Re: GCC-4.0 vs GCC-3.3.6 ia32 -Os: code size increase from 261 to 5339 bytes

On Fri, 2005-05-20 at 17:44 +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote: > Etienne Lorrain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/projet/gujin$ gcc -Os tst.c -c -o tst.o && size tst.o > >textdata bss dec hex filename > > 261 0 0 261 105 tst.o > > [EMAIL PRO

Re: tree ssa and type issues

On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 18:55 +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hi again, > > > > I just hit this one from tree-ssa-into.c:rewrite_into_ssa() > > > > /* Initialize dominance frontier. */ > > dfs = (bitmap *) xmalloc (last_basic_block * sizeof (bit

Re: tree ssa and type issues

On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 20:33 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Andreas Jaeger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > | > | > Hi again, > | > > | > I just hit this one from tree-ssa-into.c:rewrite_into_ssa() > | > > | > /* Initialize dominance frontier. *

Re: tree ssa and type issues

On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 22:00 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [...] > > | > Parenthetically, I was wondering who is freeing those extensive > | > regions of storage xmalloc/xcalloc()ed here and there? > | > | 1.

Re: tree ssa and type issues

On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 22:59 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 22:00 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > | > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > | > > | > [...] > | > >

Some questions about FIELD_DECL

While moving FIELD_DECL to it's own substruct, the following questions have come up. I figured one of you might know: 1. Do we need DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME on FIELD_DECL? I can't think of a place where we would actually try to *output* a FIELD_DECL directly, but maybe i've missed something. I ask b

Re: Some questions about FIELD_DECL

On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 02:14 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | While moving FIELD_DECL to it's own substruct, the following questions > | have come up. I figured one of you might know: > | > | 1. Do we need DECL_ASS

Re: [rfc] mainline slush

On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 00:16 +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 09:45:38PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > Btw, is it me or the individual RTL dump options are broken? > > > > The initial rtl dump is broken. The rest work. > > > > I think one of Jan's IPA pass manager changes

Re: Some questions about FIELD_DECL

On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 03:13 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 02:14 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > | > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > | > > | > | While moving FIELD_DE

Re: Some questions about FIELD_DECL

On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 21:32 -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote: > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I've actually discovered that we set the assembler name on a field that > > is the vtable, but never actually use it again, at least for DWARF2 and > > S

Re: [rfc] mainline slush

On Mon, 2005-05-23 at 10:00 -0600, Jeffrey A Law wrote: > On Mon, 2005-05-23 at 11:42 -0400, Eric Christopher wrote: > > > Eric (and anyone else who wasn't aware): there's been a lot of > > > discussion about this on gcc-patches since I posted that message: > > > > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gc

Re: Some questions about FIELD_DECL

On Mon, 2005-05-23 at 12:26 -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Daniel Berlin wrote: > > While moving FIELD_DECL to it's own substruct, the following questions > > have come up. I figured one of you might know: > > > > 1. Do we need DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME on FIELD_DEC

Re: GCC and Floating-Point

On Thu, 26 May 2005, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2005-05-25 19:27:21 +0200, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: Yes. I still don't understand why gcc doesn't do -ffast-math by default like all other compilers. No! And I really don't think that other compilers do that. Have you looked, or are you j

Re: GCC and Floating-Point

On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 12:47 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2005-05-26 09:14:40 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > On Thu, 26 May 2005, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > >On 2005-05-25 19:27:21 +0200, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > > >>Yes. I still don't understan

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Sat, 2005-05-28 at 13:09 -0400, Scott Robert Ladd wrote: > Uros Bizjak wrote: > > At this point, I wonder what is wrong with Bugzilla, that those > > programmers don't fill a proper bug report. > > In my experience, people don't file Bugzilla reports because it feels > impersonal and unrespons

