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 of
thing from #pragma if you want to dust it off and adapt
On Feb 23, 2006, at 5:46 AM, Digvijoy Chatterjee wrote:
What is PR323 ,is it some page in the manual /or gcc info ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/PR323
On Feb 23, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Frank Cusack wrote:
#include
int CS;
$ g++ ll.cc
ll.cc:2: error: expected unqualified-id before numeric constant
It works correctly on Solaris/sparc. My system is amd64, using the
Sun gcc. /usr/include/sys/regset.h #define's CS on x86/amd64 only ...
hence the brok
On Feb 23, 2006, at 9:05 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
it seems to be slow at preprocessing C++ source.
This matters quite a bit when running distcc.
One way to mitigate this would be to use a precompiled header, and
use -fpch-preprocess with distcc and ship the .gch across instead.
This saves the
On Feb 24, 2006, at 2:08 AM, Nemanja Popov wrote:
Is it possible to workaround this problem in my port files.
Sounds like a bug, I'd recommend just finding and fixing the bug.
Can't imagine it is more than a line to fix.
Watch for TREE_USED, SYMBOL_REF_USED, mark_referenced,
mark_decl_re
On Feb 24, 2006, at 1:25 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
That's painful to set up, though (it requires changing the
application's
source to be effective, doesn't it?)
No. On darwin, it is a checkbox to turn distributed builds on, no
other change necessary.
distcc already adds -E as I recall, you ju
On Feb 24, 2006, at 1:57 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
On 2/24/06, Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Feb 24, 2006, at 1:25 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
That's painful to set up, though (it requires changing the
application's source to be effective, doesn't it?)
No.
:-) On darw
On Feb 26, 2006, at 11:46 PM, Pratik Mehta wrote:
I am looking for a C++ ABI implementation
This doesn't make any sense.
My need is only to demangle the symbol names that are
produced by gcc.
However, this makes perfect sense.
By searching the web, I came across libiberty and
libcwd, bu
On Mar 1, 2006, at 3:47 AM, HASSAN AL MOATASSIME wrote:
I have a problem with the compiler gcc 3.4.4.
With the gcc 3.2 compiler, i have no problem with the following
instruction :
creal(U0[i])=PartieReelle;
cimag(U0[i])=PartieImaginaire;
Now with the gcc 3.4.4 i
First, let me say this is the wrong list for how to program in C++,
comp.lang.c++ would be better, or even comp.lang.c would be better.
gcc-help would the a second choice.
On Mar 5, 2006, at 8:47 AM, Nieuwenhuizen, JK wrote:
cout << "Done";
This doesn't output anything immediately. E
On Mar 5, 2006, at 11:15 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
The string is a bit trickier, strncpy (newbuf, buf+30, 40); newbuf
[70] = 0;
[40] = 0; I meant of course.
On Mar 6, 2006, at 5:21 AM, Pierre Chatelier wrote:
This is ok to fix the source, but I do not understand why it is
normal behaviour that the foo() in b hides the one from a. They
have different prototypes.
That's just how C++ is designed/defined, any book on C++ should be
able to explain
On Mar 8, 2006, at 2:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When I try to compile certain downloaded tarballs (especially those
that
use the gtk+ libs) gcc passes "-mt" to cc1, which chokes with an
"illegal
option error" message. The gcc docs say that this option is for
the IA64
on HPUX. What ca
On Mar 10, 2006, at 8:09 AM, Nikolaos Kavvadias wrote:
how is it possible to emit regular register names (e.g. for the MIPS
to use $31 and not $ra) when producing assembly output (with
mips-elf-gcc -S)?
I want to just use the arithmetic names ($0 to $31).
Yes, just edit gcc/config/mips/* and pu
On Mar 10, 2006, at 7:15 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Mar 10, 2006, at 10:13 PM, Toon Moene wrote:
autogen -T ../../trunk/fixincludes/check.tpl ../../trunk/
fixincludes/inclhack.def
make[2]: autogen: Command not found
Maybe we should change this to be
autogen || true
so that we don't ge
On Mar 11, 2006, at 10:53 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Creating these separate modules seems somewhat pointless given the
core
is 80% of the total. Why not simplify things a bit and just
package it
all up together?
