Hello,
for project http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/PreservingLoops, I am considering
introducing a tree LOOP_HEADER with single argument N (number of
iterations of the loop), that would be present in IL at the beginning of
header of each loop. I have following motivations:
1) One of the goals of the pr
> However, various optimizer needs to know about this special tree node.
not really (not any more than they know about other tree codes that are
not interesting for them).
If we take an example of Jump Threading pass then it needs to know
about this tree node and update it properly.
So, the p
On 10/25/06, Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
> >So, the passes that maniuplate loop structure need to know about
> >LOOP_HEADER and others do not need to worry about LOOP_HEADER.
>
> More acurately, the passes that manipulate the cfg. Right now most of
> these passes don't even k
On 10/25/06, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > and seeing the reaction of people,
> > I probably won't use it. The main reason for considering to use
> > the tree node for me was the possibility to make the number of iterations
> > of the loop as its operand, so that I would not nee
On 10/25/06, Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You could use TREE_USED, but your suggestion implies that dead code
should be retained in the program,
May be I misunderstood, but it is not dead code. Here is what Zdenek said,
"
...
To keep the information valid, we need
> to preve
On 10/25/06, Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So you would mark n_1 with TREE_USED, and never let it be removed?
What would happen if e.g. the entire loop turns out to be dead code?
Or if the loop is rewritten (e.g. vectorized) in a way that changes
the number of iterations of the loop
On 10/25/06, Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Many optimizers would need to be taught to know about TREE_USED (or any
other bit you would use for that). We do not have this type of
restriction for any other ssa names, so this would be brand new
functionality (on the other hand, most opt
Hi,
I'm trying to know more about how messages are send to the
objects in objective-C, how they are store,...
In which structures en how?
Where should I look in the source code of gcc to know it?
I looked in libobjc but I'm a bit lost.
Thanks very much
See How Messaging Works document at
http
what happens with the data previously loaded by a previous pch include file?
I can't figure out why every GTY()-ed global data (extern or static) should
be overwritten at each PCH inclusion, but then maybe I am wrong.
Couple of big limiations of GCC PCH :
- Only one PCH can be loaded during one
As for proposal to revert the aliasing fixes on the 4.2, IMHO aliasing
bugs are pretty nasty it is hard to find a option to work around because
alias info is used in many optimizations.
All bugs we are talking about can be worked around by using
-fno-strict-aliasing.
FWIW, in Apple distribute
* How do we compare the costs of if-converted vectorized code to
it's scalar counterpart?
o It may be convenient to calculate scalar cost during if-conversion itself.
o It is possible that size of two sibling blocks (Block_A & Block_B)
does not match at the beginning of tree-ssa level if co
On 2/20/07, Eric Botcazou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FWIW, in Apple distributed GCC 4.0.x, strict-aliasing is disabled by
> default when -O? is used because it breaks too much existing
> code (not just Apple internal code).
Much more than in 3.x?
I do not have data to answer this appropriate
Is there a reason why op0 is V4SF
It is destination so, yes this is wrong.
and op1 is V4SI (and not V8HI)?
condition should be v4si, but it is not op1. So this is also not correct.
And also, why not use if_then_else instead of unspec (in all vcond's)?
I did not try that path. May be I di
>
>http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg00167.html
This patch looks wrong to me. I don't understand how it could be
correct in the presence of __attribute__ ((aligned (N))). It checks
TYPE_PACKED but not TYPE_ALIGN or TYPE_USER_ALIGN. The default hook
assumes that objects larger th
On Feb 27, 2005, at 6:32 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
And in that case we did consider users: although the concatenation of
__FUNCTION__ wasn't documented, it emitted a deprecation warning in the
3.0, 3.1/3.2 and 3.3 release series before being removed in 3.4.
But, you'll agree that this is an except
On Feb 27, 2005, at 3:59 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
In stark contrast, i believe it is a very good idea for us to be "over
organized" about this. As for judging importance, the release manager
has always judged what is important for a given release, based on
general goals.