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 07:59 +0300, Michael Veksler wrote: > > > > > > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 30/05/2005 06:41:54: > > > On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 12:50 +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote: > > > Michael Veksler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 07:59 +0300, Michael Veksler wrote: > > > > > > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 30/05/2005 06:41:54: > > > On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 12:50 +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote: > > > Michael Veksler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

> > MfG Kai > > OK, then let me explain it to you. The problem with the GCC Bugzilla > reporting system is that it's a system that only other developers can > tolerate, let alone love. You probably feel this way about all Bugzilla's then, since they are all the same except for the really large o

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 00:52 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2005-05-28 17:17:32 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > At this point, I wonder what is wrong with Bugzilla, that those > > programmers don't fill a proper bug report. If there is a problem with > > GCC, that is so annoying to somebody, I t

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 18:19 +0300, Michael Veksler wrote: > > > > > > "Giovanni Bajo wrote on 29/05/2005 13:54:39: > > > Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Perhaps because GCC developers think that GCC isn't buggy when the > > > processor doesn't do the job for them? (I'm th

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 13:22 +0300, Michael Veksler wrote: > > > > > > Haren Visavadia wrote on 29/05/2005 10:51:00: > > > > You can search Bugzilla as well, so you do not fill in > > duplicate bug report. > > Unfortunately, this is not 100% correct. Recently I have filed several > duplicates,

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 16:37 +1200, Ross Smith wrote: > On Sunday, 29 May 2005 03:17, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > > There is no problem that Bugzilla is un-intuitive, it is far from > > that. The users don't fill bugreports because they are afraid of > > filling an invalid report or a duplicate. > > I

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 12:50 +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote: > Michael Veksler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Unfortunately, this is not 100% correct. Recently I have filed several > > duplicates, *after* searching Bugzilla. > > That is not a problem. Bugmasters are there exactly for that. We realiz

FYI: Upgrading sourceware mysql to 4.x

At approximately 2pm EST, we will be upgrading mysql on sourceware from version 3.x to version 4.x. This will cause a short amount of downtime in gcc.gnu.org and sources.redhat.com Bugzilla and GCC's wiki (< 30 minutes). --Dan

RE: What is wrong with Bugzilla?

On Tue, 2005-05-31 at 17:52 +0100, Dave Korn wrote: > Original Message > >From: Russ Allbery > >Sent: 31 May 2005 04:51 > > > > It's not the request for the e-mail address. It's that it's phrased as a > > login screen and a button to create an account. I know that I definitely > > pause

RE: What is wrong with Bugzilla?

On Tue, 2005-05-31 at 18:12 +0100, Dave Korn wrote: > Original Message > >From: Daniel Berlin > >Sent: 31 May 2005 18:00 > > > On Tue, 2005-05-31 at 17:52 +0100, Dave Korn wrote: > > >> Original Message > >>> From: Russ Allbery

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 10:26 -0700, Mike Stump wrote: > On Wednesday, June 1, 2005, at 12:21 AM, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > But that's not the default and you'll have problems when linking with > > existing libraries on the machine, that use a 64-bit long double... > > Fine, we'll make it the defa

Re: Edges, predictions, and GC crashes ...

On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Ulrich Weigand wrote: Hello, I'm seeing compiler crashes during garbage collection when using mudflap. The problem appears to be that some basic_block_def structures point to edge_prediction structures which point to edge_def structures that have already been ggc_free()

Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow

On Fri, 2005-06-03 at 13:03 -0400, Paul Schlie wrote: > > From: Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 11:43:32AM -0400, Andrew Pinski wrote: > >> Everyone's who writes C/C++ should know that overflow of signed is > >> undefined. > > > > In practice, however, this issue is comm

Re: gccbug submissions seem to be silently ignored

On Mon, 2005-06-06 at 21:45 +0200, Rainer Orth wrote: > I've recently sent a couple of gcc bug reports using gccbug. The latest > one was > > Subject: All libjava execution tests fail on IRIX 6 > Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 19:34:48 GMT > > Unfortunately, the submissions seem to be silently ignore

