? I
added statistics_counter_event to keep track of number of calls
inserted/used but not sure how to print them :/
I would be grateful for suggestions for improving the patch.
Thank you,
Prathamesh
2015-10-30 Prathamesh Kulkarni
Kugan Vivekanandarajah
* internal-fn.c (expand_DIVMOD): Ne
On 30 October 2015 at 15:57, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I have attached revamped version of Kugan's patch
>> (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-06/msg00100.html) for PR43721.
>> Test-case: htt
On 2 November 2015 at 13:20, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On 30 October 2015 at 15:57, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> I have attached revamped version of Kugan's patch
>>>
On 2 November 2015 at 18:31, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 2 November 2015 at 13:20, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>> > On 30 October 2015 at 15:57, Richard Biener
>> > wrote:
>> >> On F
On 4 November 2015 at 20:35, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 2 November 2015 at 18:31, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 2 November 2015 at 13:20, Prath
On 10 November 2015 at 20:11, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 4 November 2015 at 20:35, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >
>> > Btw, did you investigate code gen differences on x86_64/i586? That
>> > target expa
On 11 November 2015 at 16:03, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 10 November 2015 at 20:11, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 4 November 2015 at 20:35,
Hi,
I was having a look at PR69133.
It appears that with -flto-partition=none,
cgraph_node::get_untransformed_body ()
is called twice for node with asm_name _ZThn4_N11xercesc_3_11C5m_fn6ERKi.
c++filt says it is: non-virtual thunk to xercesc_3_1::C::m_fn6(int const&)
get_untransformed_body() calls
On 17 January 2016 at 14:56, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> Hi,
> I was having a look at PR69133.
> It appears that with -flto-partition=none,
> cgraph_node::get_untransformed_body ()
> is called twice for node with asm_name _ZThn4_N11xercesc_3_11C5m_fn6ERKi.
> c++filt says it is:
On 26 January 2016 at 00:45, Prasad Ghangal wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I would like to solve "Bug 17896 - The expression (a>0 & b>0) should
> give clearer warning message (-Wparentheses)"
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17896) but I am new to
> gcc internals.
>
> Can someone please guide me
On 11 November 2015 at 19:04, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 11 November 2015 at 16:03, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 10 November 2015 at 20:11
On 21 February 2016 at 12:32, Prasad Ghangal wrote:
> I was working on PR68425,
>
> my untested patch :
>
>
> diff --git a/trunk/gcc/c/c-typeck.c b/trunk/gcc/c/c-typeck.c
> --- a/trunk/gcc/c/c-typeck.c(revision 232768)
> +++ b/trunk/gcc/c/c-typeck.c(working copy)
> @@ -5856,7 +5856,7 @@
>
Hi Richard,
As discussed in private mail, this version of patch attempts to
increase alignment
of global struct decl if it contains an an array field(s) and array's
offset is a multiple of the alignment of vector type corresponding to
it's scalar type and recursively checks for nested structs.
eg:
On 22 February 2016 at 17:36, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Feb 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> Hi Richard,
>> As discussed in private mail, this version of patch attempts to
>> increase alignment
>> of global struct decl if it contains an an array field
On 23 February 2016 at 17:31, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 22 February 2016 at 17:36, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > On Mon, 22 Feb 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Richard,
>> >&g
On 23 February 2016 at 22:11, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 09:49:37PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.c b/gcc/tree-vectorizer.c
>> index 2b25b45..a6af535 100644
>> --- a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.c
>> +++ b/gcc/
On 5 March 2016 at 01:28, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> Tobias, Maxim, or anyone else,
>
> For the projects accepted in 2015, if you send me the relevant info
> (project title, student name, mentor name, a link to some webpage,
> blog, wiki or a mailing list post describing the project), I will tak
On 15 March 2016 at 20:46, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, 10 Mar 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>>> Then I'd like to be able to re-construct SSA without jumping through
>>> hoops (usually you can get close but if you require copie
;> them with the explicit exception syntax probably isn't particularly
>>> important.
