On Sep 5, 2005, at 12:09 AM, Noe Aljaz ITICMN wrote:
2. Define macro NO_TEMPLATE_INSTANTIATION during normal compilation
and
un-define it when g++ is called by collect2,
and making this accessible via some new compiler option (e.g. -
frepo2)?
Why would this be good?
Normal compiles instan
On Sep 6, 2005, at 6:16 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
wrong-code generation that was fixed.
Customers validate their app and are `happy' with the code
generation, so this appears to not be a real an issue. Failure to
compile their app to them feels slightly more real.
On Sep 7, 2005, at 8:58 AM, Michael Tegtmeyer wrote:
Actually, that was the real question, nothing more. I need to be
able to determine what member fields of an object passed to a
function are visible to that function during an optimization pass.
Ah, now we get to the the start of the real q
On Sep 7, 2005, at 12:36 AM, Noe Aljaz ITICMN wrote:
Maybe... I think the 'big_header', which is required by template
definitions, has a big impact here. And I find it hard to believe that
excluding a big chunk of code from compilation results in no speed-up.
Even when using precompiled headers,
On Sep 7, 2005, at 12:19 PM, Michael Tegtmeyer wrote:
This doesn't need to be that sophisticated.
So, the answer can be wrong and code generation won't be wrong? I
don't know what you mean by *could have been* accessed. I don't even
know what you mean by member.
So in this case, I do no
On Thursday, September 8, 2005, at 09:46 AM, Janis Johnson wrote:
In the hopes that it will help the discussion I ran regression hunts on
the two test cases. The first test:
struct foo {
friend class bar;
void screw (bar&);
};
is rejected starting with this 4.0 patch:
http://gc
On Sep 8, 2005, at 4:36 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
Should Objective-C++ be mentioned in the 4.1 changes?
Yes. We welcome your patch!
On Sep 12, 2005, at 8:32 AM, Daniel Towner wrote:
I would now like to formally contribute this port.
The way to do that is to send an email to gcc-patches, with the
port. :-) You can also volunteer to maintain the port at the same
time, if you so choose.
On Sep 13, 2005, at 12:23 PM, Rafael Espíndola wrote:
I have seen both in gcc. I have found that "type* variable" is
preferred in C++ code but I haven't found any guidelines for C code.
If you ask gcc, you find:
mrs $ grep 'int\* ' *.c | wc -l
4
mrs $ grep 'int \*' *.c | wc -l
369
On Sep 14, 2005, at 8:59 AM, Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
I've asked this question twice at gcc-help, but got no response.
On which platforms is the -fvisibility option supported?
autoconf will answer this question for you, please use it. Giving
you an answer strikes me as dangerous. If you
These types of rules are not ^C safe:
cc1-checksum.c : cc1-dummy$(exeext) build/genchecksum$(build_exeext)
build/genchecksum$(build_exeext) cc1-dummy$(exeext) > $@
It is a general property that builds are ^C safe, the above changes
retard that feature.
If you output to a temp file, a
On Sep 14, 2005, at 11:55 PM, Geoffrey Keating wrote:
So, I think this is safe.
My build system (GNU make 3.80 on darwin) disagrees with your theory,
I saw two zero length files, created from one -j2 build interrupted
with a normal ^C. I usually never so interrupt builds, so the
probabil
a joke lurking here.
We are confounded as to why you would want to tell a users to specify a
flag that is the default. After reading to the end of your email, I
now understand your question better.
> As Mike says,
>> If you tell us what the real question is, maybe we can answer that
On Saturday, September 17, 2005, at 06:41 AM, shreyas krishnan wrote:
I am trying to insert code which before pointer dereferences
would check if the pointer dereference is valid.
Just like mudflap? If so, use those options from the manual.
On Saturday, September 17, 2005, at 10:13 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
On Saturday, September 17, 2005, at 06:41 AM, shreyas krishnan wrote:
I am trying to insert code which before pointer dereferences
would check if the pointer dereference is valid.
