Hi all,
I need some clarification in understanding the below mentioned RTL Expressions
1. (insn 11 10 12 0
gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/20020611-1.c:13 (parallel [
(set (reg/f:SI 13 a5 [28])
(symbol_ref:SI ("n") [flags 0x2] ))
(clobber (reg:CC 21 cc))
On 10/23/06, Rafael Espíndola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have an approved patch that factors code that is common to all
builtin_function implementations
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg00195.html,
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-06/msg01499.html).
I have just updated and
Hi,
is it a known bug that `main' function (and so even specially compiled with the
specific prologue/epilogue) missing DWARF `DW_AT_location' for its `argc' and
`argv' on 32-bit targets? I did not find a Bugzilla entry for it.
affected: x86_64-redhat-linux with -m32, i386-redhat-linux
not affec
Hey Kaveh.
I'm trying to do a build of gcc. As documented here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html
Apparently a specific version of GMP and MPFR are suggested. Any chance you
could upload this to ftp.gcc.gnu.org/pub/infrastructure? I've found the GMP
website to be quite unresponsiv
> a) To which register is the value of n copied? if a5 is the register
> what is 13 and [28]
All of those numbers refer to the same register -
13 is the number of the register; a5 is the name of the register
(if it is an hard register);
[28] is the number of the old pseudo register.
(please look
Hi all,
This small bit of code worked fine with all optimization except Os.
unsigned int n = 30;
void x ()
{
unsigned int h;
h = n <= 30; // Line 1
if (h)
p = 1;
else
p = 0;
}
when we tried to debug the emitted RTL instruction for Os, it was
found that RTL instruction for Li
Steven Bosscher wrote:
I want to make gfortran produce better debug information, but I want to do it
in a way that doesn't make it hard/impossible to read back in sufficient
information for LTO to work for gfortran.
I haven't really been following the whole LTO thing much, but if I understan
2006/10/17, Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Oct 17, 2006, at 8:05 AM, Dino Puller wrote:
> i'm looking for a statistic of how many expressions simplification
> may be possible on source code
One way would be:
http://www.cs.fit.edu/~mmahoney/compression/text.html
But it´s a benchmark about
On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 16:14 +0530, Rohit Arul Raj wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This small bit of code worked fine with all optimization except Os.
If you are working with 4.0 and greater, there are optimizations that
happen before RTL, called the Tree-ssa optimizations. The optimization
you are noticing
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> Hey Kaveh.
>
> I'm trying to do a build of gcc. As documented here:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html
>
> Apparently a specific version of GMP and MPFR are suggested. Any chance
> you could upload this to ftp.gcc.gnu.org/pub/infrastruct
> I think that is a splendid idea. But I don't recall having access to that
> directory. Or is it something anyone with svn write access can do?
I believe it is something that anybody could do. If you have questions,
you can ask on overseers or ping one of the overseers on IRC.
> The docs re
Hello,
for project http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/PreservingLoops, I am considering
introducing a tree LOOP_HEADER with single argument N (number of
iterations of the loop), that would be present in IL at the beginning of
header of each loop. I have following motivations:
1) One of the goals of the pro
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> > I think that is a splendid idea. But I don't recall having access to that
> > directory. Or is it something anyone with svn write access can do?
>
> I believe it is something that anybody could do. If you have questions,
> you can ask on overseers
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote:
> I'd be happy to upload these once I get access (unless someone beats me to
> it).
Ben - Gerald uploaded the files. (Thanks Gerald!)
--Kaveh
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Sun, 2006-10-22 at 12:58 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
All the bugs with "4.2" in their summaries ("[4.1/4.2 Regression]" etc.)
need to have it changed to "4.2/4.3". I don't know the procedure for
this, but perhaps it needs adding to the branching checklist.
As I unde
Mark Mitchell wrote:
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Sun, 2006-10-22 at 12:58 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
All the bugs with "4.2" in their summaries ("[4.1/4.2 Regression]"
etc.) need to have it changed to "4.2/4.3". I don't know the
procedure for this, but perhaps it needs adding to the branching
Thanks to Joseph for helping me with this.
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(650) 331-3385 x713
--- Begin Message ---
Snapshot gcc-4.3-20061023 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.3-20061023/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for de
Mark,
What happened to the gcc 4.2 snapshot
tarball for this week?