Just to put another idea on the table, we can require they grab the
full tar
On Mar 10, 2006, at 3:10 PM, Sandro Tolaini wrote:
I have done some work on sysv.S and now libffi compiles fine on OSX/
Intel. Unfortunately, I had to put some #ifdef __APPLE__ this file
because Apple ships an old cctools with as that doesn't understand
some directives. My patch works on the
off the dead-code from the object
files after compilation to avoid the complexity of figuring dependencies
at a source level, but I wondered if the idea resonated with any of the
experts here.
cheers,
Mike Mattie
On Mar 13, 2006, at 5:29 AM, Colm O' Flaherty wrote:
I've been thinking a bit more about this (no code yet: I was busy
trying to find and fix a bug in gpsim), and I'm still not sure what
the optimal development mode is.. by this, I mean.. "what should
the proposed PIC port of GCC produce"?
On Mar 13, 2006, at 12:16 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
PR/21195 is about inlining the SSE builtins. These are special
because, for example, you probably would prefer GDB to not step
into them, but just execute them.
:-) We have an APPLE LOCAL patch to remove the debug information
associated
Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>> "Mike" == Mike Mattie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Mike> Has anyone ever tried to build a scripting interface into the guts of
> Mike> GCC with something like SWIG ?
>
> I've heard of a couple efforts alon
On Mar 13, 2006, at 2:05 PM, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf wrote:
The appropriate place for such stuff is gcc@gcc.gnu.org
No, not really. gcc-help is more appropriate.
Am I the only one who gets those:
DOMElement.m:283: warning: pointer type mismatch in conditional
expression
I doubt it.
F
Daniel Berlin wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 16:25 -0700, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>>> "Mike" == Mike Mattie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Mike> Has anyone ever tried to build a scripting interface into the guts of
>> Mike> GCC with someth
In:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-01/msg02102.html
you add restrap unconditionally, and yet it was already defined
above, thus causing make to say:
mrs $ make
Makefile:13094: warning: overriding commands for target `restrap'
Makefile:12386: warning: ignoring old commands for target
On Mar 17, 2006, at 2:07 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
So, I think you should remove the dbl-64 code until this is
resolved, or at least prevent it
from being compiled by removing whatever Makefile bits compile it
:-( At the outside, I'd say that in 7 days it should not be in
mainline nor any r
On Mar 18, 2006, at 6:47 AM, jayaraj wrote:
I want to profile an application in linux. I used -pg option and
profiled the data with gprof. Here I am getting the resolution in
seconds only. but I wants in terms of milliseconds and microseconds.
can anybody help me. or any other options and tools a
On Mar 23, 2006, at 2:02 PM, Laura Tardivo wrote:
Hello, my name is Laura and I need to know where I could find or
download the
oldest version of de "C" compiler. I look forward to hearing from you.
You can find what we have in svn, see our web site. -r1 would be the
oldest bits we have, t
On Mar 24, 2006, at 1:49 AM, Piyush Garyali wrote:
I meant other than recompiling the code of course. I have some
binaries without the source code. does 3.2 support the old mangling
algorithm.
Sure, just re-implement the 2.95 abi in 3.2 if you think that is
better than re-implementing code th
On Mar 25, 2006, at 9:14 PM, Camm Maguire wrote:
Greetings! GCL is a lisp compiler system which outputs C code normally
compiled by gcc into an object, which is then loaded and relocated
into the running GCL image. In lisp, compiling is a very incremental
process, with many, often thousands of s
On Mar 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, Nicolas Roche wrote:
I just saw that I sent this email to the wrong mailing list. So I
reforward to gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Careful; on some systems name it _main. But on others, you don't
want _main.
Well it works even in that case as my test was done on Mingw wich
On Mar 25, 2006, at 4:08 AM, Gaius Mulley wrote:
What do you folks need me to do? Presumably bring gm2 up to the
latest gcc cvs with its regression test suite working etc?
Yup, basically, submit a patch against mainline that meets our
requirements and ask for approval.
Roughly, all isolat
On Mar 27, 2006, at 11:39 PM, mohanlal jangir wrote:
Why does gcc put initialized data in .data section and
uninitialized data in bss section? Does it provide any
optimization? Also, normally gcc initializes global data to zero
then what kinds of data go to .bass section? An example would be
On Mar 28, 2006, at 12:59 PM, sean yang wrote:
If we do a search of main function in gcc4..0.2/gcc directory, we
can find several.