Just like mudflap? If so, use those
On Sep 17, 2005, at 3:33 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
C++98 came before C99, so who diverged from whom?
You seem to not not how the C++ standard was made. In fact, it come
before C99, like it or not. The intention was that C++ would come up
with a follow on standard that tracked C99, in ne
On Sep 18, 2005, at 2:43 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
In fact, as far as I can recall, 4.0.2 will be the first
ever GCC release with zero testsuite FAILs across all
languages on s390-ibm-linux ...
[ rub eyes ]
[ head explodes ]
[ desperately trying to make sense of the world ]
You didn't test -
On Sep 19, 2005, at 11:07 PM, Hitha Nambiar wrote:
i am installing gcc-4.0.1 in mandrake (k ) linux.actually i want to
install apache server .for that gcc is neded.when i
i start configuring gcc it is showing a message like
configure:error:no acceptable cc found in $path
sir plz help me to com
On Sep 19, 2005, at 10:36 PM, N V Krishna wrote:
When I try to compile something like:
foo(){
int a[] = {1,2};
}
gcc is combining them into a double (DImode) and handling as such.
Is there a switch by which I can direct gcc not to do so? I am
using gcc 2.95.2.
Side note, we aren't g
On Wednesday, September 21, 2005, at 09:13 PM, Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
> Telling users to supply that flag is useless. It is the default.
It's advertised as the default, but the threads I cited in my last
post suggest
The only time that it would matter is when the command line has on it a
On Thursday, September 22, 2005, at 05:42 PM, Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
Looking into it further, I've found:
From Bugzilla Bug 23628:
> --- Additional Comment #9 From Mat Marcus 2005-08-29 20:44
[reply]
> Sorry, I was a bit sloppy--I didn't remove all intermediate layers
> from my test e
On Friday, September 23, 2005, at 08:31 AM, Andrew Morrow wrote:
If I look at the assembly listings in thunk32.s and visibility32.s I
see the same listing that defines __i686.get_pc_thunk.bx in both
files:
.section
.gnu.linkonce.t.__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx,"ax",@progbits
.globl __
On Sep 25, 2005, at 7:58 PM, Ben Elliston wrote:
make RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=nothrow-1.C" check-g++
dg.exp=eh\*.C is another one.
dg.exp=file1.C,file2.C I think was another spelling.
On Sep 26, 2005, at 12:08 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
I was missing the *back* slash. I guess it is actually
make RUNTESTFLAGS='dg.exp=eh\\*.C'
$ make RUNTESTFLAGS=dg.exp=eh\*.C check-g++
or
$ make RUNTESTFLAGS='dg.exp=eh*.C' check-g++
Once you get past local shell quoting, you're ok.
On Sep 26, 2005, at 5:25 PM, Humberto Rocha wrote:
I need know what DERIVED_FROM_P do and How use this...
What part of the comment:
/* Nonzero iff TYPE is derived from PARENT. Ignores accessibility and
ambiguity issues. */
#define DERIVED_FROM_P(PARENT, TYPE) \
was unclear? If you didn't
assignment? I
understand Asher still needs to send in the assignment forms
to go with his disclaimer from LLNL.
Asher is currently TRYING to get his assignment paperwork. Once
that gets to him do I have to get Lab Legal produce a NEW
origional disclaimer letters and send everything in again?
Mike
On Oct 1, 2005, at 4:41 AM, Brian Rose wrote:
I am an embedded software developer and I am interested in using
GCC as a
cross-compiler on the Cygwin/Windows platform. I would like to know
which lists I should subscribe to in order to discuss this effort.
There is not one. Each issue you may
On Oct 2, 2005, at 5:27 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
[~] g++ -Wall a.cpp
a.cpp: In function `int main()':
a.cpp:4: warning: suggest parentheses around assignment used as
truth value
And -Werror turns it into a hard error...
