On Nov 25, 2005, at 9:49 AM, Michael Garvin wrote:
I would like to jump in and start contributing,
Welcome aboard.
but I'm wondering if I need to create a designer account anywhere,
or join the project electronicly?
Things you need to do, file paper work if you want to contribute
anythin
On Nov 23, 2005, at 10:30 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
I'll keep an eye on the apple branch. Will gfortran work on the
branch?
I generally like to keep Java and Fortran working on it. For moments
in time, it can have various breakages, though, they tend to be
obvious/trivial to fix. For som
On Nov 28, 2005, at 3:00 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
Possibly, but I think the more interesting observation is listed in
parenthesis: Can a volatile access ever alias a non-volatile access?
Logic would suggest that a program is unpredictable if written in
such a
way that permits such aliases t
On Nov 28, 2005, at 3:13 AM, Robert Dewar wrote:
Possibly, but I think the more interesting observation is listed in
parenthesis: Can a volatile access ever alias a non-volatile access?
I think the answer is no, Certainly Ada has compile time rules
carefully written to make this impossible.
g
On Nov 28, 2005, at 9:18 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
What is GNU C if it is not well documented?
:-)
^L
Useful.
On Nov 28, 2005, at 9:18 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
While it is true that GCC is not just an Ada compiler but I think
we should
follow a sane set of rules for GNU C which might mean following
Ada's rules
for this case.
Because GNU C doesn't have rules carefully written to make this
impossib
On Nov 28, 2005, at 9:33 AM, Richard Kenner wrote:
And where is the standard for the language known as "GNU C"?
You can obtain the ISO definition for C from ISO:
61)The intent of this list is to specify those circumstances
in which an object may or may not be aliased.
On Nov 28, 2005, at 9:41 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
Huh? they are not carefully written at all. This is why I said what
is GNU C? Again the language is not written out so it means anything.
So then clearly, since it means anything, we can change gcc to accept
pascal instead of C? Right? Thi
On Nov 28, 2005, at 9:29 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
BTW, I never did manage to find the patches you referred to in
your postings
from summer 2000. Googling for "mike stump volatile_ok" just kept
on finding
me the post where you were advising someone to find your patches by
searchin
On Nov 28, 2005, at 10:08 AM, Joe Buck wrote:
So then clearly, since it means anything, we can change gcc to accept
pascal instead of C? Right? This is absurd.
Mike, you wrote "GNU C", not "ISO C". There's no spec for the former.
He said we can do anything, this i
On Nov 28, 2005, at 11:05 AM, Robert Dewar wrote:
Right, I agree, I was answering whether this can ever be done
legitimately, and the answer is really no, it is undefined in
C
It is not.
On Nov 28, 2005, at 11:12 AM, Robert Dewar wrote:
Mike Stump wrote:
I disagree. For example, there is behavior mandated by the
Standard for C, such as this, that, reasonably, I think we have
to follow. You can argue that we don't have to follow the
standard but I'm not jus
On Nov 28, 2005, at 10:55 AM, Richard Kenner wrote:
It's not that simple and I suspect you know it.
Yes, this is all fine and very well, but do you realize that Andrew
wanted to break gcc behavior as mandated by the ISO standard? This
is very, very simple. The answer is no. I'm not budgi
On Nov 28, 2005, at 10:42 AM, Kean Johnston wrote:
* gcc.dg/assign-warn-3.c: Ditto.
Why in the world do you imagine this should depend on -fpic?
And here is the case that fails (-fPIC). I have no idea why those
warnings are not being ejected when compiling with -fPIC. Perhaps I
discovere
On Nov 28, 2005, at 12:40 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
I was, there was no where in I was saying we should break ISO standard
The effect of following Ada's rules:
While it is true that GCC is not just an Ada compiler but I think
we should
follow a sane set of rules for GNU C which might mean fol
On Nov 28, 2005, at 4:38 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
we require people to run regression tests for correctness, but that
we don't really have anything equivalent for performance.
My feeling is that we should have such a suite. I'd favor a micro
style, where we are measuring clock cycles (on ma
On Nov 28, 2005, at 6:21 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
I've attached the work-in-progress so I don't have to get into
detail about what it does :-) except noting that you'll see in
gcc.sum something like:
PASS: csibe -O1 runtime zlib-1.1.4:minigzip not slower than best
PASS: csibe -O1 runtime zl
On Nov 28, 2005, at 8:41 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
runtime,-O1,zlib-1.1.4:minigzip,previous 0.32
Ah, ok, good. I'd eject the ,previous to the filename, and reorder
slightly, but, certainly that is trivial to do.