Jack
Jack Howarth wrote:
Mark,
What happened to the gcc 4.2 snapshot
tarball for this week?
It gets build on Tuesdays, or at least it does now according to crontab.
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(650) 331-3385 x713
It seems that the GMP test is always run, even when installing binutils
or gdb.
You probably need something like
if test -d ${srcdir}/gcc && test x$have_gmp != xyes; then
...
fi
but I think that the whole test now belongs in the GCC subdirectory, not
in the toplevel (it was anyway a hack f
>
> It seems that the GMP test is always run, even when installing binutils
> or gdb.
>
> You probably need something like
>
> if test -d ${srcdir}/gcc && test x$have_gmp != xyes; then
> ...
> fi
>
> but I think that the whole test now belongs in the GCC subdirectory, not
> in the topleve
if test -d ${srcdir}/gcc && test x$have_gmp != xyes; then
...
fi
but I think that the whole test now belongs in the GCC subdirectory, not
in the toplevel (it was anyway a hack for the sake of disabling Fortran).
Moving it is not really a good thing anyways as you are able to configure
an
On Oct 23, 2006, at 4:15 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
if test -d ${srcdir}/gcc && test x$have_gmp != xyes; then
...
fi
but I think that the whole test now belongs in the GCC
subdirectory, not in the toplevel (it was anyway a hack for the
sake of disabling Fortran).
Moving it is not reall
>
>
> >> if test -d ${srcdir}/gcc && test x$have_gmp != xyes; then
> >> ...
> >> fi
> >>
> >> but I think that the whole test now belongs in the GCC subdirectory, not
> >> in the toplevel (it was anyway a hack for the sake of disabling Fortran).
> >
> > Moving it is not really a good thing
Maintainability first. If something fails with parallel make, and
is reproducible with plain "make" (i.e. doesn't screw up the build
directory), I don't see a reason not to move it. You'd do "make"
anyway to check if a dependency is missing, wouldn't you?
Really, all I care about is hav
But this is a different case as this error is for users rather than developers.
So instead of getting an error early before compiling, we get an error 10 to 20
minutes later and users get upset that they get an error this late for something
which could have been found early on.
That is a probl
Hi again,
I am having issues with the __comp_ctor () __base_ctor () etc functions
that I encounter in the C++ front-end tree (Just before gimplification).
If i compile some code that looks like:
#include
int main()
{
std::allocator alloc;
const char* str1 = "Hello";
const char* str2 =
On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 02:30 +, Brendon Costa wrote:
> I am trying to find the corresponding constructor from the basic_string
> class that should be called in place of the __comp_ctor function. There
> seems to be no FUNCTION_DECL node for the constructor:
>
> basic_string(::char const*, ::
Sorry that my previous email was unclear. I have tried to clarify what i
meant in this email by answering your questions.
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 02:30 +, Brendon Costa wrote:
I am trying to find the corresponding constructor from the basic_string
class that should
>> As I understand it, it involves editing the mysql database by hand (well
>> by a script) instead of doing it inside bugzilla. Daniel Berlin has
>> done that the last couple of releases.
>
> I have checked in the attached patch to add this step to the branching
> checklist. I will now ask Dani
On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 03:32 +, Brendon Costa wrote:
> Sorry that my previous email was unclear. I have tried to clarify what i
> meant in this email by answering your questions.
>
>
> If there is a simple class like:
>
> class MyClass
> {
> MyClass()
> {}
> };
>
> int main()
> {
>
Daniel Berlin wrote:
Anyway, i made 43changer.pl and ran it, so the bug summaries have been
updated.
Thanks!
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(650) 331-3385 x713
Andrew Pinski wrote:
Why do you need to find (2)? It is not the function which is actually
called. DECL_SAVED_TREE might not be set but that is because it has
already been gimplified and lowered to CFG at the time you are looking
through the calls.
Why do you need to know the constructor anyw
In order to help, I am posting the code I use to try and get a "user
constructor" FUNCTION_DECL node from a "__comp_ctor ()" FUNCTION_DECL
node as mentioned in previous emails. The code can be found at the end
of this email.
Also...
class MyClass
{
MyClass()
{}
};
int main()
{
MyCl
34 matches
Mail list logo