I understand collect2.c-->collect2, main.c (wrapper of toplev.c) --
>cc1, gcov.c-->gcov. Can someone give a brief introduction what gen*
() is ued for? For example
On Mar 28, 2006, at 1:41 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
I do have one other issue to resolve in this legacy c code which I
am unclear on.
Wrong list. This list is for the development of gcc, not other
software.
warning: initialization makes integer from pointer without a cast
Yup.
...for the
On Mar 28, 2006, at 11:03 PM, Tianwei Sheng wrote:
I need the field_info to help in alias analysis. for example:
int *p = &pair.a;
int *q = &pair.b;
then if I can set length of "*p" to 4,ofset is '0' . for "*q" to
"8,4". also I know that p definitly points to pair.a and q points to
pair.b, then
On Mar 29, 2006, at 12:15 AM, Tianwei Sheng wrote:
but it's my be too aggressive. as you said, you mean "base,ofst"
rule is enough,
a more safe method is "base,ofst, lenght" rule.
Right. I didn't mean to exclude length, just that I didn't expound
on the idea, as I wanted to get the simple
On Mar 30, 2006, at 7:55 AM, Camm Maguire wrote:
Longer term, it would be nice to have someone from your camp
layout where the time is spent and what changes might be worth
while in gcc to make it more suitable for that type of work.
This would be interesting, how does one benchmark gcc per
On Apr 1, 2006, at 7:26 AM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
3. GPC would get much wider exposure. It would probably eventually
ship
along with the rest of gcc in OS distributions including *ahem*
MacOSX.
The GNU project doesn't set what is or becomes product for Apple.
Or, put another way, we
On Apr 3, 2006, at 6:34 AM, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
2) Adjusting gpc development model. In particular, gpc uses rather
short
feedback loop: new features are released (as alphas) when they
are ready.
This is possible because gpc uses stable backend, so that users are
exposed only to fro
On Apr 2, 2006, at 3:20 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
The fact is, that the GNU Pascal crew did not want integration with
gcc the last time this was discussed. GCC, the project, can not just
suck in every front end out there if the maintainers of that front end
do not want that.
Actually, it can i
On Apr 5, 2006, at 5:57 AM, Colm O' Flaherty wrote:
Theres an interesting discussion going on as to whether Microchip
Inc is allowed by the GPL
Wrong list. gnu.misc.discuss is the right list.
On Apr 6, 2006, at 11:52 PM, Ching-Hua Chang wrote:
Is there a flag in gcc that indicate that we are in the inline
assembly ?
inside_cw_asm_block, but only the APPLE branch has a notion of being
`inside'.
I suspect you'll need to use a paragraph to ask your question for us
to be able to
On Apr 9, 2006, at 3:39 AM, Aaron W. LaFramboise wrote:
Just as a reminder, even though the Microchip code is covered by
the GPL, code based on it won't be acceptable for inclusion into
FSF GCC unless you can get Microchip to sign a copyright
assignment, which seems unlikely.
Would seem to
On Apr 10, 2006, at 11:48 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Thoughts?
We don't want to open the flood gates to random recruiters for random
software, however, I never saw the harm in solicitations from gcc
contributors for people to work on gcc. If we were to relax the
current policy, we can have
On Apr 10, 2006, at 1:29 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
1. What do we do if people do advertise jobs that are not free
software
jobs
Ask them not to, ultimately the same thing we do with spammers. :-)
or not purely free software jobs?
If on the wiki, edit out all the parts that aren't and tell
On Apr 10, 2006, at 4:30 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
It seems like we're getting consensus around that approach, despite
the
initial sentiment in the other direction from Mike and Joe.
Mike, Joe, do either of you care to argue the point?
I'm fine with the status quo. I think comp
On Apr 12, 2006, at 10:34 PM, Ching-Hua Chang wrote:
We had ported gcc-3.4.2 to our own RISC, and meet a strange
case in optimization level 3 (-O3).
We don't have the resources to help with very old versions of gcc on
this list. I'd recommend upgrading to gcc-4.2. If it then works,
you ca
ods
in the headers?
Put simply, what does all this mean for ISVs? Inquiring minds want to know :)
thanks -mike
On Apr 17, 2006, at 2:53 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote:
I'd go further: you should not be trusting a compiler (gcc or any
other) to be correct in "mission critical" situations.
Or, to use the option that spits out the proof that the
transformation of the code that the compiler did was indeed va
Is there a remaining purpose for pmode?