Can't be compared with each other
I suspect we're in agreement, though
On Nov 29, 2005, at 11:51 AM, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 17:55 -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
My feeling is that we should have such a suite. I'd favor a micro
style, where we are measuring clock cycles (on machines that can
expose them x86/v9), [...]
A while ago I look
On Nov 29, 2005, at 12:27 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
Ah, ok, good. I'd eject the ,previous to the filename, and reorder
slightly, but, certainly that is trivial to do.
Um, (typo?) not a filename, but a line from the file with raw
results, alternatively the baseline input. The "previous"
id
On Nov 30, 2005, at 7:49 AM, Gunther Nikl wrote:
There seem to be more conversion glichtes. I retrieved gcc-2_95-branch
from the svn repository and diffed it with my CVS checkout. The diff
contained lots of differences.
Many files had different CVS $Id strings.
I was told that this is harmless
On Nov 30, 2005, at 2:40 PM, pati (sent by Nabble.com) wrote:
I am trying to compile my code using gcc 3.3.2 provided with AMD
Au1550 development CD.
Wrong forum for this question.
$(LD) -$(ENDIAN) -T test.ld -G 0 $(OBJS) -o $(NAME).elf
Don't use ld to link, use gcc to link.
On Dec 4, 2005, at 3:09 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
I have noticed that there was a significant speed regression in the
c++ code generation between gcc 3.3 and gcc 4.0.x.
Gotta wonder if changing the inlining parameters would help you.
On Dec 5, 2005, at 9:53 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh right, what I really meant was 'char' instead of 'long'.
In fact I just took the type from the referenced article. Sorry for
that.
So am I right that the compiler should distinguish between char,
signed char
and unsigned char in the p
On Dec 5, 2005, at 2:33 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
Do you mean using -fno-threadsafe-statics or do you have any other
inlining changes in mind?
That option mentions the word inline 0 times, while interesting and
worthwhile to test, I did mean these (from the man page):
-finline-limit=n
an
On Dec 5, 2005, at 3:25 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
OBringing bit-fields into the matter is just confusing things since
you
can't have pointers to bit-fields, but anyway char is not in a
comma-separated set with signed char or unsigned char and for
DR#315 it
was proposed to say that whether ch
On Dec 6, 2005, at 4:35 PM, Andreas Killaitis wrote:
-finline-limit-10
This and wanting a small size are kinda incompatible. There might be
smaller values of n that will shrink the code, and yet still give you
the performance you seem to want.
On Dec 6, 2005, at 5:25 PM, Andreas Killaitis wrote:
Obviously I've been expressing me not very clear. I don't care for
code size (well, at least not soo much), speed is what counts, and
speed is what I get. I was just wondering why the code size has
increased with the new gcc version. An in
You don't need to also send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Dec 7, 2005, at 2:54 PM, JongMin Han wrote:
1. Process :
How does new Project about target or optimization create?
Roughly speaking,
You do up the legal paper work to assign copyright,
You write the code,
then you contribute it (mai
On Dec 8, 2005, at 8:05 AM, Paul Brook wrote:
1) Make long double == double.
Eventually the day will come when one want something bigger, then,
you have to break abi for this. We did this on darwin, and ick,
whatta pain. I think I prefer a hard error for even mentioning long
double, as
On Dec 8, 2005, at 7:24 AM, Paul Martinolich wrote:
running 'make' yields the following error:
# /Users/martinol/auto_v4.0/third/gcc-4.1-20051202/configure --
disable-multilib
I suspect you'll want to file a bug for this so we don't loose track
of it.
On Dec 14, 2005, at 9:30 AM, Olly Betts wrote:
It would be useful to at least note by the search box that it only
searches messages sent prior to May 2005.
:-( I think we should remove all traces of any search that doesn't
work. It doesn't help advanced people, and it doesn't help
beginne
On Dec 14, 2005, at 12:52 PM, Paul Martinolich wrote:
I have built gcc-4.1-20051209 successfully and while using it to
try to
compile Python-2.4.2, I get this error:
/Users/martinol/auto_v4.0/devel/powerpc-apple-darwin8.3.0/bin/gcc -
c -fno-strict-aliasing -Wno-long-double -no-cpp-precomp -mn
On Dec 14, 2005, at 3:31 PM, Andrija Radičević wrote:
I'm trying to port gcc and binutils to a new target and I hoped to
find
a brief procedure on that matter on the net, but was unsuccessful. OK,
the GCC internals is quite a resourceful document and one can learn a
lot by examining the source
On Dec 16, 2005, at 6:23 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
A simple summary would be very helpful in trying to figure out what i
want to do now.