Re: Fw: Can't bootstrap mainline on powerpc64-linux

odd on this, Adrian changed the name of prototype and then later Daniel came along and fixed prototype of "old" name. 2005-06-09 Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * config/rs6000/rs6000.c: (rs6000_insn_valid_within_doloop): Fix prototype. Before i committed this,

Re: Big differences on SpecFP results for gcc and icc

On Sun, 2005-06-12 at 11:21 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote: > Hello! > > There is an interesting comparison of SPEC scores between gcc and icc: > http://people.redhat.com/dnovillo/spec2000.i686/gcc/individual-run-ratio.html > . A quick look at the graphs shows a big differences in achieved scores > b

Bug in transparent union handling?

It seems the structure aliasing patch exposed what appears to be a bug in the C FE. Our docs on transparent union say "@item transparent_union This attribute, attached to a function parameter which is a union, means that the corresponding argument may have the type of any union member, but the arg

Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters

On Wed, 2005-06-15 at 12:13 -0400, Scott Robert Ladd wrote: > Richard Guenther wrote: > > On 6/15/05, Scott Robert Ladd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>But an objection from one of the bugmasters *is* enough to keep people > >>from presenting a patch. > > > > How do you come to this conclusion? Fr

Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2005-06-16 07:43:17 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: Again, please point to specific examples. GCC developers don't want examples. I'm sorry to interrupt your trolling, but you'll note 1. I'm a GCC developer 2. I asked for s

Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters

On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 14:03 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2005-06-16 07:43:17 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > Again, please point to specific examples. > > GCC developers don't want examples. > I should also note that *you* seem to equate "disagreement with

Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters

On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 14:08 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2005-06-15 18:18:23 -0400, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > But if you look how old it is, it is before really any bugmaster > > started. Also a main developer, RTH, closed it and he has been > > working on GCC since before 1999. > > I'm answe

Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters

On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 13:35 +0100, Haren Visavadia wrote: > --- Daniel Berlin wrote: > > Again, this is a place where you disagree that this > > should be considered > > a "bug", but refuse to believe that reasonable > > people can disagree on > >

Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters

On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 10:13 -0400, Scott Robert Ladd wrote: > Daniel Berlin wrote: > > Maybe you should start naming names, so we can take stock of the > > problem. > > Because of Acovea and my reviews of GCC (there are two more coming, one > in a print magazine),

Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters

On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 10:51 -0400, Scott Robert Ladd wrote: > Dan Kegel wrote: > > And then there's the GCC summit, if you're really serious. > > I'd certainly love to attend, but can't afford it with the medical bills > we've accumulated. Hospitalizing both the primary bread-winners has a > drama

Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)

On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 10:30 -0400, Scott Robert Ladd wrote: > Aaron W. LaFramboise wrote: > > Boosters, FreeBSD hackers, and I'm sure tons of others are calling this > > the "Bicycle shed effect." > > > > > > If I'

Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters

On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 10:58 -0400, Scott Robert Ladd wrote: > Daniel Berlin wrote: > > Again, *please* provide examples other than "The bugmasters are mean". > > Don't invent quotes. I never said anyone was "mean." And other people > have provided ex

Re: Major regression in 4.1.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does this look familiar to anyone? It certainly was happening a few days ago. Shouldn't a bootstrap and regression of all frontend be required before someone checks in a patch to the back-end? Indeed. The last working GCC-4.1 compiler for both M

Re: Bugzilla queries extremely slow

I cannot make sourceware faster, unfortunately :) I can make sure all the queries are using the right indexes, etc, which i do. (I monitor index/key efficiency on the server, as well as number of temp tables created, scanned, blah blah blah) On Sun, 2005-06-19 at 15:04 +0200, Paolo Carlini wrot

Re: Someone introduced a libiberty crashing bug in the past week

On Mon, 2005-06-20 at 16:05 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > > The crash line is > > 3729 if (pedantic && !DECL_IN_SYSTEM_HEADER (fundecl)) > > > > Here, fundecl is null. > > Any pr