I agree. IMO taking one mo
invoke.texi mentions following URL for further info on visibility
#pragmas.
http://www.nedprod.com/programs/gccvisibility.html
but it does not exist.
-
Devang
On Mar 30, 2005, at 10:36 PM, Per Bothner wrote:
* Note that we compile the gch file as it were the main file
- i.e. it has the MAIN_FILE_P property, and it is not included
from any file.
Another side effect, it bypasses system header check.
gcc -x c-header /usr/include/stdio.h
Here, stdio.h is
On Apr 3, 2005, at 3:58 PM, Robert Dewar wrote:
so the question
is do similar opportunities still exist?
GCC wiki has a laundry list @ http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Speedup%20areas
-
Devang
On Apr 3, 2005, at 1:33 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
Steve, Toon,
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, Steve Kargl wrote:
Jim,
Thanks for the detailed explanation of how GCC options work.
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Toon Moene wrote:
Ditto. Jim, are you reading from some documentation about this
option
processing that I
On Apr 7, 2005, at 12:36 PM, Virender Kashyap wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Dale Johannesen wrote:
The command line you show is the built compiler trying to build
gcc's library.
It doesn't work, which means there is a bug in your changes.
actually it was working fine before even with changes.
but n
On Apr 8, 2005, at 1:35 AM, vivek sukumaran wrote:
Hello everybody,
I need benchmark programs for my project.
Does anybody have or know the links to C benchmarks
that can be compiled using gcc?
Thanking you,
You question is not clear and this is probably
wrong list for whatever you are looking for.
On Apr 8, 2005, at 10:08 AM, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 13:04 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
When we rescan the operands, we get a different set of V_MAY_DEFS,
specifically we lose the V_MAY_DEF for SFT.3_20.
Why?
It should be copying subvars to the new vectorizer variable too.
At leas
Try -fsyntax-only
On Apr 12, 2005, at 7:10 AM, Dimitry Golubovsky wrote:
Hi,
A program I am working on generates some C code on the fly, and I
would like to check its syntax right after generation. I might save
this code fragment in a temporary file and gun gcc -c over it,
watching for exit code (0
To read source from stdin use "-".
preprocessor man page says,
Either infile or outfile may be -, which as infile means to
read from
standard input and as outfile means to write to standard output.
On Apr 12, 2005, at 7:10 AM, Dimitry Golubovsky wrote:
Hi,
A program I am working on
On Apr 14, 2005, at 8:11 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
The device driver case seems like a more plausible objection to
me, but I'd
like to see an example there, too.
Perhaps Windows? I'd think Windows is chok full of device
drivers written in C++.
Here in Mac OS X land, many device drivers are writt
warning: initialization discards qualifiers from pointer target
type
This warning can not be disabled using -Wno-cast-qual
(or any other warning flags). Is it intentional ?
Otherwise I'll prepare patch.
Thanks,
-
Devang
const char *a( void )
{
return "abc";
}
int main( void )
{
From line_map comment at (libcpp/include/line-map.h)
/* Physical source file TO_FILE at line TO_LINE at column 0 is
represented
by the logical START_LOCATION. TO_LINE+L at column C is
represented by
START_LOCATION+(L*(1<
What happens when column number is >= 128 ? This is PR 20907.
a
On Apr 18, 2005, at 11:54 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
On Apr 18, 2005, at 9:55 AM, Devang Patel wrote:
From line_map comment at (libcpp/include/line-map.h)
/* Physical source file TO_FILE at line TO_LINE at column 0 is
represented
by the logical START_LOCATION. TO_LINE+L at column C is
On Apr 18, 2005, at 6:29 PM, James E Wilson wrote:
Devang Patel wrote:
warning: initialization discards qualifiers from pointer
target type
This warning can not be disabled using -Wno-cast-qual
(or any other warning flags). Is it intentional ?
It looks like we have been doing it this way
On Apr 18, 2005, at 9:22 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
Though of course, this doesn't mean that we can't have an option to
control it. -Wno-cast-qual doesn't seem like the right choice, as
there is no user cast here. Maybe something like -Wno-discard-
qual, where -Wdiscard-qual is the default.
