On Sat, 14 Nov 2015, Cary Coutant wrote:
> > 3.3.2 Static Linking Object Acceptance Rules
> >
> > The static linker shall follow the user selection as to the linking mode
> > used, either of `strict' and `relaxed'. The selection will be made
> > according to the usual way assumed for the environ
On 11/16/2015 12:58 AM, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:04:06AM +0100, Thomas Koenig wrote:
See
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/11/llvm-to-get-fortran-compiler-that-targets-parallel-gpus-in-clusters/
It is not entirely clear on what they plan to do.
Use gfo
On 11/15/2015 04:09 PM, D Haley wrote:
Thanks for the prompt reply. I am not an expert here, so I probably
don't know the correct solution for gcc. We are using std=c++11 to
maximise source compatibility for any users seeking to recompile our
code on whatever compiler/toolchain they have.
Note
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Toon Moene wrote:
> On 11/16/2015 12:58 AM, Steve Kargl wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:04:06AM +0100, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
>
>>> See
>>>
>>>
>>> http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/11/llvm-to-get-fortran-compiler-that-targets-parallel-gpus-
On 11/16/2015 10:11 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Toon Moene wrote:
To put this in a (timeline) perspective:
On the 18th of March, 2000, I announced Andy Vaught's work on the g95
front-end to the gcc-patches mailing list.
In 2004 (!) we merged the resulting compi
On 11/15/2015 06:23 PM, David Wohlferd wrote:
On 11/9/2015 1:32 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 04:10:01PM -0800, David Wohlferd wrote:
It seems like a doc update is what is needed to close PR24414 (Old-style
asms don't clobber memory).
What is needed to close the bug is
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Toon Moene wrote:
> On 11/16/2015 10:11 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Toon Moene wrote:
>
>
>>> To put this in a (timeline) perspective:
>>>
>>> On the 18th of March, 2000, I announced Andy Vaught's work on the g95
>>> front-end to
On 11/16/2015 10:33 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
Of course one unknown is whether PGI had already done any work
internally with the llvm middle-/back-end. If so, they might not be
starting from scratch.
Perhaps it helps if I repost the following from 12 years ago:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/20
On 11/11/2015 02:19 AM, David Wohlferd wrote:
On 11/9/2015 1:52 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/07/2015 12:50 AM, David Wohlferd wrote:
- Starting with 'modifiers', "=+&" and (reluctantly) "%" seem reasonable
for inline asm. But both "#*" seem sketchy.
Right. =+& are no-brainer yes, as are the co
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Toon Moene wrote:
> On 11/16/2015 10:33 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>
>> Of course one unknown is whether PGI had already done any work
>> internally with the llvm middle-/back-end. If so, they might not be
>> starting from scratch.
>
>
> Perhaps it helps if I repost t
On 11/16/2015 11:02 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
FYI, this posting has a bit more detail on the actual implementation...
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-November/092438.html
That surely helps - thanks.
--
Toon Moene - e-mail: t...@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 37
Hi folks,
(I'm not subscribed to the list, so please CC me on all responses.)
This is using GCC 5.2 on Linux x86_64. On a project at work I've found
that one of our shared libraries refuses to link because of some
symbol references it shouldn't be making. If I add "-fno-devirtualize
-fno-devirtua
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Toon Moene wrote:
> On 11/16/2015 11:02 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>
>> FYI, this posting has a bit more detail on the actual implementation...
>>
>> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-November/092438.html
>
>
> That surely helps - thanks.
Basically NVIDI
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Toon Moene wrote:
>> On 11/16/2015 11:02 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>>
>>> FYI, this posting has a bit more detail on the actual implementation...
>>>
>>> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-November/0
On 11/16/2015 1:29 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/15/2015 06:23 PM, David Wohlferd wrote:
On 11/9/2015 1:32 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 04:10:01PM -0800, David Wohlferd wrote:
It seems like a doc update is what is needed to close PR24414
(Old-style
asms don't clobber memo
15 matches
Mail list logo