>>>
>>>> *openmp functions like
>>>> main._omp_fn.0 (void * .omp_data_i)
>>>
>>> I'd think you'd want to change the duping of th
>> basic stuff working"
>> part to have all pieces of the project prototyped, including the pass manager
>> support. Otherwise there is no way to fully test part of the implementation.
>> I'd say modifying the gimple dumps can be done last as you can always writ
Hi,
I was trying to address first TODO from ipa-comdats.c (attached patch)
TODO: When symbol is used only by comdat symbols, but from different groups,
it would make sense to produce a new comdat group for it with anonymous name.
The patch introduces new lattice value ANON "between" COMDAT and BOT
Hi,
How to check if two symbols are from same source file during WPA ?
Is symbol1->lto_file_data == symbol2->lto_file_data true if symbol1
and symbol2 are from same
source files ? Would that be a sufficient condition or do I need to
check for something more ?
Thanks,
Prathamesh
On 12 April 2016 at 22:41, Richard Biener wrote:
> On April 12, 2016 3:47:19 PM GMT+02:00, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>>Hi,
>>How to check if two symbols are from same source file during WPA ?
>>Is symbol1->lto_file_data == symbol2->lto_file_data true if symbo
On 14 April 2016 at 13:56, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 12 April 2016 at 22:41, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > On April 12, 2016 3:47:19 PM GMT+02:00, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> > wrote:
>> >>Hi,
>> &g
On 23 February 2016 at 21:49, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On 23 February 2016 at 17:31, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>>
>>> On 22 February 2016 at 17:36, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> > On Mon, 22 Feb 2016, Pratha
On 6 May 2016 at 17:20, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 4 May 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 23 February 2016 at 21:49, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>> > On 23 February 2016 at 17:31, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, Pratha
ping https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2016-05/msg00120.html
Thanks,
Prathamesh
On 11 May 2016 at 15:39, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On 6 May 2016 at 17:20, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 May 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>>
>>> On 23 February 2016 at 21:49, Pratha
On 17 May 2016 at 18:36, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 11 May 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 6 May 2016 at 17:20, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >
>> > You can't simply use
>> >
>> > + offset = int_byte_position (field);
>> &g
On 18 May 2016 at 19:38, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 18 May 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 17 May 2016 at 18:36, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > On Wed, 11 May 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 6 May 2016 at 17:20, Richard Biener w
On 19 May 2016 at 13:19, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 19 May 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 18 May 2016 at 19:38, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > On Wed, 18 May 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 17 May 2016 at 18:36, Richard
On 30 May 2016 at 20:45, Prasad Ghangal wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As David suggested in his rtlfe patch,
> this patch recognizes __GIMPLE keyword and switches to
> c_parser_parse_gimple_body by providing -fgimple option.
>
>
> diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> index 4568cf6..
On 6 June 2016 at 15:49, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Prasad Ghangal
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch parses simple assignment statement
>>
>> int a;
>> void __GIMPLE foo()
>> {
>> a = 1;
>> }
>>
>> but it does not produce gimple dump. In debugging I found that
>> cf
On 18 June 2016 at 12:02, Prasad Ghangal wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I tried hacking pass manager to execute only given passes. For this I
> am adding new member as opt_pass *custom_pass_list to the function
> structure to store passes need to execute and providing the
> custom_pass_list to execute_pass_list
On 30 June 2016 at 17:10, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 9:13 PM, Prasad Ghangal
> wrote:
>> On 29 June 2016 at 22:15, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On June 29, 2016 6:20:29 PM GMT+02:00, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
>>>>On 18 Jun
Hi,
I have attached a "quick and dirty" prototype patch (var-partition-1.diff),
that attempts to partition variables to reduce number of
external references and to increase usage of section-anchors
to CSE address computation of global variables.