I no
On Apr 19, 2005, at 11:51 AM, James E Wilson wrote:
Devang Patel wrote:
On Apr 18, 2005, at 6:29 PM, James E Wilson wrote:
I notice that these are pedwarns,
In that case, we can enable it only when -pedantic is used (like
many pedwarns) ?
Consider this small modification to your testcase.
const
On Apr 26, 2005, at 5:55 PM, James E Wilson wrote:
Devang Patel wrote:
* dbxout.c (dbxout_type): Emit attribute vector.
You are setting have_used_extensions without first checking
use_gnu_debug_info_extensions, which is wrong. If you look at the
code, you will see that this idiom is
On Apr 28, 2005, at 9:10 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
1. make bootstrap on a 2.4ghz p4 takes 90 minutes for me as of
yesterday.
2. Building XLC with (C,C++,Fortran) and a single backend takes
roughly
the same time as building GCC. And they aren't three staging, AFAIK.
"..ain't the same ballpark, it
On Apr 28, 2005, at 10:54 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 10:23 -0700, Devang Patel wrote:
On Apr 28, 2005, at 9:10 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
1. make bootstrap on a 2.4ghz p4 takes 90 minutes for me as of
yesterday.
2. Building XLC with (C,C++,Fortran) and a single backend takes
On May 4, 2005, at 11:49 PM, Dorit Naishlos wrote:
GCC 4.1 is going rather well thus far.
Technically, Stage 1 ended on April 25th, though I failed to announce
that. There are a few stage 1 tasks that have not made it in yet,
according to the Wiki:
# Autovectorization Enhancements
Items 1.4, 2.1,
On May 10, 2005, at 1:37 PM, Kazu Hirata wrote:
Now, what would be the right fix here? Something like this?
case GOTO_EXPR:
break;
Just remove handling of GOTO_EXPR here and in if_convertible_stmt_p().
-
Devang
On Jun 5, 2005, at 10:18 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Here are three bugs I'd really like to see fixed.
* 21528: SRA and/or aliasing problem.
* 21847: DCE over-eagerness.
* 20928: IA32 ICE.
* 19523: [4.0/4.1 Regression] DBX_USE_BINCL support broken in the C++
compiler
19523 is a nasty regr
On Jun 9, 2005, at 3:29 AM, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
Hello,
I have some questions about the use of check_vect() in the vectorizer
testsuite:
1) All the ifcvt tests (vect-ifcvt*) seem to require SSE2
capability to be
vectorized but they do not call check_vect(). Is this a bug? They
surely fail
On Jun 9, 2005, at 8:24 AM, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
So, the point is that you cannot select between compile-time/run-
time based
on a target triplet check, at least for this target. What do you
suggest?
All the other tests use check_vect() exactly for this reason, as
far as I
can see, so it l
On Jun 10, 2005, at 2:01 PM, Dorit Naishlos wrote:
Devang, is vect-dv-2.c a duplicate of vect-ifcvt-1.c or are they
both there
on purpose?
It is duplicate. I'll remove vect-dv-2.c tomorrow, unless I hear
otherwise.
-
Devang
On Jun 14, 2005, at 1:01 AM, Matthew Sachs wrote:
And that's why someone (possibly me, ideally someone with more
hardware to spare) should do runs against FSF mainline.
One thing to watch out is the APPLE LOCAL patches in back-end/code
gen area, particularly related to alignment and other
On Jul 1, 2005, at 8:51 AM, Paul Schlie wrote:
As in general it seems that as the compiler knows what it needs to
know to
enable ideal loop optimization, why not simply have it assert: if
it knew x,
then it could do y? For example, if given something like:
for (i = x; i < y; i++){ ... }
Our analysis suggests that reducing certain stabs info for C++ ctors/
dtors can lead to significant final size reduction without noticeable
change in quality of debugging (in STABS world, at least).