I'm sure most of the functionality exists, i'm just not sure what it's
called anymore :)
A wiki page that has the mapping from the old style to the new style
On Dec 16, 2005, at 3:05 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
$subject - since a day now.
Thanks, fixed.
On Jun 20, 2005, at 2:41 PM, Bradley Lucier wrote:
I can't seem to build any 64-bit shared library on powerpc-apple-
darwin8.1.0, although I can now run the test suite more
effectively; see
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22110
and
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-06/m
On Dec 17, 2005, at 6:08 AM, FX Coudert wrote:
I'm trying to understand the gfortran failure large_real_kind_2.F90
on ppc-darwin7.9, which can be reduced to:
$ cat large_real_kind_2.F90
real(kind=16) :: x
real(8) :: y
x = 1
y = x
x = cos (x)
y = cos (y)
print *, x, y, y-x
end
On Dec 17, 2005, at 10:27 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Dec 18, 2005, at 1:13 AM, Geoff Keating wrote:
Yes; to do this right, GCC's builtins need to know about the
different names.
If you're interested in fixing this, I can tell you what to do...
I figured out how to fix it and will be posti
On Dec 19, 2005, at 2:56 PM, Jim Blandy wrote:
Subversion provides an "opt-in" version of keyword substitution, and
provides a $Revision$ keyword.
But it doesn't do what people really want it to by design. :-(
On Dec 18, 2005, at 2:17 PM, Kevin Andrew Kaploe wrote:
are they telling the truth?
Simple answer, Yes. The long answer is off-topic for this list.
A hint at the long answer lies in dependencies. If those are
precisely in sync, then there is no point at recompilation. If they
are out of
On Dec 19, 2005, at 5:34 PM, Jim Blandy wrote:
On 12/19/05, Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But it doesn't do what people really want it to by design. :-(
And that would be?
http://subversion.tigris.org/faq.html#version-value-in-source
I would like something, that
On Dec 22, 2005, at 1:54 AM, Liu Haibin wrote:
I'd like to add some source and header files into gcc. I think I
probably need to make some change in Makefile.in. But the Makefile.in
looks very complicated. Could anyone give some advice on this?
google("make tutorial"). After that, you can just
On Dec 22, 2005, at 5:28 AM, Piotr Wyderski wrote:
I am trying to compile my low-level library, which contains
several inline assembly functions. It doesn't work, because
the compiler (4.0.1) does not replace local labels from the
assembly code (i.e. "0:", "1:", etc.) with their machine-specific
On Dec 28, 2005, at 8:49 PM, Domagoj D wrote:
Can anyone explain me the following gcc/c-decl.c code (4.0.2, seems to
be unchanged in 4.2)?
What part was unclear?
#define I_SYMBOL_BINDING(node) \
(((struct lang_identifier *)
IDENTIFIER_NODE_CHECK(node))->symbol_binding)
Yes, each identifie
On Dec 28, 2005, at 11:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any options in converting assembly code to c using
gcc as u
convert c code to assmbly.
Yes, but they are all poor to very poor. see google("decompilers").
Anyway, this is off-topic for this list.
On Dec 29, 2005, at 12:38 AM, Domagoj D wrote:
Sorry, I didn't see that each identifier *is* a lang_identifier,
that's
a weird way to keep bindings. It's not that easy for someone new to
GCC
to get around the code. What was the design decision behind that hack
(instead of something like:
str
On Dec 29, 2005, at 8:37 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
As far as I can tell the -fobjc-exceptions flag is supposed to
work with the GNU runtime as of GCC 4.0. However, invoke.texi
still states that "Currently, this option is only available in
conjunction with the NeXT runtime on Mac OS X 10.3 and
On Dec 29, 2005, at 10:39 AM, Domagoj D wrote:
Also, not all identifiers in all languages have an ht_identifier,
again, for example, java doesn't.
Hmm... But tree_identifier in tree.h has an ht_identifier struct. So,
is gcc/tree.h C-specific?
Oops, uhm, I mean, just checking to make sure you'
On Dec 29, 2005, at 11:32 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
I believe, but I'm not sure, that GCC is using type puning not
guaranteed to work (except "common sense" from "obvious model".)