We could put a variable in a partition that has max
On 4 July 2016 at 13:51, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I have attached a "quick and dirty" prototype patch (var-partition-1.diff),
>> that attempts to partition variables to reduce number of
>
On 6 July 2016 at 22:25, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 5:00 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> On 4 July 2016 at 13:51, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>&g
> > wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > > On 6 July 2016 at 14:24, Richard Biener
>>>>> > > wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Prasad Ghangal
>>>>> > > wrote:
On 24 July 2016 at 21:26, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> I ran into a problem that C frontend (in function
> build_conditional_expr) creates expression like (C_MAYBE_CONST_EXPR
> (NULL, x + const)). The inner expression (and its operands) have
> unsigned int type. After that, the expression needs to b
Hi,
I am trying to write a WIP patch to warn for dead function calls,
and incidentally it caught the following dead call to gimple_bb() from
slsr_process_phi () in gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c:
if (SSA_NAME_IS_DEFAULT_DEF (arg))
arg_bb = single_succ (ENTRY_BLOCK_PTR_FOR_FN (cfun));
else
On 27 July 2016 at 00:20, Prasad Ghangal wrote:
> On 20 July 2016 at 18:28, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> On 20 July 2016 at 11:34, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Pra
On 29 July 2016 at 00:01, Prasad Ghangal wrote:
> On 27 July 2016 at 14:22, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> On 27 July 2016 at 00:20, Prasad Ghangal wrote:
>>>> On 20 July 2016 at 18:28, Richard Bi
Hi,
While implementing divmod transform:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-05/msg01757.html
I ran into an issue with optab_libfunc().
It appears optab_libfunc (sdivmod_optab, DImode) returns
a libfunc with name "__divmoddi4", even though such a libfunc
does not exist in libgcc. This happens
Hi Richard,
I was trying to have a look at PR35503.
The attached patch tries to warn when an argument is passed to a
restrict-qualified parameter
and the argument could alias with other argument.
For the following test-case:
int f2(int *restrict x, int *y);
void f(void)
{
int a;
f2 (&a, &a);
Hi,
There appears to be a redundant second assignmeent bb_copy = NULL in
free_copy_original_tables(). I suppose it should be
bb_original = NULL instead ?
I found this mentioned on a blog "Bugs found in gcc with help of PVS studio":
http://www.viva64.com/en/b/0425/#ID0EHCCK
Thanks,
Prathamesh
diff
On 2 September 2016 at 15:49, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> There appears to be a redundant second assignmeent bb_copy = NULL in
>> free_copy_original_tables(). I suppose it should be
>> bb_original = NULL instead
On 2 September 2016 at 14:49, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> There seems to be plenty of slots available on the 2nd track to
> schedule additional BOFs. So I'd gather if there is interest
> in discussing
>
> A) Unit testing (GIMPLE FE, RTL FE, the existing unit-testing),
> basically how people fe
Hi,
I was having a look at PR71636 and added the following pattern to match.pd:
x & ((1U << b) - 1) -> x & ~(~0U << b)
However the transform is useful only if the target supports "andnot"
instruction.
As pointed out by Marc in PR for -march=core2, lhs generates worse
code than rhs,
so we shouldn't
On 12 October 2016 at 13:09, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> Hi,
> I was having a look at PR71636 and added the following pattern to match.pd:
> x & ((1U << b) - 1) -> x & ~(~0U << b)
> However the transform is useful only if the target supports "andnot"
On 12 October 2016 at 14:43, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Oct 2016, Marc Glisse wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 12 Oct 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>>
>> > I was having a look at PR71636 and added the following pattern to match.pd:
>> > x & ((1U <&l
Hi,
I am getting the following error when bootstrapping trunk (tried with r241108)
on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu during stage-1:
../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/compatibility-thread-c++0x.cc:121:12:
error: ISO C++ forbids declaration of \u2018_Bind_simple_helper\u2019
with no type [-fpermissi
On 13 October 2016 at 23:12, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> Hi,
> I am getting the following error when bootstrapping trunk (tried with r241108)
> on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu during stage-1:
>
> ../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/compatibility-thread-c++0x.cc:121:12:
> erro
On 13 October 2016 at 13:22, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 12 October 2016 at 14:43, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 12 Oct 2016, Marc Glisse wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 12 Oct 2016, Prathames
On 17 October 2016 at 13:52, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Oct 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 13 October 2016 at 13:22, Marc Glisse wrote:
>> > On Thu, 13 Oct 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 12 October 2016 at 14:43, Richa
On 26 October 2016 at 11:23, Will Hawkins wrote:
> Hello everyone!