Re: -fprofile-arcs changes the structure of basic blocks

On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, Liu Haibin wrote: Hi, I want to use profiling information. I know there're two relevent fields in each basic block, count and frequency. I want to use frequency because the compiled program is for another architecture so it cannot run on the host. Besides the fact that, a

Re: toplevel bootstrap (stage 2 project)

On Tue, 2005-06-28 at 11:43 +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote: > Gerald Pfeifer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> It would help also if you add to the wiki explanation of what exactly all > >> these options do. Especially bubblestrap vs quickstrap vs restrap. > > > > Why to the WIki?? This should be par

Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005, Mark Mitchell wrote: Joe Buck wrote: I don't think we should give the user any such promise, and if we do give such a promise, we will never catch icc. The main problem is that we will no longer be able to optimize many loops. It's entirely possible that I was naive i

Re: GCC-4.1.0 size optimization bug for MIPS architecture...

On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 07:44 -0500, Steven J. Hill wrote: > Richard Henderson wrote: > > > > Not a bug. The inline marker is merely suggestive. You told > > the compiler to optimize for size, and it is doing that. > > > > If you absolutely have to have the function inlined, then you > > need to

Re: Do CO++ signed types have modulo semantics?

> Overall, I guess I still simply believe the the first rule of optimization > is to preserve existing semantics unless explicitly authorized otherwise, > and then only if accompanied with corresponding warnings for all potentially > behavior altering assumptions applied. It is, you just believe

Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?

On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 18:46 +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Tuesday 28 June 2005 14:09, Steven Bosscher wrote: > > On Tuesday 28 June 2005 14:02, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > > Steven Bosscher wrote: > > > > Anyway, I've started a SPEC run with "-O2" vs. "-O2 -fwrapv". Let's > > > > see how big th

PARM_DECL of DECL_SIZE 0, but TYPE_SIZE of 96 bits

Why is that C++ can't create normal DECL's like everyone else? Case in point: (gdb) unit size ... addressable used BLK file minimal.c line 194 size unit size $11 = void (gdb) y So we've got a parm decl that if you ask it for the DECL_SIZE, says 0, but has a TYPE_SIZE of 12 by

Re: PARM_DECL of DECL_SIZE 0, but TYPE_SIZE of 96 bits

On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 16:55 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote: > On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 06:57:12PM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > I'm going to work around this by using TYPE_SIZE, but it would be nice > > if somebody could explain the purpose for this behavior (if it's a

Re: Pro64-based GPLed compiler

On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 14:01 -0400, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > Marc Gonzalez-Sigler wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > > > > > I've taken PathScale's source tree (they've removed the IA-64 code > > generator, and added an x86/AMD64 code generator), and tweaked the > > Makefiles. > > > > I thought so

Re: PARM_DECL of DECL_SIZE 0, but TYPE_SIZE of 96 bits

On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 20:47 +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote: > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So we've got a parm decl that if you ask it for the DECL_SIZE, says 0, > > but has a TYPE_SIZE of 12 bytes, and we access fields in it, etc. > > > I a

Re: Pro64-based GPLed compiler

On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 18:23 -0400, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > James E Wilson wrote: > > > Daniel Berlin wrote: > > > >> A bunch of random code #ifdef KEY'd > > > > > > FYI Pathscale was formerly known as Key Research. So the KEY probably > >

Re: [C++] Re: PARM_DECL of DECL_SIZE 0, but TYPE_SIZE of 96 bits

On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 14:11 -0700, Geoffrey Keating wrote: > Richard Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 09:17:07PM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > > 1. In require_complete_types_for_parms, in the C++ FE, reset DECL_SIZE > > > t

Re: Pro64-based GPLed compiler

't well tuned for 32-bit performance and/or > Intel parts. Anyways, from what Daniel Berlin mentioned, it may be that > the tree-ssa stuff in gcc4.x has negated much of their earlier advantage. I would not be surprised if they kick the crap out of us when it comes to numerical fortran o

Re: Should GCC publish a general rule/warning due to it's default presumption of undefined signed integer overflow semantics?

