Good morning all!
Is there some reason that I don't know about (e.g. limiting the load on the
server) why the revision log views of files in our viewvc setup would be
heavily truncated?
For example:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/trunk/gcc/varasm.c?view=log
ends at r.138078, ~14 months ago
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Oliver Kellogg
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Looking at ggc-page.c:175ff.,
>
> static const size_t extra_order_size_table[] = {
> sizeof (struct var_ann_d),
> sizeof (struct tree_decl_non_common),
> sizeof (struct tree_field_decl),
> sizeof (struct tree_parm_decl),
> size
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Oliver Kellogg
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Looking at ggc-page.c:175ff.,
> >
> > static const size_t extra_order_size_table[] = {
> > sizeof (struct var_ann_d),
> > sizeof (struct tree_decl_non_common),
> > sizeof (struct tree_field_decl),
> > sizeof (struct tr
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:19 AM, Dave Korn
wrote:
>
> Good morning all!
>
> Is there some reason that I don't know about (e.g. limiting the load on the
> server) why the revision log views of files in our viewvc setup would be
> heavily truncated?
The issue comes down to the trunk had be acc
Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:19 AM, Dave Korn
> wrote:
>>Good morning all!
>>
>> Is there some reason that I don't know about (e.g. limiting the load on the
>> server) why the revision log views of files in our viewvc setup would be
>> heavily truncated?
>
> The issue co
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> programs. So it seems to me that any changes that Apple makes to gcc
> (or gdb, emacs, etc.) can simply be brought over by any interested
> party.
I'd certainly check with the FSF before betting on that. ISTR that some
copyright assignments have a "contribution" step;
Mark Mitchell writes:
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
>> programs. So it seems to me that any changes that Apple makes to gcc
>> (or gdb, emacs, etc.) can simply be brought over by any interested
>> party.
>
> I'd certainly check with the FSF before betting on that. ISTR that some
> copyright assig
Dave Korn wrote:
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:19 AM, Dave Korn
wrote:
Good morning all!
Is there some reason that I don't know about (e.g. limiting the load on the
server) why the revision log views of files in our viewvc setup would be
heavily truncated?
The issue com
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:20:58 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor
wrote:
> Mark Mitchell writes:
>
>> Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>
>>> programs. So it seems to me that any changes that Apple makes to gcc
>>> (or gdb, emacs, etc.) can simply be brought over by any interested
>>> party.
>>
>> I'd certainly chec
On Sep 16, 2009, at 11:12 AM, Vincent R. wrote:
True, though Apple's entry in the copyright file says "assigns past
and
future changes" (I checked before the above e-mail). Certainly
checking
with the FSF is a good idea.
Ian
While we are discussing apple extension, is there a list of appl
Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Sep 16, 2009, at 11:12 AM, Vincent R. wrote:
>> While we are discussing apple extension, is there a list of apple
>> specific extension about C and objective compiler ?
>
> There isn't anything good, but some information is available here:
> http://clang.llvm.org/docs/L
Hello all,
I have created a branch in the GCC SVN repository for development work on
the Cygwin-targeted port of the compiler. The URL of the branch is
(r/o) svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/cygwin-improvements
(r/w) svn+ssh://@gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/cygwin-improvements
and it'
Sorry to bring this back to the conversation. Is there any reason why
this would not work with floating-point constraints ?
My "R" constraint is defined as:
(define_memory_constraint "R"
"R is for memory references which take 1 word for the instruction"
(and (match_code "mem")
(match_t
On 09/16/2009 03:00 PM, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
Sorry to bring this back to the conversation. Is there any reason why
this would not work with floating-point constraints ?
Not that I can think of. Did you provide all of the secondary reload
stuff that you need? Probably not.
(define_m
> Not that I can think of. Did you provide all of the secondary reload
> stuff that you need? Probably not.
Probably not, I've been working at cleaning up what was done before.
What exactly is needed to be done to define the secondary reload stuff
?
> You'll do much better by rejecting these ad
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Mark Mitchell writes "I'd certainly check with the FSF
> > before betting on that. "
> True, though Apple's entry in the copyright file says "assigns past and
> future changes" (I checked before the above e-mail). Certainly checking
> with the FSF is a good idea.
---
Quoting Jean Christophe Beyler :
I have an expand_move that rejects anything not accepted, a check_move
that makes sure everything is ok and the constraints that go with (my
'R' constraint).
The instruction generated during greg should normally be refused.
From what you've said, it seems that I
Chris Lattner wrote:
> The first difference is that every instance of a lambda gives you a
> value of a new (anonymous) type, which makes them mostly only useful
> with templates.
---
Ahh..didn't know that. That certainly would make them less useful
in a general sense. I've only been expos
18 matches
Mail list logo
