On 06/17/2014 05:00 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
GCC will likely not optimize it away at this point, but having code with
undefined behavior is just asking for future trouble. Just use "" instead?
It's always const and may lack sufficient alignment. The former isn't a
problem in C++ (I think), b
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 09:18:10AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 06/17/2014 05:00 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> >>>GCC will likely not optimize it away at this point, but having code with
> >>>undefined behavior is just asking for future trouble. Just use "" instead?
> >>
> >>It's always const
On 06/18/2014 09:24 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
You're returning a T *, not a void *, and C++ requires that pointers are
properly aligned even if they aren't dereferenced.
C qsort doesn't return anything and the comparison function returns int.
extern void qsort (void *__base, size_t __nmemb, si
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > * Patterns requiring GENERIC support like cond_expr
> >> > I am not sure about how to handle these
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Richard Biener
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > * Patterns requiring GENER
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
> Hi,
> I am looking at a performance regression in our code. A big loop produces
> and uses a lot of temporary variables inside the loop body. The problem
> appears that IVOPTS pass creates even more induction variables (from original
> 2 to 27
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 18 June 2014 12:36
> To: Bingfeng Mei
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: regs_used estimation in IVOPTS seriously flawed
>
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I am lo
Hi Tobias,
I made a separate patch and rebased the previous one. They are
attached to this letter.
> I am surprised. Are all these includes really needed to get _this_ patch
> compile? (I asked this before).
I saw your previous comment related to this and the following includes
were removed: is
Dear gcc contributors,
could you please advise how to better write the following testcase?
After the compilation with -O2 -fdump-tree-graphite-all
-fgraphite-identity -fgraphite-code-generator=isl the dump file should
contain the following text
ISL AST generated by ISL:
for (int c1 = 0; c1 < n -
On 18/06/2014 15:22, Roman Gareev wrote:
Hi Tobias,
I made a separate patch and rebased the previous one. They are
attached to this letter.
I am surprised. Are all these includes really needed to get _this_ patch
compile? (I asked this before).
I saw your previous comment related to this an
Hello,
First of all thanks so much for all your hard work! I'm compiling a bunch of
legacy fortran that relies on SAVE semantics from relic compilers. I'm using
the -fno-automatic option to replicate that behavior. I also was using the
-finit-local-zero option, assuming that it would initial
I used trunk and compiled these patches only with isl 0.12 and ClooG
0.18.1. Which versions of these libraries are need to be checked for
compatibility?
--
Cheers, Roman Gareev
On Jun 18, 2014 6:03 PM, Roman Gareev wrote:
>
> I used trunk and compiled these patches only with isl 0.12 and ClooG
> 0.18.1. Which versions of these libraries are need to be checked for
> compatibility?
That's fine. Please post the patches for wider review at gcc patches. Also
mention that
Hello All,
The following code:
#include
struct s1_st {
char* i_name;
struct s1_st* i_foo;
};
void clear_s1 (struct s1_st*s)
{
__atomic_store(s->i_name, NULL, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
}
gives an ICE when compiled (on Debian/Sid/amd64) by GCC 4.8 & 4.9 (I did not
On 06/18/2014 12:59 PM, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
Hello All,
The following code:
#include
struct s1_st {
char* i_name;
struct s1_st* i_foo;
};
void clear_s1 (struct s1_st*s)
{
__atomic_store(s->i_name, NULL, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
}
gives an ICE when c
Snapshot gcc-4.9-20140618 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.9-20140618/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.9 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
16 matches
Mail list logo