On Oct 6, 2005, at 2:44 AM, Michael Veksler wrote:
This is the wrong list for linker enhancements. You should look for
binutils mailing lists. However "collect2" which is part of gcc and is
called before the linker (for C++)- could also detect this and give
the same warning. I would bet that coll
On Oct 10, 2005, at 2:25 PM, Frans Englich wrote:
What makes me ask these questions, is that I have code which
(according to my
opinion) severely needs virtual inheritance(VI). The code VI would
affect is
not under my veto power, and the maintainers of that code have so
far given
as comment "
On Oct 12, 2005, at 7:40 AM, Jonathan Larmour wrote:
Volker Reichelt wrote:
Btw, I get no response for
ping gcc.gnu.org
Is this intended? Or does this also need fixing?
It is intentional.
?
mrs $ ping gcc.gnu.org
PING gcc.gnu.org (209.132.176.174): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 209.132.176.1
On Oct 12, 2005, at 2:20 PM, Thomas Costa wrote:
gcc doesn't have such a warning at present.
Yup.
Is this correct?
I suspect so.
What are the chances of adding such a warning?
Zero, unless someone else wants it or you file a bug report asking
for the enhancement. Be sure to explain
On Oct 11, 2005, at 7:42 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
So, Mike Stump said his update times with svn from toolchain.org
were a
little slow.
Let me know if it's still slow for you.
Ok, had a chance to upgrade my svn to 1.2.3, and time from gcc.gnu.org:
$ cd gcc
$ time svn update *.c
[ l
On Oct 12, 2005, at 5:55 PM, Marcin Dalecki wrote:
On 2005-10-12, at 04:42, Daniel Berlin wrote:
Checkouts will be about 30% slower with svn, just because it has to
write more data out to disk because of the working copy
Yes. Indeed. One suggestions comes immediately to my mind. Why
don't yo
On Oct 13, 2005, at 8:57 AM, Thomas Costa wrote:
I didn't want this totally tied to -Weffc++ unless there was also a
separate switch for turning it on/off because:
We support fine grained warnings now. So, this isn't a problem.
Just be sure to mention you want a fine grained flag, and that
On Oct 13, 2005, at 8:58 AM, Joe Buck wrote:
-Weffc++ is broken and should just die.
Or we can `modernize it' by removing those things we no longer agree
with, and document the bits of it that we don't like anymore in the
manual. Hopefully he'll release a new book with updated guidelines.
On Oct 13, 2005, at 11:46 AM, Thomas Costa wrote:
So can the existing set of warnings that -Weffc++ enables be broken
up into fine grained warnings quite easily?
Yes. M-x grep warn_ecpp in gcc/cp/*, then replace:
warning (0,
with
warning (OPT_Weffc_12,
and then arrange for
On Oct 8, 2005, at 5:47 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
Thus, i'm going to put an updated repo on gcc.gnu.org on Monday (i was
converting it
Could I request that:
svn ls svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/export/u0/gccsvn/gccrepo/branches | grep
-i apple
output a line or two (or five) before in a test repo be
On Oct 13, 2005, at 8:21 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
What exactly are all of the new libgcc versions created when
building
the current gcc cvs on MacOS X 10.4.
They allow targeting different OS versions with one compiler, from
the doc:
@item [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The earliest version of MacOS
On Oct 19, 2005, at 2:56 AM, François-Xavier Coudert wrote:
Or am I the only person to find that disk is expensive (or working
on his own hardware, maybe)?
A checkout costs US$0.50. This is around 2.6x more expensive than a
cvs checkout. Check around locally, maybe you can find `throwaways
On Oct 20, 2005, at 10:45 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
For the curious, my goal for 1.4 is to have it under 500 meg in
size, if
at all possible.
svn edit (hard link, then have edit break the link), and making use
of union filesystems might be two easy things to do that can reclaim
lots of spa
On Oct 20, 2005, at 2:45 AM, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
Note that I found it a real pain to have to install so much
dependency package
on my linux system, so I suspect building the whole dependency
packages under
non linux systems might be slghtly of a pain.