I think the C family of language standards should think about the
issue and clarify their exact intent... I kn
On Dec 29, 2005, at 11:45 AM, Leif Ekblad wrote:
However, now I still get unresolved externals related to C++
exception-handling (_Unwind_resume
and so on).
mrs $ nm libgcc_s.1.dylib | grep Unwind_Re
8c24 T __Unwind_Resume
mrs $ nm libgcc/unwind-dw2.o | grep Unwind_Res
24c0 T __Unwind
On Dec 29, 2005, at 12:16 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > I guess we just have to wait till GCC is miscompiled (probably by
| > itself) to see whether the Middle End would cite chapter and
verse :-)
I suspect that humor does not travel well through emails :-) Sorry.
As my 4 year old would
On Dec 29, 2005, at 1:01 PM, Leif Ekblad wrote:
OK, I found unwind-dw2.c in the GCC directory. I also found
the object files in the linux host directory, but not in the RDOS
cross
compilation directory. I cannot run the GCC configuration process
natively on RDOS (yet), so I must somehow build
On Dec 29, 2005, at 1:25 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
I was actually referring to this case
This is well defined, save for possibly the fact that 4 is written as
4 and not offsetof () and uncontested.
The case I think you're thinking of was upcasting; - offsetof(). It
was decided. The d
On Dec 29, 2005, at 2:20 PM, Domagoj D wrote:
In the case anybody cares about code verifiability... It's
exteremely hard
to automatically prove the correctness of the code that uses pointer
arithmetic and casts as in the example above.
It is but a couple of trivial rules that one should have
On Dec 31, 2005, at 10:51 AM, Paul Schlie wrote:
As although C/C++ define some expressions as having undefined
semantics;
I'd rather it be called --do-what-i-mean. :-)
Could you give us a hint at what all the semantics you would want to
change with this option? Are their any code bases th
On Jan 1, 2006, at 9:26 AM, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
I noted that when PIC is enabled (-fpic, Linux Intel) ebx is
reserved to global pointer. However LzmaDecode do not access any
global data and do not call other functions (no relocations at all)
so why not use ebx register?
This is a known
On Dec 31, 2005, at 9:26 PM, Paul Schlie wrote:
be able define NULL as being some value other than 0.
Do you have a specific chip in mind you want to do this for? Why
would you want to do this? How many users would benefit from having
done this?
- enable the specification of arithmetic
On Jan 1, 2006, at 9:57 AM, Paul Schlie wrote:
- x[y] = 0;
if (x[y]) y = y+1;
And how does this differ from the portable code in which x points to
volatile data? If none, what are the advantages in being able to
write non-portable code that leaves the volatile out over standard
conform
On Jan 3, 2006, at 11:54 AM, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
To stop the annoying VM randomization you need to turn on
the old style VM layout in the kernel. Grrr.
I believe detailed instructions on the ways to disable VM
randomization
in the GCC wiki would be a welcomed addition by many GCC hackers
On Jan 8, 2006, at 3:11 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So can you tell me more about your experience with the Microchip
18F, if
somebody is currently working on this device,
Nope, don't think so.
or if the memory model of the PIC18 is definitively a problem to
gcc porting ?
Weird chips mak
On Jan 9, 2006, at 7:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I actually want to do coverage analysis on bootloader code from
YAMON (used mostly on MIPS board). Obviously, I cannot invoke
'gcov' on bootloader code and thus the conundrum.
Don't see why not, just arrange to save it out to memory somepl
On Jan 13, 2006, at 5:01 PM, Richard Kenner wrote:
Steven Bosscher wrote:
... you can use --disable-bootstrap and do a regular make, or is
there
some reason why you can't do that?
I thought the point was that that option is temporary and will go
away.
Over my dead body. We will al
On Jan 9, 2006, at 10:46 AM, David Taylor wrote:
For a variety of reasons, we would like to be able to specify
individual compilation switches *within* individual files.
Dale added this to our gcc compiler, see the apple/trunk branch for
example, near APPLE LOCAL .* optimization pragmas lines
On Jan 17, 2006, at 1:19 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Someone's informed Richard Stallman that this (annoying) warning
will not be
enabled by default in GCC 4.1.
But, it currently seems to be. Should it be turned off before the
release?
The SC or Jim Wilson will know more than I.