>
> My name is Will Hawkins and I am a longtime user of gcc and admirer of
> the project. I hope that this is the proper forum for the question I
> am going to ask. If it isn't, please accept my apology and ignore me.
>
> I am a re
/opt/notnfs/msebor/src/gcc/gcc-78622/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/execute.exp.
> ERROR: unmatched open brace in list
>
> ERROR: tcl error sourcing
> /opt/notnfs/msebor/src/gcc/gcc-78622/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/ieee.exp.
> ERROR: torture-init: torture_without_loops
Hi,
I observed a couple of similar ICE's with -fgimple for a function
having startwith.
eg:
void __GIMPLE (startwith ("ccp1")) foo ()
{
return;
}
Compiling with -fgimple -O works fine however removing -O causes the
following ICE:
foo.c:7:1: internal compiler error: in expand, at cgraphunit.c:2
Hi,
Thank-you for selecting me for GSoC 2014, I am looking forward to
working with GCC community. I am grateful to Richard Biener and Diego Novillo
for choosing to mentor me for this project. Unfortunately, I couldn't
reply last week because I am in the middle of university exams, I
apologize f
Hi,
There was a comment in parse_c_expr, mentioning to use obstack to
build c-code string. I have attached patch for the same.
OK to commit ?
* genmatch.c (parse_c_expr): Use obstack to build c code string.
Thanks and Regards,
Prathamesh
Index: gcc/genmatch.c
==
Hi,
I have a daft question to ask. I was looking through genmatch, I
couldn't figure out why is tree code class (TYPE) stringified in call
to add_operator () ?
#define DEFTREECODE (SYM, STRING, TYPE, NARGS) \
add_operator (SYM, #SYM, #TYPE, NARGS)
In add_operator() tcc (argument correspo
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:12 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On April 25, 2014 4:54:28 PM CEST, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>>Hi,
>>I have a daft question to ask. I was looking through genmatch, I
>>couldn't figure out why is tree code class (TYPE) stringif
Hi,
I have few questions regarding genmatch:
a) When simplification fails, we continue pattern matching with the next pattern
in the order they appear in match.pd. Is that necessary ?
Could we not simply return false from gimple_match_and_simplify if
simplification fails ?
b) How do we handle
Hi,
I was trying to write test-case for the pattern A + -B -> A - B
(currently written for only int type).
Is the test-case written correctly (attached) ?
a) I am not able to follow why 3 slashes are required here
in x_.\\\(D\\\) ? Why does x_.\(D\) not work ?
(I saw 3 slashes used in a testca
On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Prathamesh Kulkarni writes:
>
>> a) I am not able to follow why 3 slashes are required here
>> in x_.\\\(D\\\) ? Why does x_.\(D\) not work ?
>
> Two of the three backslashes are eaten by the tcl parser.
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Andreas Schwab
>> wrote:
>>> Prathamesh Kulkarni writes:
>>>
>>>> a) I am not able to f
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
>>&
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
>>&
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
>>&
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 4:00 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
Hi,
Unfortunately I shall need to take this week off, due to university exams,
which are up-to 27th May. I will start working from 28th on pattern
matching with decision tree, and try to cover up for the first week. I
am extremely sorry about this.
I thought I would be able to do both during exa
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:30 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>Unfortunately I shall need to take this week off, due to university exams,
>> which are up-to 27th May. I will start working from 28th on
I have few questions regarding genmatch:
a) Why is 4 hard-coded here: ?
in write_nary_simplifiers:
fprintf (f, " tree captures[4] = {};\n");
b) Should we add syntax for a symbol to denote multiple operators ?