I'm on darwin, grabbed tarball, built
On Oct 21, 2005, at 8:05 AM, Ivan Novick wrote:
With the sun compiler, the declared buffer is pushed onto the stack
upon
entry into function foo and not only when it goes into scope.
Yup.
Do you know if gcc will use the stack for the buffer if it never
goes into scope?
Yes, it usually wi
svn tag inspection:
mrs $ time cvs log version.c | grep apple-gcc-52
real0m3.640s
user0m0.181s
sys 0m0.037s
mrs $ time svn ls svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/tags | grep -i apple-
gcc-52
real0m5.233s
user0m0.083s
sys 0m0.061s
Is there a better/faster way of doing this?
On Oct 21, 2005, at 4:11 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Shantonu Sen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Or "getconf _NPROCESSORS_ONLN" (the POSIX way).
On darwin:
$ getconf _NPROCESSORS_ONLN
undefined
:-(
On Oct 21, 2005, at 5:38 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
You'll also get a much faster time if you moved the apple tags into a
subdir (probably a second).
Once we're converted, I'd propose to `cleanup' all the tags. We can
svn rm the really old ones, logically group them and so on...
You must ha
On Oct 24, 2005, at 9:14 AM, Ranjit Mathew wrote:
I have a few queries on GGC, the GCC garbage collector,
and usage of GTY markers in GCC sources. I would be grateful
if someone could take some time out to answer these.
First off, several fields are marked "skip", though the
documents seem to
On Oct 24, 2005, at 5:52 PM, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
But then, copy-paste would no longer always work since spaces are
sometimes added at the end of some lines (depending on the terminal
and the context).
Please name such systems. We can then know to not use them, and can
document in the manu
On Oct 25, 2005, at 11:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
While looking at PR c++/24512, I have noticed that for
#pragma omp {,parallel }for loops we don't handle -fno-for-scope
Issue a sorry and don't worry about it? -fno-for-scope is for legacy
code for people that can't be bothered to spend a fe
On Oct 24, 2005, at 10:39 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
Emacs in an xterm, from time to time.
Yeah, I knew about that one, cutting and pasting from any full screen
program running in a terminal emulator tends to be wrong. Tab
characters are usually the first causalities, along with long
line
On Oct 25, 2005, at 12:50 AM, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
Uhm, I'm not sure how to explain this without being too pedantic.
Does this
sound clearer?
This tool tracks each individual change (fine-grained) and will never
reapply an already applied change.
I think that is a high level answer, and c
On Oct 24, 2005, at 9:43 PM, Ranjit Mathew wrote:
1. we want to reduce time spent in the GC,
Doesn't really help on time.
2. we know it doesn't matter for PCH, so we do it to
reduce the size of the PCH and its loading time,
No, doesn't reduce the size, nor the load time. We can only know
On Oct 25, 2005, at 1:31 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
So, you're saying you can find this mailing list, but not the compiler
that is being discussed here?
No, he is asking if it really does work, which isn't as obvious. :-)
After that, he might be asking for a pointer to a binary to bootstrap
On Oct 25, 2005, at 3:22 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
I don't think we should change it at all since it is one more thing
to break old gcc code like stuff in Linux kernel.
To get concrete, how many times does \ SP SP * NL occur in old/
current linux kernels?
On Oct 25, 2005, at 4:25 PM, Joe Buck wrote:
I'm having a hard time picturing source code that
a) exhibits different behavior because of this bug, and
b) is maintainable (remember, the behavior depends on the presence
of characters that are completely invisible to many tools).
Perhaps you
On Oct 25, 2005, at 4:44 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
People depending on this is not the correct thing do any ways as
there could be another compiler besides which GCC which does this.