From rs6000.c:
void
rs6000_initialize_trampoline (rtx addr, rtx fnaddr, rtx cxt)
{
enum machine_mode pmode = Pmode;
g some text editor to check it really is UTF-8.
thanks -mike
On Apr 27, 2006, at 10:46 AM, Qiuker wrote:
I'm trying to support Shared libraries on mcore. but it doesn't
support PIC. So, need I add PIC first?
Only if your shared library design requires it. Some don't. You
probably will need to.
Is there any info for adding it?
The usual referenc
On Apr 26, 2006, at 6:26 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
readelf -d foo.so | grep TEXTREL
Does anyone know if some mechanism like this is possible for Darwin
shared libraries?
A man page is a terrible thing to waste:
-segprot name max init (32-bit only)
Specifies the maximum and
On Apr 27, 2006, at 7:05 PM, Qiuker wrote:
Is there much difference from different PIC implement?
They all do exactly the same thing, allow code to be run at different
addresses, so they are all identical, or, yeah, they can be totally
different from just doing normal codegen and saving the
On Apr 28, 2006, at 3:18 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
Yes, but it's an even more terrible thing to wrap:
Welcome to format=flowed. :-( Apparently some companies think that
everyone uses an intelligent mail reader. I believe that if you read
it with just the right software, you'd see it as inte
On Apr 29, 2006, at 7:45 AM, Manfred von Willich wrote:
Any interested GCC maintainers/contributors:
I'd encourage you to work up a solid proposal for ISO/ANSI and
propose it there. Some of the issues you bring up have already been
discussed in that forum and decided, I'd doubt that they'd
On May 1, 2006, at 1:26 PM, David Desimone wrote:
I have a hex file that i want to read and then write to another
file and preserve the hex info.
Wrong list.
svn is giving me grief, I'm merging and getting:
mrs $ svn cp -r113703 svn+ssh://src.apple.com/svn/fsf-gcc/gcc/
branches/apple-local-200502-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/
bitreverse-10.C bitreverse-10.C
svn: Entry for 'bitreverse-10.C' exists (though the working file is
missing)
mrs $ svn add
On May 1, 2006, at 7:43 PM, Paul Brook wrote:
What exactly are you trying to achieve?
The first order operation is is a new fangled concept called a
merge. The second order operation is to dig out from under svn bugs
with additional commands to get the state of the working copy
correct,
On May 1, 2006, at 8:48 PM, Ben Elliston wrote:
It amazes me that svn can't do a merge.
That's patently inaccurate.
Ok, try this out:
mrs $ mkdir svn-repo
mrs $ svnadmin create svn-repo
mrs $ svn co file:///Volumes/mrs4/svn-repo svn
Checked out revision 0.
mrs $ cd svn
mrs $ svn mkdir trunk
On May 1, 2006, at 8:58 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On 5/2/06, Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It amazes me that svn can't do a merge.
Just because you can't do it, doesn't mean svn can't do it.
Let me know if you can reproduce what I see with your versi
On May 1, 2006, at 9:17 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
It amazes me that svn can't do a merge.
You obviously have not read the documentation nor browsed the GCC
wiki.
Doing merges with svn is amazingly simple.
I look forward to your answer I put to Ben.
On May 2, 2006, at 6:05 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
What happened to rev3?
I did a svn mkdir brnaches && svn mv brnaches branches, but didn't
want to fess up to it.
Also, with svn 1.4 dev (all i have on this machine)
Cool, fixed in 1.4 dev. Now I'm curious if it is fixed in 1.3.x. I
rea
On May 2, 2006, at 6:38 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
I even tried following your directions and it worked for me without
conflicts.
I had to replace 4:6 with 3:5 but other than that it worked.
And this was with 1.3.0.
Hum... :-( Thanks for the data point. Might just be me, with a
codegen bug
On May 2, 2006, at 4:23 AM, jacob navia wrote:
To get to the corresponding catch, the runtime should skip through
the intermediate frames in assembler generated by the JIT. We would
like to know how should be the interface with gcc to do this.
The C++ abi spec and dwarf specs are good backgr
On May 2, 2006, at 6:08 AM, Bill Cunningham wrote:
Everytime I compile gcc I see that libiberty is being compiled.
Is this
a needed library and if not how can I switch it off? I'm using
glibc-2.1 and
I'd like to figure out compiling 2.3 and I've done it before so I
just have
to remember
On May 3, 2006, at 4:03 PM, Perry Smith wrote:
Can a link be added in the g++ documentation to this page?