On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 03:39 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 09:02:48PM -0400, Andrew Pinski wrote: > | > But the reason question is why make it an undefined behavior instead of > | > an implementation defined? This would have mad

Re: var_tracking question

On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 11:50 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 09:25:47PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote: > > > > My m32c port is generating tracking notes that look like this: > > > > (var_location 0x2a95758dd0 (parallel [ > > (expr_list:REG_DEP_TRUE (reg/v:SI 0 r0 [orig:

SVN test repo updated and call for help

The svn test repo has been updated on dberlin.org. Please don't rape my bandwidth or my disk i/o :) svn://www.dberlin.org/ Commits to the hooks dir will be reflected in the actual repository hooks through the nice sync script. If people help convert the contrib scripts and the current cvs repos

Re: Bugzilla does not let me in

On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 15:03 +0400, Ilya Mezhirov wrote: > Hi, > > > I've got a problem: bugzilla sends me no registration e-mails. > I tried two times with different e-mail addresses and got nothing. > So I cannot report a gcj bug :( I verified the emails were getting sent to your address (or at

Re: The origin of scalar evolutions?

On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 12:31 -0400, Robert van Engelen wrote: > Hi, > > I am interested in the recent work in gcc 4.0 with respect to "scalar > evolutions". The students in my compiler laboratory studied the > algorithm implemented in gcc 4.0. We are considering extending this > work based on ou

Re: PARM_DECL of DECL_SIZE 0, but TYPE_SIZE of 96 bits

On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 08:35 -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Daniel Berlin wrote: > > > 3. Not call layout_decl on the template types until they are completed. > > In the abstract, this is the best choice. Although we need to know that > types are complete (which

Re: help:how to get the Nth argument stmt from CALL_EXPR stmt tree

On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 23:18 +0800, alert7 wrote: > hi,all > > > I don't know how to get the Nth argument stmt from CALL_EXPR stmt tree? assuming TREE_CODE (call) == CALL_EXPR: GetCallArgOperand(tree call, int i) { int j = 0; tree arg; for (arg = TREE_OPERAND (

Re: [PR22319] Ada broken with ICE in tree-ssa-structalias...

Try the attached patch. On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 06:54 -0400, Geert Bosch wrote: > This is http://gcc.gnu.org/PR22319. > > On Jul 6, 2005, at 06:17, Andreas Schwab wrote: > > Andreas Jaeger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > >> Building ada with the patch for flag_wrapv fails now with a new > >

Re: Existing tree functionality?

Most of this can be found in the cgraph nodes. The rest requires scanning the IL. Ken Zadeck should have code to do this. On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 08:32 -0400, Michael Tegtmeyer wrote: > Hello, > > Is there existing functionality somewhere to sweep a function and collect > all externally visible

Re: Existing tree functionality?

On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 08:46 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > Most of this can be found in the cgraph nodes. The rest requires > scanning the IL. > Ken Zadeck should have code to do this. > Oh, i assumed you were trying to work at an interprocedural level. If you only ever care to

Re: Existing tree functionality?

On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 09:40 -0400, Michael Tegtmeyer wrote: > Thanks-intraprocedural is all I need. > > Sorry, bit new to gcc internals (coming from SUIF), is anything missing > from referenced_vars list or is it complete? It is a complete list of variables *referenced from this function*. > d

Re: [PR22319] Ada broken with ICE in tree-ssa-structalias...

