz :
>> [psi...@joana obj]$ ls -lh gcc/xgcc gcc/g++
>> -rwxrwxr-x. 1 psilva psilva 481K Ago 31 12:58 gcc/g++
>> -rwxrwxr-x. 1 psilva psilva 477K Ago 31 12:58 gcc/xgcc
>
> That's not the real compiler, only the compiler driver. Look for files
> named cc1 (the C compiler) and cc1
Hi,
On Mon, 31 Aug 2009, Pedro Lamarão wrote:
> 2009/8/28 Pedro Lamarão :
>
> > I have not yet made complete size and execution speed measurements, though.
> > I've run the test suite and there are some failures; I think many of
> > them are not regressions when compared with a pure build with C
2009/8/28 Pedro Lamarão :
> I have not yet made complete size and execution speed measurements, though.
> I've run the test suite and there are some failures; I think many of
> them are not regressions when compared with a pure build with C++.
Comparing trunk -r151160 and trunk -t151160 --enabl
On 08/31/2009 09:09 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
In which case you'd need a strathegic using namespace std; somewhere.
system.h? :-)
r~
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 08/31/2009 08:26 AM, Pedro Lamarão wrote:
>>
>> I'll try to include cstdlib in system.h to see if that's enough.
>
> Note the existing
>
> #ifdef HAVE_STDLIB_H
> # include
> #endif
>
> You may wish to convert this to
>
> #ifdef __cplus
On 08/31/2009 08:26 AM, Pedro Lamarão wrote:
I'll try to include cstdlib in system.h to see if that's enough.
Note the existing
#ifdef HAVE_STDLIB_H
# include
#endif
You may wish to convert this to
#ifdef __cplusplus
# include
#elif defined(HAVE_STDLIB_H)
# include
#endif
and similarly f
2009/8/31 Richard Henderson :
> On 08/29/2009 03:49 PM, Pedro Lamarão wrote:
>>
>> 2009/8/29 Magnus Fromreide:
>>>
>>> Why the changes to gcc/system.h where you unpoision malloc and realloc?
>>> Why the changes to libcpp/system.h where you unpoision malloc, realloc,
>>> calloc and strdup?
>>
>> In
On 08/29/2009 03:49 PM, Pedro Lamarão wrote:
2009/8/29 Magnus Fromreide:
Why the changes to gcc/system.h where you unpoision malloc and realloc?
Why the changes to libcpp/system.h where you unpoision malloc, realloc,
calloc and strdup?
Including requires them for some reason.
I haven't reall
2009/8/29 Magnus Fromreide :
>
> Why the changes to gcc/system.h where you unpoision malloc and realloc?
> Why the changes to libcpp/system.h where you unpoision malloc, realloc,
> calloc and strdup?
Including requires them for some reason.
I haven't really looked into it.
--
P.
On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 18:12 -0300, Pedro Lamarão wrote:
> 2009/8/11 Pedro Lamarão :
>
> > I've recently started my contributions to the gcc-in-cxx project, and
> > eventually decided on the qsort suggestion because it seems the
> > easiest one.
>
> Attached is a much more extensive patch replacin
2009/8/12 Richard Guenther :
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:03 AM, Pedro
> Lamarão wrote:
>> I've recently started my contributions to the gcc-in-cxx project, and
>> eventually decided on the qsort suggestion because it seems the
>> easiest one.
>> I've made the change in three places in cp/classes.c
Pedro Lamarão writes:
> Also, is the gcc-in-cxx branch still active? Should my objective be to
> contribute patches to this branch?
The gcc-in-cxx branch is currently dead, having been merged into
mainline. We can choose to revive it for contributions like yours. I
would be interested in opini
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:03 AM, Pedro
Lamarão wrote:
> I've recently started my contributions to the gcc-in-cxx project, and
> eventually decided on the qsort suggestion because it seems the
> easiest one.
> I've made the change in three places in cp/classes.c; the patch can be
> found here:
>
>
13 matches
Mail list logo