If
On Jan 18, 2006, at 5:26 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
MRS and Eric Botcazou objected strongly against not being able to
build a 1-stage GCC with --disable-bootstrap. And that's never
going to happen.
I tend to like long term stability in who things are done, but I'm
not stuck in the mud, the
On Jan 18, 2006, at 12:22 PM, Eric Lemings wrote:
Right now the infrastructure for it isn't there, but someday
it will be. But how would you indicate to the debugger what
constituted "uninteresting" headers?
I figure the responsibility for this would probably reside more
with the compiler than
On Jan 18, 2006, at 9:41 AM, Perry Smith wrote:
In the course of doing my work last week to get exception handling
working in my device driver, I learned that the exception
processing code calls malloc during the exception. This seems weak
to me. It seems like one of the most critical time
.georgeshagov.com/twiki/tiki-index.php?page=Matrix
+Linking+-+Proxing)
Can't manage to read it, posting links I can't read is bad style.
Synchronization and other challenges.
Mike, do you have a copyright on that phrase: "there are certain
realities when
doing this, and its importa
On Oct 28, 2019, at 12:40 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> I'd really like to see us move to C++11 or beyond. Sadly, I don't think
> we have any good mechanism for making this kind of technical decision
> when there isn't consensus.
I'll just point out that we do have good mechanisms in place. Consensus
On Sep 14, 2015, at 3:37 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> Maybe GCC-6 can bump the required
>> dejagnu version to allow for getting rid of all these superfluous
>> load_gcc_lib? *blink* :)
> I'd support that as a direction.
>
> Certainly dropping the 2001 version from our website in favor of 1.5 (which
>
On Sep 15, 2015, at 1:04 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> Given we haven't updated the dejagnu reqs since ~2001, I think stepping
> forward would be appropriate and I'd support moving all the way to 1.5.3 with
> the expectation that we'll be on a cadence of no faster than 2 years going
> forward.
So, I a
On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Mike Stump writes:
>
>> The software presently works with 1.4.4 and there aren’t any changes
>> that require anything newer.
>
> SLES 12 has 1.4.4.
Would be nice to cover them as well, but their update schedule
On Sep 16, 2015, at 9:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan
wrote:
>
> Sorry about the obvious (possibly dumb) question.
> Can't we just import a copy of dejagnu each year and install it as part of
> the source tree?
TL;DR: No.
We could, and indeed, some people do engineering that way. We instead dep
On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:02 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
> Where Joseph said he'd wait some more.. I had thought I asked longer ago than
> that, time flies if one has fun.
>
> I'd just require 1.5.3 just to avoid the time needed by folks to workaround
> those silly ordering gotchas and lo
mming this list.
my account on gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla is "vap...@gentoo.org".
-mike
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On 02 Jan 2016 09:53, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Jan 2016, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > seeing as how i have commit access to the gcc tree, could i have
> > my bugzilla privs extended as well ? atm i only have normal ones
> > which means i only get to edit my own bugs
the raw message:
https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=x32-abi/IHmCJvigOEg/TyjZJYZ63DMJ
it's actually nicer than mailmain (i.e. sourceware) as it doesn't do all
the trivial content mangling (s/@/ at/g). it's not like e-mail scrapers
today can't reverse that easily.
> and the url through which you visit a post is not a
> reliable permanent link so linking to posts is hard.
every post has a "link" option to get a perm link. needing the location
in the URL bar be the perm link is a weak (dumb imo) requirement.
-mike
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On 15 Feb 2016 17:17, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Feb 15, 2016, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 15 Feb 2016 16:18, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> >> they need to allow google to execute javascript code on their
> >> machine.
>
> > complaining that the web interf
On Jul 25, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2016, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
>>> No, we want to have as little churn as possible in existing tests, the
>>> general policy is to add new tests (not just for OpenACC/OpenMP, but for
>>> all functionality).
>>
>> Hmm, that's so
On Sep 8, 2016, at 1:53 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> On Sun, 4 Sep 2016, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>
>>> It looks that different handling of _Complex char, _Complex short and
>>> _Complex float is there on purpose. Is (was?) there a limitation in a
On Dec 30, 2016, at 11:58 AM, Daniel Santos wrote:
>
> Still being pretty new to GCC and having never used dejagnu, expect or Tcl,
> I'm trying to determine how to best integrate my test program into GCC's test
> harness. I wrote this to help find breakages while working on optimizations
> fo
On Dec 31, 2016, at 11:18 AM, Daniel Santos wrote:
>
> The generated sources are 2MiB
Yeah, too big, better to have a generator.