For example,
class Base1 {
public: int x;
Base1(int i) { x = i; }
int getx (void) { retu
On Jul 11, 2005, at 6:18 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 06:11:58PM -0700, Jason Molenda wrote:
Yeah, Devang didn't present what we're doing here on the debug side
too well. We're giving up a bit of information from within gdb --
it won't know what constructors and destr
C++ does not generate debug info for anonymous aggregates in cases
like :
class A
{
public:
typedef struct
{
int d;
} mystruct;
mystruct data;
};
This is because FE sets DECL_IGNORED_P bit. This causes debug info
generator to
skip debug info when invoked through r
On Jul 23, 2005, at 8:44 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Actually, I think the best fix would be just not to set
DECL_IGNORED_P in the first place, and let the debug-generators
sort it out.
OK. I'll see how dbxout reacts.
-
Devang
This was discussed as part of bugzilla PR/21828. I have filed PR 23190.
$ cat t.c
static int foo;
int bar;
int main(void)
{
foo += 3;
bar *= 5;
return 0;
}
$ xgcc -g -O2 -o t t.c
$ cat gdbcmds
b main
ptype foo
ptype bar
p foo
p bar
$ gdb --batch -x gdbcmds t
Reading symbols for shared
On Aug 2, 2005, at 12:10 AM, Dorit Naishlos wrote:
I was wondering if any addition work had been completed toward pragma
support for the autovectorization branch (see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg01560.html)?
I think Devang was planning to continue this work - I'm not sure
w
GCC routinely puts on the fly type description in other stabs. For
example,
006c - 00 0002 PSYM argv:p(0,2)=*(0,3)=*(0,4)=r(0,4);0;127;
Now when this PSYM stab is discarded by linker the useful type info
is lost. This happens a lot in -feliminate-unused-debug-symbols mode.
It happ
On Sep 16, 2005, at 3:23 AM, Geoffrey Keating wrote:
Devang Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I've now patch ready (based on apple-local-200502-branch) but it
requires few bug fixes in darwin GDB. My simple question is : Is
anybody interested in reviewing this GCC patch for ac
On Sep 22, 2005, at 2:32 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Sep 22, 2005 11:25 AM, Zdenek Dvorak
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
4. Other ideas?
Preserving the information about loops throughout the
optimizations, and
just keeping this information attached at the loop description
would by
far
wrote:
On Thu, 2005-09-22 at 18:49 -0700, Devang Patel wrote:
On Sep 22, 2005, at 2:32 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Sep 22, 2005 11:25 AM, Zdenek Dvorak
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
4. Other ideas?
Preserving the information about loops throughout the
optimizations,
On 10/7/05, Steve Ellcey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> In the meantime I would be interested in any opinions people have on
> what level we should be writing things out at. Generic? Gimple? RTL?
> (Just kidding on that last one.) Also any opinions on what format to
> write things out in
On 10/12/05, Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 10 October 2005 19:25, Steve Ellcey wrote:
>
> > Could we just have -fwrite-ipo create a '.o' file that contains the
> > intermediate representation (instead of being a real object file).
> >
> > Then when the linker is called it wou
I've never used subversion before but I have subversion book on my desk.
It's time to open it very first time!
You say that it is easier to manage multiple branches using
subversion. This is enough to get my vote in favor of this transition.
My question is - What's the plan regarding cvs respoist
On 11/7/05, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> I have generated an SVK repository to go with this. As anyone who's
> doing or done this themselves can attest, it takes a long time and a
> lot of RAM and a whole ton of I/O.
Yes, it takes very long time, few hours before I inte
On 11/8/05, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It will simply tell you you don't have access :)
However, it is rejecting local branch creation also.
---
$ svk ls /svkgcc/gcc/local_branches
Path /gcc/local_branches is not a versioned directory
bardoli:~ bardoli$ svk mkdir /svkgcc/gcc/loca
On 11/8/05, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Isn't this, creating local branches, is a local operation ?