Let's enumerate them, what other compilers do this besides gcc?
On Oct 25, 2005, at 5:11 PM, Joe Buck wrote:
I personally like the fact that gcc's behavior does not depend on
invisible characters
All other things being equal, this is a nice design goal. I like it
too. Should we break peoples otherwise portable code to have an
implementation defined b
On Oct 25, 2005, at 5:40 PM, Joe Buck wrote:
1) a C++ comment
But case 1 is the nasty one, as users think they can put anything
in a comment. A backslash at the end is likely to be an accident,
since just starting the next line with a // is easy enough.
Be interesting to see the results of
On Oct 25, 2005, at 6:45 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
Does that really matter?
gcc is free to ignore users, existing code, porting problems from
other platforms and other C implementations, if we so choose. I'm
not used to writing such factors off wholesale. I tend to think a
balance is bet
On Oct 25, 2005, at 6:43 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
In fact the removal of the warning for comment cases was that exact
case
so ...
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2001-04/msg00603.html
Curious, the backslash2.c testcase is now:
/* Test warnings for backslash-space-newline.
Source: Neil
On Oct 25, 2005, at 6:46 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
Hint, hint it was not an accident that this was done.
I am not unaware of the history. What we are addressing is, if this
was a mistake.
On Oct 25, 2005, at 6:50 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
but it is not portable code. That is my point.
I'm sorry, what word/phrase do you mean for code that compiles and
runs on a plethora of actual C++ implementations? Pretend I used
that word/phrase instead.
On Oct 25, 2005, at 9:33 PM, Joe Buck wrote:
Be interesting to see the results of a grep on a large software
base. Does anyone have ready access to, say a linux distro handy?
Of all the hits I know about, none of them were an accident.
You're forgetting something: GNU/Linux distros are built
On Oct 25, 2005, at 9:28 PM, Joe Buck wrote:
Are you really saying that someone is using ASCII line art in comments
that tweaks this behavior?
Yes, I'm sorry if previous message didn't make this clear.
On Oct 25, 2005, at 11:05 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
Why did Apple revert that patch, well because there was push back from
internal developers who did not want to fix their code. Why should
this case be any difference?
I'm sorry you don't understand the differences. In one, we have
every exp
On Oct 26, 2005, at 9:28 AM, Joe Buck wrote:
This is a case of unspecified behavior.
?
That's what we have standards for: so that compilers work the same way
for standard-conformant code.
But in this case, we are talking about the behavior when the
compiler is
given code with *unspecified
On Oct 26, 2005, at 9:39 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
I still am trying to figure out why this was even brought up if it
was only due to ASCII art, that seems silly.
sorry ("I find ascii line art silly"); ;-)
We could do that!
If we didn't have any customers or if we expected they wouldn't brin
On Oct 26, 2005, at 9:58 AM, Robert Dewar wrote:
No, conflicting "de facto" behaviors (certainly not standards), that
cannot all be resolved. In this case, we have to worry about past
gcc behavior and behavior of foreign compilers.
Yes. I've asked, how many lines exist that rely upon this, the
On Oct 27, 2005, at 12:06 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Unfortunately, GUI programs such as TextEdit seem not to know this,
Odd, I just created a file and saved it:
mrs $ od -c -x ~/Desktop/barfoo.c
000m i k e \n w a s \n h e r e \n
6d696b650a77
On Oct 27, 2005, at 3:48 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| // this is a continued comment \
| // but who cares, because this is a comment too
| % gcc -Wall -c foo.C
| foo.C:1:1: warning: multi-line comment
| Perhaps the thing to do is to fix -Wcomment to eliminate the noise,
| so it will be mor
On http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/SvnMerge
I changed:
$ svn switch svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-4.0-branch
to:
$ svn switch svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-4_0-branch
:-( Took me a while to figure out what was wrong. :-(
The error message is, uhm, well, unfortunate.