> Also, I can't have the two generated .c files in the same translation unit
> (at least in their current form) because gcc's too smart with optimizations.
> :)
Yo
On Dec 31, 2016, at 2:13 PM, Daniel Santos wrote:
>
> Well I'm learning all sorts of new things; I wasn't aware that the testsuite
> was designed to run with other compilers! Does the Microsoft compiler
> support building functions using the System V ABI?
IDK. I kinda doubt it.
On Apr 22, 2014, at 12:48 PM, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
>
>>> While of course one hopes that there will be no issues with wide-int, a
>>> change of this size will have some pain no matter how well we have
>>> tested it. Having three reviewers will assure problems are resolved
>>> quickly.
>> Works f
I am seeing the below on wide-int. The go teststsuite violates one of the
principals of goo test suite hygiene, the names thought arbitrary, should be
stable. These names are not stable across differing build locations.
s,.*/testsuite/,,g is approximately what it needs. Thanks.
New tests t
On Feb 13, 2014, at 1:18 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> This patch tries to reduce that by providing an alternative single-script
> version.
> Python isn't yet required and I'm pretty sure this script needs 2.6
> or later.
> I'm also worried that the seek/tell stuff might not work on
> Windows.
On May 6, 2014, at 8:19 AM, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
> please hold off on committing patches for the next couple of hours as we have
> a very large merge to do.
> thanks.
All done… It is in.
So, I was wondering about patterns like:
(define_insn_and_split "*setcc_di_1"
[(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand" "=q")
(match_operator:DI 1 "ix86_comparison_operator"
[(reg FLAGS_REG) (const_int 0)]))]
"TARGET_64BIT && !TARGET_PARTIAL_REG_STALL"
"#"
"&& reload_c
On May 26, 2014, at 4:26 AM, FX wrote:
> Here’s a patch that removes all the casts on output operands in x86/x86_64
> code in longlong.h.
I’d love for someone to explain why the casts were there in the first place… I
like the idea of removing them.
On May 26, 2014, at 2:22 AM, FX wrote:
>> This causes GCC bootstrap to fail on Darwin systems (whose system compiler
>> is clang-based). Since PR 61146 was resolved as INVALID (but I’m not sure
>> it’s the right call, see below), I’ve filed a separate report for the
>> bootstrap issue (https://
Ping?
Or, I can ask, any objections? In https://gcc.gnu.org/PR61146 it is stated
that GMP removed the casts in 2005.
On May 26, 2014, at 4:26 AM, FX wrote:
>> So changing just 2 of them doesn't feel right to me…
>
> [Again, with the patch actually attached… sorry]
>
> Here’s a patch that rem
I'm trying to copy gcc's behavior with the -ffast-math compiler flag
into haskell's ghc compiler. The only documentation I can find about
it is at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html
I understand how floating point operations work and have come up with
a reasonable list of
> Though for the gory details and authoritative answers I suppose you'd
have to look into the source code.
Where would I find the code for this?
Right, but I've never taken a look at the gcc codebase. Where would I
start looking for the relevant files? Is there a general introduction
to the codebase anywhere that I should start with?
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 12:18
Gosh, https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html and
https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8/cxx0x_status.html seem to old and dated now.
First, the standard before last has been published. Second, at some point, it
can’t be experimental anymore. Would be nice if someone could update the
content. The part
On Sep 5, 2014, at 4:05 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Updating my GCC trunk working tree from r212389 (2014-07-09) to r214918
> (2014-09-04), I notice that (only) in libstdc++ testing, and only for the
> second multilib of »RUNTESTFLAGS='--target_board=unix\{,-m32\}'« (so, the
> 32-bit x86 one), a
On Sep 9, 2014, at 8:14 AM, VandeVondele Joost
wrote:
> Attached is a further revision of the patch, now dealing with check-c++.
So when last I played in this area, I wanted a command line tool that would
bin-pack from the command line. I would then grab the seconds per for each
.exp, and bin
On Sep 10, 2014, at 1:38 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> Perhaps this is a silly question, but has anyone tried going the whole
> way and not having buckets, going to an extremely fine-grained approach
No, we fear the overhead, but do not know what it is.
On Sep 10, 2014, at 2:23 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Seems file mkdir in tcl doesn't error on pre-existing directory,
shell mkdir will. :-)
501 - 600 of 1036 matches
Mail list logo
