Re: [ARM] Is TARGET_UNIFIED_ASM still needed?

2014-07-23 Thread Richard Earnshaw
On 22/07/14 16:23, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > > > On 22/07/14 14:14, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> In the arm backend we've got this TARGET_UNIFIED_ASM macro that is >> currently on for TARGET_THUMB2 with a comment that says: >> /* We could use unified syntax for arm mode, but for now

Re: [ARM] Is TARGET_UNIFIED_ASM still needed?

2014-07-23 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
On 23/07/14 09:55, Richard Earnshaw wrote: On 22/07/14 16:23, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: On 22/07/14 14:14, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi all, In the arm backend we've got this TARGET_UNIFIED_ASM macro that is currently on for TARGET_THUMB2 with a comment that says: /* We could use unified synta

Re: [ARM] Is TARGET_UNIFIED_ASM still needed?

2014-07-23 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
On 23/07/14 09:59, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 23/07/14 09:55, Richard Earnshaw wrote: On 22/07/14 16:23, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: On 22/07/14 14:14, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi all, In the arm backend we've got this TARGET_UNIFIED_ASM macro that is currently on for TARGET_THUMB2 with a comment

Re: GCC version bikeshedding

2014-07-23 Thread Richard Biener
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 4:27 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 08:44:41AM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> So why >> not just stick to the current scheme and have 5.0.0, 5.0.1, 5.0.2 etc.? > > Yes, why would we use a different numbering scheme now? There is no change > in

Re: GCC version bikeshedding

2014-07-23 Thread Jason Merrill
On 07/20/2014 06:01 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 05:59:08PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: I understood we agreed on 5.0 and further 5.1, 5.2 releases from the branch and 6.0 a year later. With unspecified uses for the patch level number (so leave it at zero). Ian/Jason, is

Re: [Copyright transfer] What to do for copyright transfer to FSF for contracted changes?

2014-07-23 Thread Andre Vehreschild
Hi, thanks for all your help. I have contact ass...@gnu.org now. Still waiting for a reply though. - Andre -- Andre Vehreschild

C as intermediate language, signed integer overflow and -ftrapv

2014-07-23 Thread Thomas Mertes
C is popular as intermediate language. This means that some compilers generate C and use a C compiler as backend. Wikipedia lists several languages, which use C as intermediate language: Eiffel, Sather, Esterel, some dialects of Lisp (Lush, Gambit), Haskell (Glasgow Haskell Compiler), Squeak's Smal

Re: GCC version bikeshedding

2014-07-23 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 07/20/2014 06:01 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> >> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 05:59:08PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: >>> >>> I understood we agreed on 5.0 and further 5.1, 5.2 releases from the >>> branch and 6.0 a year later. With unspecified

Re: GCC version bikeshedding

2014-07-23 Thread Andreas Schwab
Ian Lance Taylor writes: > At the same time, we face the fact that going from 4.9 to 4.10 will > break some people's existing scripts, as is also true of any other > decision we can make. Looking forward to gcc 10.0. :-) Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint =

Re: GCC version bikeshedding

2014-07-23 Thread pinskia
> On Jul 23, 2014, at 9:51 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > > Ian Lance Taylor writes: > >> At the same time, we face the fact that going from 4.9 to 4.10 will >> break some people's existing scripts, as is also true of any other >> decision we can make. > > Looking forward to gcc 10.0. :-) So a

Re: C as intermediate language, signed integer overflow and -ftrapv

2014-07-23 Thread David Wohlferd
I believe that sometimes gcc is promoting the ints to long longs when doing the overflow testing. If I try to overflow a long long, I get the trap as expected. See also https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19020 dw On 7/23/2014 7:56 AM, Thomas Mertes wrote: C is popular as intermedi

Re: GCC version bikeshedding

2014-07-23 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 09:20:23AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > I think that if anybody has strong objections, now is the time to make > them. Otherwise I think we should go with this plan. My preference was to keep the current versioning scheme, after all, even right now it is IMHO worthwhil

Re: Question for ARM person re asm_fprintf

2014-07-23 Thread Hans-Peter Nilsson
On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, David Wohlferd wrote: > I have been looking at asm_fprintf in final.c, and I think there's a design > flaw. But since the change affects ARM and since I have no access to an ARM > system, I need a second opinion. There's this thing called cross-compilation, which happens for

gcc-4.9-20140723 is now available

2014-07-23 Thread gccadmin
Snapshot gcc-4.9-20140723 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.9-20140723/ 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

Slides from Cauldron talks

2014-07-23 Thread David Malcolm
I didn't see a place to post slides for Cauldron talks, so am posting links to them here. "Just-In-Time compilation using GCC (libgccjit.so)" === HTML slides: http://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/presentations/cauldron-2014/jit/ Source code used for ge

Re: Question for ARM person re asm_fprintf

2014-07-23 Thread David Wohlferd
Not that the following would constitute the actual testing usually required for a patch, but: /path/to/toplevel/configure --target=arm-eabi && make all-gcc # Yay, the compiler-proper for a "bare iron" ARM compiler. ./gcc/xgcc -B./gcc -S test.c Woot, compiled your first ARM program. :) Just e

Re: Slides from Cauldron talks

2014-07-23 Thread Tobias Burnus
David Malcolm wrote: I didn't see a place to post slides for Cauldron talks, so am posting links to them here. I have added the links to https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/cauldron2014#Slides_and_Notes Does anyone know if any Cauldron talks were recorded? At least the ones in Lecture Theatre One were