If t
On Oct 28, 2005, at 9:20 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
snip
[EMAIL PROTECTED] /gnu/HEAD> svn co svn+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/svn/gcc/
trunk
Enter passphrase for key '/home/dk/.ssh/id_rsa':
[ 40 minutes later, no response and still waiting ]
---
On Oct 29, 2005, at 10:19 PM, Paul Thomas wrote:
if mainline/head/gcc-4_1-branch is available from the svn repository.
When created, you will be able to find it with ls, and it will be
called:
branches/gcc-4_1-branch.
I'd like to think that we should rename all such tags, like so:
On Oct 30, 2005, at 10:56 AM, Paul Thomas wrote:
I will look forward to seeing it! The reason that I asked in the
first place is the responce to trying to update from trunk:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] gcc-svn]# svn up svn+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/svn/gcc/
trunk
svn: 'svn+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/svn/gc
On Oct 29, 2005, at 7:54 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
1. Apple tags should go in a subdirectory named "apple".
Hey, I already had that thought, I don't want to see all your tags in
my tags directory! :-)
Done.
2. All the old old-gcc tags should go in a subdirectory named "old-
gcc".
I'm no
On Oct 30, 2005, at 10:23 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
I'm not quite sure who can approve this, but I think probably I can.
So, I'll approve it, conditional on no objections for 72 hours.
Would be nice to have a general well established policy that everyone
can follow, baring other reasons for no
On Nov 2, 2005, at 12:31 AM, Softish soft wrote:
I'm wondering if it's possible to build a shared library with GCC.
Yes, see the documentation. gcc-help is a more appropriate list for
all your questions.
Use google to read up on what a shared library is and how they work,
and all the oth
This is the wrong list for such questions. In the future, please use
gcc-help, thanks.
On Nov 1, 2005, at 10:38 PM, Eric Fisher wrote:
When I compile such c codes as following,
int a=0x,i;
int sra[32]={0x,0x,0x,0x,
0x,0x,0x,
On Nov 2, 2005, at 2:35 AM, Martin Reinecke wrote:
Is this a bug in my local version of "install", or could it be
interpreted as acceptable behaviour?
I'd call it a bug. Free free to recraft your environment to not
feature that install. If it were a popular install, a check for it
could
On Nov 2, 2005, at 2:18 PM, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
I tried:
bash-2.05b$ svn diff Makefile.in svn+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/svn/
gcc/trunk/gcc/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
But that gives me an error message:
svn: Target lists to diff may not contain both working copy paths
and URLs
This works for us:
s
On Nov 2, 2005, at 7:45 PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
However, before coming up with a zillion suggestions about how to
make the syntax nicer, please do consider the idea that we did put
a lot of thought into the diff syntax, and that covering all the
uses and edge cases and is not easy.
Any sys
On Nov 3, 2005, at 11:15 AM, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
bash-2.05b$ svn diff --old svn+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/svn/gcc/
trunk/gcc --new gcc
/usr/bin/diff -up -F'^(' -u -L gcc/.cvsignore (.../svn+ssh://
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/svn/gcc/trunk/gcc) (revision 0) -L
gcc/.cvsignore (.../gcc) (revis
On Nov 7, 2005, at 3:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've looked at so many places that I'm thinking it won't have ways
to resolve
this problem. Then I remembered that exists this discussion list.
No, please forget everything you thought you knew about this list.
Try google, try gcc-help,
On Nov 7, 2005, at 3:19 PM, Jim Wilson wrote:
Pierre-Matthieu anglade wrote:
I'd like to contribute to the development of gfortran and for
that, it
appears that filling a copyright assignment form is mandatory. Can
someone tell me where to get this?
You can start with the form in
http:/
correct way to do this.
regards
Mike Lerwill
On Nov 11, 2005, at 8:18 AM, Ioannis E. Venetis wrote:
I sent this message about a week ago, but didn't get any response.