>
> //gcc is a mirrored location. You have to create your branches outside
> of there; try /svkgcc/local-gcc in your example.
Yes, this works.
Thanks,
-
Devang
On 11/16/05, Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 November 2005 15:35, Dorit Naishlos wrote:
> > We'd like to suggest a few new tree-codes/optabs in order to express the
> > extraction and merging of elements from/to vectors.
>
> Watch out for tree code starvation:
>
> $ ~/d
On 11/19/05, Joseph S. Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Nov 2005, Chris Lattner wrote:
>
> > 1. The build system is taught about C++ code.
>
> With toplevel bootstrap this will bootstrap libstdc++ so that the compiler
> ends up linked with the new libstdc++ not the (in general
> ABI-in
> >
> > With our limited resources, we cannot really afford to go off on a
> > multi-year tangent nurturing and growing a new technology just to add
> > a
> > new feature.
> >
> What makes you think implementing LTO from scratch is different here?
I read entire thread (last msg, I read is from Mik
On 2/22/06, Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 22, 2006, at 10:24 AM, Ian S. Nelson wrote:
> > It looks like there are attributes to help optimize some functions
> > further but are there any to not optimize at all?
>
> In general, no; however, Dale did up a patch to control this sort o
On 2/22/06, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Just a note from the person who keeps tabs on a lot of stuff. There
> is already a project which is written or started to write to do this.
> See http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Function%20Level%20Control%20of%20Optimizations.
I did not know about
Hello,
On 3/13/06, Thomas Yeh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> I am trying to use the latest autovectorization gcc code to generate
> functionally correct SSE instructions, and I have the following questions:
>
> Where is the latest stable gcc version with autovector? (is this 4.1.
Tom Tromey wrote:
"Devang" == Devang Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Devang> This version removes internal radar numbers and replaces s/
Devang> DW_AT_APPLE.../DW_AT_GNU...
I read this. I'm not anywhere near an expert in dwarf or anything
related
Tom Tromey wrote:
* Why put the optimization diary into the object file?
Why not just have -Wdiary and print it along with all the warnings?
(I'm sure there's an answer to this, it would just be nice if it
were in the document...)
These are not warnings and they should not cause build f
Andrew Pinski wrote:
These are not warnings and they should not cause build failures
when -Werror is used, hence warnings are not suitable medium to
communicate this info.
There is a third type of diagnostic in GCC which gets not much
use at all. It is called note. It might be interestin
Andrew Pinski wrote:
Andrew Pinski wrote:
These are not warnings and they should not cause build failures
when -Werror is used, hence warnings are not suitable medium to
communicate this info.
There is a third type of diagnostic in GCC which gets not much
use at all. It is c
Is this what you want ?
yes :)
Thanks,
-
Devang
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 05:36:33PM -0700, Geoffrey Keating wrote:
I don't see how making it a string makes this different. Either your
new string will be a standard string or it won't. Either your new
number will be a standard number or it won't. If you want it
Tom Tromey wrote:
"Devang" == Devang Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Tom> * Why put the optimization diary into the object file?
[...]
Devang> 2) This info is consumed by other tools (e.g. IDE, performance
Devang> analyzer). It makes sense for a too
Tom Tromey wrote:
"Devang" == Devang Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
* DW_AT_GNU_OD_cmd - it seems strange for this to be defined in terms
of text highlighting. Why have a separate code here for "dead
code" instead of just marking a text region a
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Jun 6, 2006, at 9:49 PM, Devang Patel wrote:
We can allocate space in numbering for vendor extensions.
What happens when you compile two sources with two different compilers
and they
use the same number for vendor extension?
What happens when another compiler
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Jun 6, 2006, at 10:34 PM, Devang Patel wrote:
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Jun 6, 2006, at 9:49 PM, Devang Patel wrote:
We can allocate space in numbering for vendor extensions.
What happens when you compile two sources with two different
compilers and they
use the
Tom Tromey wrote:
Dan> It also has almost zero hope of working over multiple compiler versions,
Dan> being future proof in general, and not having other compiler vendors
Dan> fight over message number namespace.