You mean as we've done on:
http://gcc.gnu.org/readings.html
under
The V3 multi-vendor standard C++ ABI is used in GCC releases 3.0
and above
and
DWARF Workgroup
? Yes, we c
On May 4, 2006, at 5:05 AM, jacob navia wrote:
Well, I searched for those and found some usage examples in the
source of Apple Darwin gcc code for the startup. But then... is
that current?
This question lacks any detail that would allow me to answer it.
With enough detail, I could.
ALL
On May 4, 2006, at 2:17 PM, Bill Cunningham wrote:
I used gcc-2.96 to compile gcc-3.4.6 core with the c++
libraries added.
It took almost if not two hours to compile and that was with these
options:
make CFLAGS='-O' LIBCFLAGS='-g -O2'
LIBCXXFLAGS='-g -O2 -fno-implicit-templates' boot
On May 4, 2006, at 2:45 PM, Gary Funck wrote:
I've been looking at how GCC 4.0 handles "volatile" internally,
and may have a question/two on that later, but in the meantime,
I noticed some interesting differences in generated code that I
thought were a bit unusual, and was wondering if someone he
On May 4, 2006, at 4:44 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
struct C : A, B { /* ... */ };
I am sorry to say that I don't understand the definition of struct C.
C is derived from A and B. Only valid of course in C++.
I'll entertain pointers to VLA/VM and [*] bugs for C, please send me
pointers to reports in bugzilla.
Thanks.
I know about http://gcc.gnu.org/PR25802
I also would like to know what people think the standard (c99) says
about:
void foo4(int o[*][4]) { }
void foo5(int o[4][*]) { }
void foo6(
On May 6, 2006, at 3:32 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
Function prototype scope is defined in 6.2.1#4.
I've fixed up most all the previously identified issues...
In gnu99:
void foo11(typeof (int (*)(int o[*])) i);
valid?
On May 8, 2006, at 2:30 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
void foo11(typeof (int (*)(int o[*])) i);
I think that's valid gnu99.
Speaking of typeof, should typeof (vla) follow the same rules as for
sizeof (vla)? vla, evaluate, otherwise, no eval.
On May 14, 2006, at 11:54 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
The other languages don't do that.
ObjC/ObjC++ kinda do :-( I have a dream, one day...
On May 15, 2006, at 8:56 AM, Igor Bukanov wrote:
Consider the following code that starting with GCC 4.1.0 generates
'dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules'
warning:
Yup. Kinda does seem a flaw in the C language. You could switch to C
++. :-)
~> cat test.c
str
On May 15, 2006, at 4:33 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was not able to find who is maintaining the GCC Wiki at
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/HomePage
I have found one strange problem and I would like to discuss it in
private.
Private, what's that?! :-) If you want, I'll entertain a discussion.
On May 15, 2006, at 7:08 PM, Eric Fisher wrote:
Anybody knows that if we can define a comment?
Wrong list. comp.lang.c or gcc-help is more appropriate.
Short answer, no, not really. Longer answer:
#define COMMENT(X)
This list isn't for these type of questions.
On May 15, 2006, at 9:31 PM, Bill Cunningham wrote:
Where's the simplest part of the source tree to learn from? GCC? Does
that directory contain the compiler simple?
No, gcc isn't simple, though, what you can learn from it is more
valuable, if you
On May 16, 2006, at 3:13 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
I wonder now if I should keep this as SH-specific code, or does it
make
sense to write this a bit more generic - i.e. a variable number of
constant ranges, configurable size of small cold blocks, and the
range
of branches selectable - a
On May 16, 2006, at 5:08 AM, Nikolaos Kavvadias wrote:
is basic block profiling being dropped out
Please use gcov instead. No, gcov isn't going away.
On May 16, 2006, at 10:44 AM, Nikolaos Kavvadias wrote:
Do you know if when building the gcc for cross (different) target
(e.g. sparc-elf-gcc) the gcov does get built as well?
It should.
I mean my intention is to use gcov for a cross target on a simulation
environment based on SystemC (http:
Ping? I think this fixes a current bootstrap problem. Looks safe
and reasonable to me.
On May 16, 2006, at 1:09 PM, H. J. Lu wrote:
Here is a patch to compile gcc-options.o from options.c.