So, I try again.
Please don't. Imagine this list is about 100x more costly than
filing a bug report, even if the bug report is wrong.
If you want to discuss what a val
Anyone else seeing:
ld64 failed: bl out of range (57687405 max is +/-16M) from
___ieee754_pow in .libs/libgcj.lax/libfdlibm.a/e_pow.o to _L4
in .libs/libgcj.7.0.0.dylib
/usr/bin/libtool: internal link edit command failed
make[5]: *** [libgcj.la] Error 1
make[5]: Leaving directory `/Volumes/m
On Nov 11, 2005, at 4:15 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
I thought this was fixed by:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-11/msg00735.html
Thanks, I'm sure it was... (updating and rebuilding now)
On Nov 12, 2005, at 5:06 PM, Romain Failliot wrote:
Is it plan to add the D language in the ones that are supported by GCC
by default?
No plans I'm aware of, but, asking the D folks would be more
productive than asking us.
On Nov 12, 2005, at 11:43 PM, Steven Woody wrote:
how can i get see the runtime memory useage graph for my c++
program? this will
include stack memory and dynamic memory (heap). thanks.
This is an OS question, and gcc isn't an OS, so this is the wrong
place to ask. I usually use top, leaks
On Nov 14, 2005, at 1:31 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
The documentation of the asm keyword does not explicitly say that a
volatile asm statement may be duplicated by the compiler, but of
course it is to be expected in some cases (inlining, for example).
However, for consistency, it might be better t
On Nov 14, 2005, at 9:14 AM, H. J. Lu wrote:
Can we change it to something like
gcc (GCC) 4.1.0 20051113 (revision 106863) (experimental)
Doesn't work, unless you also have the branch name. Further, the
substitutions that svn can do, doesn't allow for the above, and they
don't want to `fi
On Nov 14, 2005, at 11:36 PM, David Daney wrote:
Perhaps not in general, but one unstated premise of this whole
thread is that for some GCC targets (most Unix like operating
systems) you *can* count on a SIGSEGV when you dereference a null
pointer.
Unless that null pointer points to an obj
On Nov 18, 2005, at 8:24 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
I'd like to have a look at the C++ bits before they go in, but I'll
not
be looking to make life difficult. :-)
There was one thing I saw that was bad, as I recall, but I didn't
mention it as I thought it'd be cleaned up on the branch. And n
On Nov 17, 2005, at 3:09 PM, Robert Dewar wrote:
I never like arguments which have loaded words like "lot" without
quantification. Just how long *is* spent in this step, is it really
significant?
as is 2-3% as I recall (Finder_FE C++) of total build time.
On Nov 17, 2005, at 6:13 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Also, please keep in mind that generating and then assembling debug
info takes a huge amount of I/O relative to code size. I'd expect
much
more than 1% saving the write-out and write-in on -g.
I'd hope that we can contribute code to elim
On Nov 17, 2005, at 6:33 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote:
When I arrived at Apple around 5 years ago, I was told of some recent
measurements that showed the assembler took around 5% of the time.
Yeah, it's been sped up actually.
ng this. Is it simply that they think a
GCC with LLVM merged in would be better and don't care for the FSF
politics of it all? Or is there some interest in using the LLVM IR as a
CPU abstraction for software distribution (as was talked about in the
context of autopackage on the LLVM list?).
thanks -mike
On Nov 22, 2005, at 7:52 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
3) A volatile load isn't moved across any store that may alias (though
I'd expect that to be volatile if there's a real risk of aliasning, so
maybe we could have another dimension in the 'may-alias' test here).
? Is this just a restatement o
On Nov 22, 2005, at 8:10 AM, Robert Dewar wrote:
I think this is a bad idea in practice, since volatile will be used
to describe memory mapped devices, and combining can completely
mess up the access.
Only if one missed a restriction.
401 - 500 of 1036 matches
Mail list logo