The maintenance issue is a major one. This document definitely needs
to address thi
Tom Tromey wrote:
Devang> In the case of "dead code" we could use _msg. However, _cmd is
Devang> available to trigger some actions in tools that use this
Devang> information. If we let our imaginations run wild then for
Devang> example, lead developer towards __restrict documentation
Devang> (i.
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Jun 7, 2006, at 10:10 AM, Devang Patel wrote:
Is it constructive (and appropriate? but hey I'm DWARF newbie myself)
to declare
DWARF standard limited and full of mistakes ?
No, I am saying that dwarf2 is supposed to be stable and adding stuff
is not likely
Andrew Pinski wrote:
No, you said it has limitations and it is mistake to allow vendor
extensions in DWARF.
My exact words were:
Not my fault and not really related because we are creating a new standard and
don't want to repeat this mistake, messages don't have this issue.
I was not tryin
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 11:29:44AM -0700, Devang Patel wrote:
And string does not answer localization issue, however for numbers at least
there is one precedent to follow.
I think this discussion has gotten totally sidetracked.
I agree.
When I said
I was
Tom Tromey wrote:
"Devang" == Devang Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Devang> Since messages are represented using a number, how about using
Devang> one category bit to identify command message vs display message ?
Devang> Command message is a message
Dorit Nuzman wrote:
most of the links you listed are 4.2 projects that haven't been reviewed
(indeed, they also haven't been pinged very frequently - only about once a
month I think). these will be resubmitted relative to updated mainline (for
4.3 I guess).
Dan Berlin created patch queue so
>>I think this patch by Zdenek - vectorizing function calls - is related:
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg01655.html
>> (would need to be extended to cover this case).
Yes, extending Zdenek's patch to recognize built-in is a good idea.
However, in case of compiler inserted built-
[off-topic]
Andrew Pinski wrote:
Dan Berlin created patch queue so that we do not have to ping patches.
Actually it was created for a different reason.
>> From: Andrew Pinski
>> To: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
>> Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 21:18:39 -0400 (EDT)
>> Subject: patch p
Can these type casts (from uchar to schar and back) be cleaned away
by some pass before vectorization, or do we need to teach the vectorizer
to ignore such type casts?
This was considered as tree-combiner's responsibility. However, I do not
know what is the current state and plan of tree-combine
Hi,
On 9/16/06, Dorit Nuzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: .
so the stuff in tree-ssa-forwprop:eliminate_unnecessary_casts in
autovect-branch is supposed to go under this tree-combiner pass as well, or
do you plan to merge it to mainline some time?
tree-ssa-forwprop:eliminate_unncessary_casts
Would it be OK, if this warnings are disabled for system headers ?
Thanks,
-
Devang
--- c-decl.c.~1~2005-01-06 19:26:09.0 -0800
+++ c-decl.c2005-02-15 11:59:48.0 -0800
@@ -1169,11 +1169,15 @@ diagnose_mismatched_decls (tree newdecl,
*oldtypep = oldtype = tryt
On Feb 22, 2005, at 6:36 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Devang Patel wrote:
Would it be OK, if this warnings are disabled for system headers ?
What is the built-in function involved and what (and why) is the
different
system header type? Is this a case where a system reuses a
Also, returning a single object file restricts the possibilities.
The
design of WHOPR, as I understand it, permits creating several
different object files in parallel based on a fast analysis of which
code should be compiled together. When the linker supports
concurrent
linking, it will be
On Jun 4, 2008, at 6:09 PM, Nick Kledzik wrote:
On Jun 4, 2008, at 5:39 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Nick Kledzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Jun 4, 2008, at 5:00 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Nick Kledzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I don't claim our current implementation is bug free,
I can hand you more than the testcases i've given so far. There is
tons of code out there that would benefit from straight line
vectorization.
I'm interested in these test cases. Thanks!
In fact, we have some that gets written in loop form
right now just so it gets vectorized!
May be loop
91 matches
Mail list logo
