On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 04:44:48PM +0800, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> >> extern uint32_t __bss_start[];
>> >> extern uint32_t __data_start[];
>> >>
>> >> void Reset_Handler(void)
>> >> {
>> >> /* Clear .bss section (initialize with zeros) */
>> >> f
On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 04:01:23PM +0800, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> Em, YES, it comes from ivopt rewriting, but, if it's not undefined
> behavior, won't it be annoying (or simply wrong) for compiler to do
> something not written by the code?
If __bss_start of __data_start aren't 32-bit aligned, then it i
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 04:01:23PM +0800, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> Em, YES, it comes from ivopt rewriting, but, if it's not undefined
>> behavior, won't it be annoying (or simply wrong) for compiler to do
>> something not written by the code?
>
> I
On 01/04/2014 07:21 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
FYI: a draft set of C bindings for additional floating-point functions
from IEEE 754-2008 are now available (draft TS 18661-4):
Is there an accurate summary of IEEE 754-2008 available online?
I'm asking because IEEE 754 is widely quoted, but nobo
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 01/04/2014 07:21 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>
> > FYI: a draft set of C bindings for additional floating-point functions
> > from IEEE 754-2008 are now available (draft TS 18661-4):
>
> Is there an accurate summary of IEEE 754-2008 available online?
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> The IEEE 754 operations are corrected rounded. However, the C bindings
(Except that the IEEE 754 reduction operations - subclause 9.4 - return
"an implementation-defined approximation". But 9.2 is "Recommended
correctly rounded functions", e.g. ex
On 01/07/2014 02:48 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>
>> The IEEE 754 operations are corrected rounded. However, the C bindings
>
> (Except that the IEEE 754 reduction operations - subclause 9.4 - return
> "an implementation-defined approximation". But
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Paulo
> Matos
> Sent: 13 November 2013 16:14
> To: Andrew Haley
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: RE: Infinite number of iterations in loop [v850, mep]
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: A
On 2014-01-07 14:36:58 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> (As far as I know, the state of the art on exhaustive searches for
> worst cases for correct rounding - as needed to implement correctly
> rounded transcendental functions with bounded resource use - does
> not make such searches feasible for I
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> For some of them, this is proved. Here's a summary of the current
> status:
>
> http://tamadiwiki.ens-lyon.fr/tamadiwiki/images/c/c1/Lefevre2013.pdf
Thanks for the details. What's the current state of the art on the
asymptotic cost of the exhausti
On 2014-01-07 14:48:01 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> (Except that the IEEE 754 reduction operations - subclause 9.4 - return
> "an implementation-defined approximation". But 9.2 is "Recommended
> correctly rounded functions", e.g. exp and sin, for which the strictly
> corresponding C function
On 2014-01-07 16:18:48 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>
> > For some of them, this is proved. Here's a summary of the current
> > status:
> >
> > http://tamadiwiki.ens-lyon.fr/tamadiwiki/images/c/c1/Lefevre2013.pdf
>
> Thanks for the details. What's
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2014-01-07 14:48:01 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > (Except that the IEEE 754 reduction operations - subclause 9.4 - return
> > "an implementation-defined approximation". But 9.2 is "Recommended
> > correctly rounded functions", e.g. exp and sin
Hi,
Registration is now open for the eighth annual C++Now conference
(formerly BoostCon) which will be held in Aspen, Colorado, USA, May
12th to 17th, 2014.
C++Now is a general C++ conference for C++ experts and enthusiasts.
It is not specific to any library/framework or compiler vendor and
has t
GMANE replaces "@" with " ", so that @#$* becomes " #$*".
The wiki.documentfoundation.org site is taking too late to load.
Hi,
I noticed function df_insn_rescan always deletes and re-computes
insn_info if any one of defs/uses/eq_uses/mw is verified changed by
df_insn_refs_verify, even in some passes (like fwprop), the defs are
never changed. Could it be improved to only update the changed part
(especially we have df_r
16 matches
Mail list logo