2006-05-16 H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Makefile.in (GCC_OBJS): Replace options.o with g
On May 17, 2006, at 1:06 AM, Eric Fisher wrote:
Does gcc support Simple Chinese language for now? Is there anyone
working on this?
I think you'll want to talk with the GNU translation project, they do
all of this stuff, we just add whatever they do to gcc.
On May 19, 2006, at 6:57 AM, Christian Joensson wrote:
../../gcc/gcc/objc/objc-act.c:5573: warning: implicit declaration of
function 'default_conversion'
Update and build again... :-)
On May 19, 2006, at 12:01 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Mark Mitchell wrote on 05/19/06 14:54:
Yes, this test case is valid; the code is ill-formed GNU C, since the
machine in question know not have a register named "unknown
register".
On May 23, 2006, at 8:21 AM, Jon Smirl wrote:
Or am I just reinventing a variation on exception handling?
:-)
On May 23, 2006, at 6:01 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Our company had developed a new 32bit embedded processor many years
age,
now we had ported GCC4.X for it(c/c++), and we want add its GCC4.x
backend
to your GCC packages, can you tell me what should we do next?
First step, read our web si
On May 28, 2006, at 12:19 AM, Loren Wilton wrote:
I'm looking at the need to build a very comprehensive code
optimizer and
generator for a very strange (antique but still used mainframe)
machine.
Which machine out of curiosity?
On May 29, 2006, at 1:17 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
In building xplor-nih against the gcc trunk, I noticed that there
is a c++ related
regression
I'll let Andrew comment if it sounds like anything he's seen. I'd
recommend a binary search to narrow down the translation unit and the
compiler
On May 29, 2006, at 1:07 PM, sean yang wrote:
For example, I know to allocate a chunk of memory to hold BB
information is done by "ggc_alloc_cleared()". But after a function
analysis/optimization is done, the memory should be freed.
ggc_free (ptr);
can be used, but, if you use it, you hav
[ I wasn't going to answer this, because you've left out all the
details that would be required for me to answer it well, but since
you've asked me specifically to answer, I'll try. ]
On May 29, 2006, at 9:09 PM, sean yang wrote:
The first question is: If I want to find a BB that containing
On May 30, 2006, at 3:25 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
...and I get no hits suggesting it can't be a wrong visibility
problem.
I prefer the idea that it reduces the likelihood of such a problem. :-)
Is there some approach I can use to figure out if it is a throw across
a dylib or bundle boundary?
On May 30, 2006, at 9:14 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
I am able to suppress the aborts on the throw in xplor-nih when
built under gcc 4.2 if I link the main xplor program with g++ rather
than gcc. Should this be considered a regression from gcc 4.0/4.1?
Don't know, as we don't know what the bug is y
On May 31, 2006, at 5:57 PM, Ben Elliston wrote:
Don't we have a comparison script in the "contrib" subdirectory?
If that script does indeed work, then I'd like to distribute it with
DejaGnu.
Please. Yes, it does work and has been working just fine for the
past decade to decade and a half.
On May 31, 2006, at 11:13 AM, James Lemke wrote:
My current version is attached. If others find it useful I can
contribute it. Comments and suggestions are welcome.
Please do. I'd welcome it (and scripts to generate html, to track
known issues, to trim log files, to drive things and do on)
On Jun 1, 2006, at 1:45 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
The only problem I have with Mike's script is that it doesn't handle
runs with multiple multi-lib variants nicely.
Yeah, in the past, we drove the multilib pass from above as in
general we had to select different hardware for testing. I lik
On Jun 1, 2006, at 11:32 AM, Ron McCall wrote:
Does anyone happen to know if it is possible to link
(and run) C code compiled with a powerpc-eabi targeted
gcc with C code compiled with a powerpc-linux targeted
gcc?
This is a linker question, we don't do linkers here. In particular,
the reloc
On Jun 2, 2006, at 11:08 AM, James Lemke wrote:
I took a quick pass at implementing the comparisons in a more suitable
lanugage. Run time is now a few seconds on both platforms. About the
same as compare_tests on my old ibook/OSX and much faster on FC3.
Since Ben and I seem interested in this
On Jun 4, 2006, at 2:08 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On 6/4/06, Richard Sandiford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Even if it's not intended that way, your proposal is probably
going to
be interpreted at some stage as a way of punishing maintainers.
And what is wrong with that?
I have a different
701 - 800 of 1036 matches
Mail list logo