For exampleim in simplify_rotate:
(X << CNT1) OP (X >> CNT2) with OP being +, |, ^
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 6:14 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> I have few questions regarding genmatch:
>>
>> a) Why is 4 hard-coded here: ?
>> in write_nary_simplifiers:
>> fprintf (f, " tre
On 6/11/14, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 1:57 PM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jun 10,
On 6/11/14, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On 6/11/14, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 1:57 PM, Richard B
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 4:09 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> On 6/11/14, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jun 11, 20
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > * Patterns requiring GENERIC support like cond_expr
>
Hi,
The attached patch attempts to generate commutative variants for
a given expression.
Example:
For the AST: (PLUS_EXPR (PLUS_EXPR @0 @1) @2),
the commutative variants are:
(PLUS_EXPR (PLUS_EXPR @0 @1 ) @2 )
(PLUS_EXPR (PLUS_EXPR @1 @0 ) @2 )
(PLUS_EXPR @2 (PLUS_EXPR @0 @1 ) )
(PLUS_EXPR @2
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 2:53 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> Hi,
> The attached patch attempts to generate commutative variants for
> a given expression.
>
> Example:
> For the AST: (PLUS_EXPR (PLUS_EXPR @0 @1) @2),
>
> the commutative variants are:
> (PLUS
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 3:02 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 2:53 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > The attached patch attempts to generate commutative variants for
> > a given expression.
> >
> > Example:
> >
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 3:02 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 2:53 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > The attached patch attempts to gene
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 5:58 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
Hi,
I have attempted to add syntax for symbol to denote multiple operators.
I tried it with few bogus patterns and it appears to work hopefully -:)
eg: (bogus pattern):
(for op in plus minus
(match_and_simplify
(op @0 @1)
(op @0 @0)))
generates following patterns:
(plus @0 @1) ->
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 8:29 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On 7/11/14, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 8:05 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>I have attempted to add syntax for symbol to denote multiple
>>> operators.
I was wondering if it was a good idea to implement
predicate on expressions ?
Sth like:
(match_and_simplify
(op (op2:predicate @0))
transform)
instead of:
(match_and_simplify
(op (op2@1 @0))
if (predicate (@1))
transform)
When predicate is simple as just being a macro/function,
we coul
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> I was wondering if it was a good idea to implement
>> predicate on expressions ?
>>
>> Sth like:
>> (match_and_simplify
>>
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 10:52 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
>&g
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> I was wondering if it was a good idea to implement
>>> predica
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 10:52 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
>>&
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:29 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
>>&
Hi,
This patch adds support for outer-if expressions.
Couple of issues:
a) Doesn't interop with for-pattern, since we don't replace identifier
in c-expr yet,
and this gets more complicated with addition of outer-if.
b) I removed ifexpr-locations for now. I am not sure where to output
if-expr l
Hi,
I was wondering if it would be a good idea to have the following syntax
for literals:
(type val) ?
type would be one of the tree-codes representing cst types like
INTEGER_CST, REAL_CST, etc.
eg:
(negate (integer_cst 3))
would be equivalent to the following:
(negate INTEGER_CST_P@0)
if (TR
I am having few issues replacing op in c_expr.
I thought of following possibilities:
a) create a new vec vector new_code.
for each token in code
{
if token.type is not CPP_NAME
new_code.safe_push (token);
else
{
cpp_token new_token =
??? create new token of
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>Sorry to ask a stupid question, but I am having issues writing patterns
>> involving casts. I am trying to write patterns from simplify
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>Sorry to ask a stupid question, but I am having issues writin
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>Sorry to ask a stupid question, but I am having issues wri
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 6:44 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
&
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>Sorry to ask a stupid question, but I am having issues writin
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:49 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
&g
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:49 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
>>&
1 - 100 of 248 matches
Mail list logo