On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 10:35 -0400, Richard Kenner wrote: > Try the attached patch. > > In the case where I saw this ICE, the tree generated by Ada was not valid > (had a type mismatch on a MODIFY_EXPR). So the patch you sent may not > necessarily be needed. Well, it's actually still needed i

Re: Re: help:how to get the Nth argument stmt from CALL_EXPR stmt tree

On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 23:30 +0800, alert7 wrote: > Daniel Berlin,您好！ > > I'am gcc beginner,thank your answer . > > Is it the return Value of GetCallArgOperand function that u given stmt > tree? No. > > I pass return value--ops to funct

Re: Existing tree functionality?

On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 09:31 -0400, Michael Tegtmeyer wrote: > I'm using gcc initially to do some static analysis with the resuts being > sent somewhere else for the time being. I basically just need to gather > the variables with visibility outside of the current function. In addition > I need a

Re: Existing tree functionality?

On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 12:40 -0400, Michael Tegtmeyer wrote: > > pass_init_datastructures is still necessary. > > That was the problem-thanks. > > New question (or still the original rather), is there existing > functionality to obtain the variables used in a function with external > visibility

4.1 news item

I was thinking we maybe should just copy the checked in project list from the wiki, remove the duplicates (IE struct aliasing part I and II, etc), and add a news item saying: "GCC 4.1 stage 2 is now closed. The following projects were contributed: . Thank you to all contributors, testers, and ev

Re: x86 build is broken

On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 17:13 -0700, Fariborz Jahanian wrote: > Tried building fsf mainline on x86-darwin. Syntax error compiling c- > common.c. The preprocessed file shows the following: > as of when? I bootstrapped and tested x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu and x86-linux-gnu and powerpc-linux-gnu in t

Re: 4.1 news item

On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 23:39 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > I was thinking we maybe should just copy the checked in project list > > from the wiki, remove the duplicates (IE struct aliasing part I and II, > > etc), and a

Re: gcc 4.1 compile time and memory usage graphs

On Sun, 2005-07-10 at 16:46 +0400, Serge Belyshev wrote: > Hi, > > I have measured compilation time and memory usage of mainline on x86_64 > from 2005-02-25 to 2005-07-10 with one day interval. So does Jan, and to be honest, his tester is better than your graphs, because it knows the difference be

Re: Some notes on the Wiki (was: 4.1 news item)

On Sun, 2005-07-10 at 19:31 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > I noticed that the Wiki is getting more and more of a third place where > to find documentation in addition of gcc/doc and wwwdocs, and a parallel > universe at that, with quite some duplication and inconsistencies. Have you not yet discov

Re: Some notes on the Wiki (was: 4.1 news item)

we provide and how to make use of provided alias info, data dependence info, immediate uses, etc) F. Reference guide for analysis providers in RTL. On Sun, 2005-07-10 at 13:53 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > On Sun, 2005-07-10 at 19:31 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > > I noticed that the Wiki is g

Re: Some notes on the Wiki (was: 4.1 news item)

On Sun, 2005-07-10 at 20:14 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | On Sun, 2005-07-10 at 19:31 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > | > I noticed that the Wiki is getting more and more of a third place where > | > to find documenta

Broke swim interchange through aliasing

It looks like we are now giving type tags to global that didn't use to have type tags, and are *not* pointers. before: Variable: pcheck, UID 511, real8, is an alias tag, is addressable, call clobbered, default def: pcheck_83 ... Variable: TMT.68, UID 1386, real8, is addressable, is global, call

Re: Broke swim interchange through aliasing

On Sun, 2005-07-10 at 15:49 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > It looks like we are now giving type tags to global that didn't use to > have type tags, and are *not* pointers. > As a followup, it looks like alias grouping went crazy and turned on here, when it didn't before. It

Re: Some notes on the Wiki (was: 4.1 news item)

> It appears to me that you're relating unrelated effects and causes. Not really. People don't contribute to the current docs for the following main reasons, AFAICT and have heard from people, *in order of number of complaints i've heard from people*: 1. They don't want to send continual incompl

Re: Some notes on the Wiki (was: 4.1 news item)

On Sun, 2005-07-10 at 22:50 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Sun, 10 Jul 2005, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > I find it sad that you are complaining that people have created > > a resource *they* find useful, instead of one that *we think they > > should find useful*. > > I&

Re: why are there many copies of function_decls that have the same information including the same uid?

