Re: RFC: GCC 4.4 criteria - add Fortran as primary language?

David Daney wrote: Joe Buck wrote: Maybe there could be a "semi-primary" or "experimental primary" status; a feature could be treated as primary, but with the understanding that the requirement will be waived if it causes excessive delay. The "experimental" label could be dropped after a few su

Re: [RFC] Modeling the behavior of function calls

Diego Novillo wrote: We have been bouncing ideas for a new mechanism to describe the behavior of function calls so that optimizers can be more aggressive at call sites. Currently, GCC supports the notion of pure/impure, const/non-const, but that is not enough for various cases. Fortran support

Re: Better GCC diagnostics

Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: Again, my point is that even if GNAT has all these features already, GNAT should be interested in this since it means moving stuff out of libcpp which will allow to break that dependency. C/C++ could very well implement caret diagnostics and everything else within libcp

Re: Some thoughts about steerring commitee work

Vladimir N. Makarov wrote: > Eric Botcazou wrote: >>> Please, just look at those charts >>> >>> https://vmakarov.108.redhat.com/nonav/spec/comparison.html >>> >>> The compilation speed decrease without a performance improving (at least >>> for the default case) is really scary. >>> >> >> Right,

Re: $Revision$ in version string?

Hi, Uros Bizjak wrote: > Is there a way to add automatically updated SVN revision number to gcc > version string? Something similar to $Revision$ in RCS? Well, the problem with $Revision$ is that it only refects the revision of that single file. > I think it would be quite informative if during

Re: Fortran regressions on Cygwin_NT

Paul Thomas wrote: > FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/980310-3.f (internal compiler error) > FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/980310-3.f (test for excess errors) I get the same error on x86-64/openSUSE with "-m32 -O" with -m64 and without "-O" it works. FX reported it yesterday as PR 33074. > FAIL: gfortran.fortran-to

Re: Someone has caused regressions in gfortran (c_char_tests_red.f03, now PR33330)

Salut Dominique, moin Richard, hello all, (Answering Richard's question from PR0.) Dominique Dhumieres wrote: >> Btw, is it mandated by the fortran standard to pass a scalar as array >> reference? >> > Does anyone knows the answer? or should it be asked on comp.lang.fortran? > The sta

Polyhedron test: gas_dyn run-time performance regression compared with yesterday

This is using the Polyhedron Fortran test. http://www.polyhedron.co.uk/MFL6VW74649 Using several options, the gas_dyn test got much slower; however, with some options, the performance remained roughly the same. In terms of the geometric mean, it is a slowdown of around 1%. The run time of the othe

Fwd: [Announcing OpenMP 3.0 draft for public comment]

For those interested in OpenMP. Tobias -- Forwarded Message -- From: Meadows, Lawrence F Date: Sun Oct 21 19:12:10 PDT 2007 Subject: [Omp] Announcing OpenMP 3.0 draft for public comment 21 October 2007 The OpenMP ARB is pleased to announce the release of a draft of Version 3.0

Re: Patch manager dying for a week or two

Daniel Berlin wrote: > Patch manager will be dying for a week or two while i change hosting. > of course, if nobody is still using it, i can just kill it permanently. At least I use it almost always to make sure patches does not get forgotten; thus I regularly check http://dberlin.org/patches/pat

RFC: Update FSF (physical) mail address - in various files (COPYING, *.texi, ...)

Hi, the FSF is located in Free Software Foundation, 31 Milk Street, #960789, Boston, MA 02196 USA. Older GPL licenses contained that mail address ("51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA"), which is no longer valid. Therefore, the FSF updated their licenses to point only

<    1   2   3