On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 08:40 -0400, Kenneth Zadeck wrote: > Is this a bug or a feature? Bug. where is it occurring?

Re: Some notes on the Wiki

On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 16:22 +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Monday 11 July 2005 16:19, Diego Novillo wrote: > > Would a blanket statement at the start of the wiki be enough? > > Who gets to decide this? > > I guess that, apart from the legal discussion of whether this enough, > such a statement

Re: Some notes on the Wiki

On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 15:19 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Steven Bosscher wrote: > > > On Monday 11 July 2005 16:50, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > > > Steven Bosscher wrote: > > > > I guess that, apart from the legal discussion of whether this enough, > > > > such a statement would

Bugzilla is temporarily down

While we free some space on the server. Sorry about that.

Bugzilla back up (was Re: Bugzilla is temporarily down)

On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 12:55 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > While we free some space on the server. > Sorry about that. > > And now it's back up

Re: Some notes on the Wiki

On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 13:09 -0700, Robert Thorpe wrote: > > I believe the Wiki is an invaluable documentation tool, precisely > > because it allows such an unencumbered contribution process. > > > > I agree. I wasn't suggesting that the Wiki has no value, but rather > > that it's not a

Re: Some notes on the Wiki

On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 22:47 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [...] > > | > Also, a web-browser is much slower than an info-browser, especially when > doing searchs. > | > | You must be close to the only user i

Re: Some notes on the Wiki

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Daniel Berlin wrote: Also, a web-browser is much slower than an info-browser, especially when doing searchs. You must be close to the only user i've met who uses the info browser :) I use it. Info pages suck in

Re: Some notes on the Wiki

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Andreas Schwab wrote: Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Most people i've met can't undertand the commands for info (pinfo is nicer in this regard). There exist many alternative info browsers (this includes konqueror). Yet the amount of docs a

Re: Some notes on the Wiki

> > > > > I just had a quick quiz in the C++ IRC channel I was in, and very few > people there like info, and very few are comfortable using it. There was > a general agreement HTML, PDF and docbook are the best ways to recieve > documentation. > > Chris It's possible these people ride the shor

Re: Some notes on the Wiki (was: 4.1 news item)

On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 15:21 -0700, Joe Buck wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 12:07:01AM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > > On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Steven Bosscher wrote: > > > Another idea that was coined on IRC is to have reviewing and commit > > > after approval rules for the user manual, but to allow

Re: Pointers in comparison expressions

> I think that even if the use of relational operators other than '==' and '!=' > is legal with pointers, the compiler should issue a warning (when the option > -Wall is used), as it does for assignment, used as truth values, not > surrounded with parentheses. Why? It's legal, it's useful, and

Bugzilla

may go up and down the next few hours while i attempt to figure out what is going on. It looks like some of the actual data got very out of whack with the mysql indexes when we ran out of space on sourceware, and while the data is still fine, every time someone changes a bug, it seems to cause the

Re: volatile semantics

On Sat, 2005-07-16 at 12:50 -0400, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote: > Sorry for the very late response. It is actually triggered by the > bugzilla entry > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22278 > > The motivating example, abstracted from a misbehaving part of X, is: > void test (c

Re: volatile semantics

object volatile). I don't understand your point. given void Foo (char const * a) { *(char *)a = 5; } the compiler generates code to store 5 through the pointer 'a'. It doesn't turn this into a call to 'abort', because it thinks you're writing to const storage. Is this *always* the cas

Re: volatile semantics

> In other words, we're asked to agree that the type of an object > changes depending on how it is accessed. > For the benefit of readers, only the first sentence of this para is > the language of the standard; the rest isn't. > > That an object referred to through a volatile pointer must > "te

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >