This is hard to reproduce as it
> depends on how the OS is supplying memory, and it might depend on
> the "history" of the machine and the actual OS.
... and many Linux kernels deliberately randomize memory layout to
provide some protection from buffer overflow attacks.
Andrew.
remember). It seems that they thought the code was still
>>> buggy.
>>
>>
>> The ARC guys seem to have sneaked something in for their architecture:
>>
>>
>> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arc/kernel/unwind.c
>
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 12:18 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> -fstack-usage does not work when there are VLAs or alloca's. So there
>> is no way to figure that part out without analysis of the actual
>> assembly code.
>
> No, -fstack-usage always works, i.e. its output can always be relied upon;
> wh
ng the nop_expr either as it
should be using useless_type_conversion_p there.
Also in C there is no 32bit boolean types only a 1 bit one (which
fills a 1 byte field). So something else is going wrong.
Thanks,
Andrew
rts
>> .even
>> .globl _test6
>> _test6:
>> jsr _test4
>> move.l %d0,_d1
>> move.l %d1,_d1+4
>> jsr _test5
>> move.l %d0,_d2
>> move.l %d1,_d2+4
>> rts
>>
>> In t
On 02/02/2016 05:41 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> Everything is possible! Not sure how hard it would be, though. As
> said, GJC, the Java FE, was doing something similar sometime ago, but
> it has perhaps bit-rotted now.
It is doing something the other way around: bytecode to Gimple.
Andrew.
is a patch. OK for trunk?
>
> You have not explained why this actually is needed and only the FSF
> can agree to license changes.
In fact I think all linker plugins needs to be GPLv3 compatible
because other ld.bfd and ld.gold would have a license violation.
This is the same story as a GCC plugin too.
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> - David
dard which declares that the lifetime of an object begins with its
constructor, and thus any stores into the object performed by
placement new may be deleted.
Can someone please tell me Chapter and Verse in the standard, please?
Then I can close this one.
Thanks,
Andrew.
class type ... before the constructor
begins execution ... referring to any non-static member or base
class of the object results in undefined behavior
Thanks,
Andrew.
2015-06-16 17:23 GMT+03:00 Joseph Myers :
> On Mon, 15 Jun 2015, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
>> > results in asm redirection for log to __log_finite and final vector
>> > function name becomes _ZGVbN2v___log_finite.
>> >
>> > With point of view from C Li
onsistently
everywhere. Then we wouldn't need a warning, and there'd be
one fewer trap.
Andrew.
On 27/02/16 11:53, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 10:39:59AM +0000, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 26/02/16 21:28, Bradley Lucier wrote:
>>> Any advice on how to proceed? I'd be willing to write and test the few
>>> lines of code myself if I knew w
ges and evolves the result is only one place to worry
about for reading and writing... and as we progress (slowly) towards
uncoupling the middle/backend from the front ends, we'd have a single
well defined "front end" for gimple that accepts binary or text.
Andrew
On 03/09/2016 10:47 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 03/07/2016 11:33 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
So for testing specific passes, I'd much rather have an input format
for testing individual passes that:
* can be easily generated b
on arguments seems to mean: “make this
> volatile and subject to change outside of the compiler” rather than
> being a qualifier for its storage (which is a register).
No, arguments are not necessarily stored in registers: they're passed
in registers, but after function entry function they're just auto
variables and are stored wherever the compiler likes.
Andrew.
isting
> test cases (though of course I wasn't exactly sure what to look for).
What most folks do is have two .c files; one that includes the other.
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> For example, something like this if I wanted to compile the test case once
> with -Dfoo and once with -Dbar.
>
&
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Bill Seurer wrote:
> On 04/01/16 10:48, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 8:42 AM, Bill Seurer
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Is there some way using deja-gnu to have a single test case run multiple
>>> times usi
e best place to fix such
a problem.
So, if required please feel free to suggest improvements or other more
appropriate places to apply this fix.
Many thanks,
Andrew
diff --git a/gcc/emit-rtl.c b/gcc/emit-rtl.c
index 3041b9e..b20de6f 100644
--- a/gcc/emit-rtl.c
+++ b/gcc/emit-rtl.c
@@ -2
rd to track down all cases that generate invalid lo_sums, and therefore it
could
be easier to just perform the fixup in adjust_address_1.
Regards,
Andrew
It's going to be difficult. GCJ is no longer supported on recent
Red Hat systems. You'll have to download sources and follow the
build instructions at https://gcc.gnu.org/install/.
Andrew.
orary std::string that was bound to a const reference.
>
> And it only crashes when I pass -O2 or -O3 and the -fprofile-generate flags.
What is the return type of URLDatabaseReader_1::identifier() ?
Also does -fsanitize=undefined say anything about your code?
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> $ gc
;> mtest06
>>
>> The list is rough because some tests fail not every time.
>>
>> Tests abort01 and kill11 fail for lp64 too, so maybe there's
>> a reason unrelated to ilp32 itself.
>>
>> float_xxx tests fail because they call unwind() from signal co
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:30 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 8:37 PM, Zhangjian (Bamvor)
> wrote:
>> Hi, Yury
>>
>>
>> On 2016/4/6 6:44, Yury Norov wrote:
>>>
>>> There are about 20 failing tests of 782 in lite scenario.
&g
h a bug report only account too).
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> dw
>
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Many GCC tests for constexpr rely on static_assert to verify things
> work correctly. While testing some changes of my own, I was surprised
> to find the static_asserts pass even though my changes did not (see
> below). It took me a while to
or the reader, nothing to warn about.
Andrew.
d-sysroot instead of just
--with-sysroot.
I use the following for the candian cross:
--with-sysroot=/ --with-build-sysroot=${SYSROOT}
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> Cheers,
>
> Brett
choose to assume an implicit
int and continue to translate the program in order to support
existing source code that exploits this feature.
Given this, I do not understand why GCC does not treat implicit int as
a hard error.
Andrew.
ntax" } */
You say it is acceptable but then have a dg-warning on it.
Also I think the other place where we should accept basic asm is for
"nop" instructions. I have seen people use that heavily.
Note really I don't like the idea of deprecating basic asm at all.
Thanks,
Andrew
&
On 20/06/16 08:00, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> + /* Acceptable. */
> + asm (" "); /* { dg-warning "Deprecated: asm in function without
> extended syntax" } */
This is incorrect English. It should be
"Deprecated: asm without extended syntax in function"
b
On 20/06/16 14:50, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> If basic asm is deprecated, that means some time later it will be
> removed, at which time an asm without : can be used as extended asm
Not exactly: it'd be an asm with no inputs, no outputs, and no
clobbers i.e. no effects.
Andrew.
On 20/06/16 15:42, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 02:55:58PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 20/06/16 14:50, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>> If basic asm is deprecated, that means some time later it will be
>>> removed, at which time an asm without :
On 20/06/16 15:52, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 03:49:19PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 20/06/16 15:42, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 02:55:58PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>>> On 20/06/16 14:50, Segher Boessenkoo
dencies and therefore work only by accident.
There are some correct basic asms. For example,
asm("nop")
There are some others too, once we've made the change to have basic
asms clobber memory. These include syscalls which are implemented
by using named register variables.
Andrew.
Hi,
On 20/06/16 19:01, Michael Matz wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
>> On 20/06/16 18:36, Michael Matz wrote:
>>> I see zero gain by deprecating them and only churn. What would be the
>>> advantage again?
>>
>> Correctness.
>
Hi,
On 21/06/16 13:08, Michael Matz wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2016, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
>>> As said in the various threads about basic asms, all correctness
>>> problems can be solved by making GCC more conservative in handling
>>> them (or better said
nything else we can do to make basic asm
in a function a bit less of a time bomb.
Andrew.
On 22/06/16 09:59, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 06/20/2016 07:40 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 20/06/16 18:36, Michael Matz wrote:
>>> I see zero gain by deprecating them and only churn. What would be the
>>> advantage again?
>>
>> Correctness. It is very l
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
wrote:
> On 22/06/16 10:02, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>
>> On 06/21/2016 06:53 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>>
>>> Me too. I wonder if there's anything else we can do to make basic asm
>>> in a functio
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
wrote:
> On 22 June 2016 at 19:05, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
>> wrote:
>>> On 22/06/16 10:02, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>>> GCC could parse the asse
s (using movw/movt),
> however since we are placing the set in partition that has maximal
> references for it, number of external references should be overall
> reduced.
>
> Partitioning is gated by -flto-var-partition and enabled
> only for arm and aarch64.
Why only for arm an
roblems...
...and breaking everything.
Andrew.
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,
>>> I have attached a "quick and dirty" prototype patch (var-partit
y significant
> reduction in compile time and disk io.
>
> Is this a good idea?
Yes and no. Do we know if all ar support rcs now? Or is it just binutils's ar?
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> Here's the patchlet I used:
>
> -- >8 --
>
> diff --git a/Makefile.in b/Ma
. For such a support routine like vsinf I would expect it also needs
> a reduced clobber set to ensure that the caller's live SIMD registers don't
> need saving/restoring, such registers would normally be caller-saved. If the
> routine were to clobber all SIMD registers anywa
limited to 500k (if I read dejagnu code correctly).
Or can/should we split up float-cast-overflow-1.c instead?
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
ividual log files, the consolidated
>> log file does not have those; it looks like pointers).
>
> Hmm, there was a kernel bug a while back which had similar behavior. What
> kernel version are you running?
I am running with 4.2. Let me find the old email and see I should
include it in our tree (I thought we did).
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> jeff
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 07/20/2016 02:21 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 12:48:09PM +0530, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
>>>>>
>>
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 2:57 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 07/20/2016 03:09 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at
single-core cpu the function can be empty. Either that or you can
build your program with a -mcpu= option which names a recent x86
processor.
Andrew.
model of ARM it
is and GCC will generate the appropriate instruction. It's a DMB
instruction.
Andrew.
a,b) ditto.
unsigned __int128 poo(unsigned long a, unsigned long b) {
return (__int128)a * b;
}
unsigned __int128 bar(unsigned __int128 a, unsigned long b) {
return a + b;
}
Andrew.
would not even BE an
> "extension" since as I said,
> the standard already allows providing other sizes.)
Does your history tell you that sarcasm and abuse works as a way to
get people to do what you want?
Andrew.
9,
> 8,
> 7,
> 6,
> };
>
> /* find the element closest to elem */
> int main()
> {
> unsigned int elem = 0;
> unsigned int i = 0;
>
> while ((elem < numbers[i]) && (i < ARRAY_SIZE(numbers)))
>
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Vikram Mulukutla
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The program listed below seems to invoke optimization behavior that produces
>> different results pre 4.8 and 4.8+ versions of gcc. Usi
of changing the compiler or of slowing
it down for even a nanosecond to achieve spurious "consistency",
IMO.
Andrew.
range generator understands, we just thought it would be handy to
leverage the folder during the proof of concept stage.
Andrew
On 09/14/2016 03:29 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On September 14, 2016 6:39:14 PM GMT+02:00, Jeff Law wrote:
On 09/14/2016 08:08 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
range generator understands, we just thought it would be handy to
leverage the folder during the proof of concept stage.
It's also
er_set__Sysinit_begin;
const volatile rtems_sysinit_item *end = _Linker_set__Sysinit_end;
MAKEGCCNOTKNOWTHEADDRESS(cur);
MAKEGCCNOTKNOWTHEADDRESS(end);
You can think of better names if you want but this is the best way really.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> The nice thing with the "type
On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:33 AM, Bill Seurer wrote:
> parameter_handler.cc: In member function 'double
> ParameterHandler::get_double(const string&) const':
> parameter_handler.cc:777:28: error: ISO C++ forbids comparison between
> pointer and integer [-fpermissive]
>AssertThrow ((s.c_str()!='\
t;
> ^~~
> thread.cc:5:5: note: suggested alternative: ‘fread’
> std::thread tt;
> ^~~
> fread
I Just tested it with revision 241328 of GCC, it works ...
apinski@apinski-ss1:~/src/local4$ ./tools/bin/g++ t88.cc -std=c++11 -mabi=ilp32
apinski@apinski-ss1:~/src/lo
y (got aware of this by libffi issue #197). Who would be responsible
> now to update / review libffi patches, just the global reviewers, or should
> libffi be maintained by the libgo maintainers?
libffi has always been maintained by the appropriate back-end maintainers.
Andrew.
d by libgo, for much the same reason as it was used by
> libjava, so it needs to come from somewhere.
It has been very convenient for GCC port maintainers to be able to
commit their patches to the GCC tree.
Andrew.
)'
Basically, the code only works where HOST_WIDE_INT == size_t.
Andrew
void f (void *d, const void *s, signed char i)
> {
> if (i < -1 || 126 < i) i = -1;
> __builtin_memcpy (d, s, i);
> }
>
> I see the following in the output of -fdump-tree-vrp:
>
> prephitmp_11: ~[127, 18446744073709551614]
prephitmp_11 is an unsigned type as
from register having number as "0 mod
2^ceil(log2(N))"),
and "1+K" specifies the next registers in the group.
Is this syntax ok? How to implement it?
Any comments or proposals will be appreciated, thanks.
--
WBR,
Andrew
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Andrew Senkevich
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> new Intel instructions AVX512_4FMAPS and AVX512_4VNNIW introduce use
> of register groups.
>
> To support register groups feature in inline asm needed some extension
> with new constraints.
>
> Curren
2016-11-16 8:02 GMT+03:00 Andrew Pinski :
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Andrew Senkevich
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> new Intel instructions AVX512_4FMAPS and AVX512_4VNNIW introduce use
>> of register groups.
>>
>> To support register groups feature in in
version check
> configure: error:
> The following requested languages could not be built: java
> Supported languages are: c,ada,c,c++,fortran,go,jit,lto,objc,obj-c++
> [end configure output]
> Anyone have any ideas? Libjava is in there and everything. Do I need
> to have gcj installed prior to building gcj like I need GNAT?
What version of GCC? Is this trunk? If so java was removed a few months ago.
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> --
> Signed,
> Ethin D. Probst
27;s interesting. Can you explain what you mean by a specification-
driven way?
Andrew.
ict-aliasing is used.
`-fstrict-aliasing'
Allow the compiler to assume the strictest aliasing rules
applicable to the language being compiled. For C (and C++), this
activates optimizations based on the type of expressions.
I have appended a suggested patch to this message.
Andrew.
On 04/25/2014 01:01 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> I agree, -fstrict-aliasing has nothing to do with this. Sounds simply like
> a genuine bug (please open a bugzilla).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60965
Andrew.
On 04/25/2014 03:14 PM, Volker Simonis wrote:
> Could you therefore please re-categorize this as devirt bug.
It is an IPA bug. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60965
Andrew.
ned __builtin_unreachable is folded right away into a
> library call that will emit a message and then die.
In theory, yes. With this one, though, gcc 4.9-compiled binary just
crashed with a segv.
Andrew.
r3]@ zero_extendqisi2
> sxtbr3, r3
> cmpr3, #0
> cmpner1, r3
> bgt.L5
> ldrr0, [r0]
Does the patch series at located at:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-02/msg01407.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-02/msg01405.html
Fix thi
ab.c but I don't see
any which have more than 30 depth of parenthesis. The max level of {}
is 4 in that file too.
So this sounds like a bug in clang. Please report it to them.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>>
>> So, I tried to increase the number of nesting level as indicated
>>
surely. CSE would be absolutely determined to get rid of
all this redundant work. I guess it'd all have to be done very late
or we'd need a new node that CSE can't see through.
Would it be enough to mark all nodes that go into the vote as volatile?
I guess not: we wouldn't want to generate extra memory traffic.
Andrew.
rations. if that is the
> case, my question is, how do we just make this as spill register class
> so that we will replace ldr/str with equal number of fmov when it is
> possible.
I'm also seeing stuff like this:
=> 0x7fb72a0928 :
add x21, x4, x21, lsl #3
=> 0x7fb72a092c :
fmovw2, s8
=> 0x7fb72a0930 :
str w2, [x21,#88]
I guess GCC doesn't know how to store an SImode value in an FP register into
memory? This is 4.8.1.
Andrew.
,
and I'm sure that we don't want to parse an optional requires clause
as part of that parse tree. It allows constraints to come into the
language in too many places.
Andrew
s feature which you can use:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Processor-pipeline-description.html#index-data-bypass-3773
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> At first glance it seems that it will will break a few things.
> 1) The definition of dependencies cannot come from the simple ordering
On 05/16/2014 05:20 PM, Ian Bolton wrote:
>> On 05/16/2014 12:05 PM, Kugan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 16/05/14 20:40, pins...@gmail.com wrote:
> On May 16, 2014, at 3:23 AM, Kugan
>> wrote:
>
> I would like to know if there is anyway we can use registers from
> particular regi
On 05/19/2014 01:19 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 05/16/2014 05:20 PM, Ian Bolton wrote:
>>>> On 05/16/2014 12:05 PM, Kugan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 16/05/14 20:40,
>> bootstrap issue (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61315).
>
> Since my PR has been closed twice by Andrew Pinski (“it’s clang’s fault, bouh
> ouh”), I’d ask the maintainers to step in. Can we please provide a GCC that
> works for the default darwin setup? Or at least dr
(One thing I wish wouldn't be included in -ffast-math is
> -fcx-limited-range; the naive complex division algorithm can easily
> lead to comically poor results.)
Which is kinda interesting because the Google folks have been trying
to turn on -fcx-limited-range for C++ a few times now.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> --
> Janne Blomqvist
tree_to_uhwi to segfault. could be
fixed with something like this.. try it. I get
a.c: In function ‘clear_s1’:
a.c:9:6: error: size mismatch in argument 2 of ‘__atomic_store’
__atomic_store(s->i_name, NULL, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
Thoroughly untested of course :-)
Andrew
* c-commo
et away without the parameter types
being exact as long as they are all the right size... sinc all the
checking is in the front end :-)
Hope that helps.
Andrew
ison.
>
Can you remove debug_str and debug_info from this list as they only
change the file size and not the mapped in size?
Thanks,
Andrew
> Thanks,
> Martin
root as a
> command line option, "fixincluded" header could replace the actual
> header from the specified sysroot - that is the root-cause of certain
> problems.
>
> Should search in 'include-fixed' be disabled when sysroot command line
> option is specified?
>
> --Alexander
--
Thanks,
Andrew
On 18/07/14 08:30, Dennis Luehring wrote:
>int* array = (int*)&argv;
This looks like undefined behaviour. Don't you get a warning?
Andrew.
On 07/18/2014 09:40 AM, Dennis Luehring wrote:
> Am 18.07.2014 10:29, schrieb Andrew Haley:
>> On 18/07/14 08:30, Dennis Luehring wrote:
>>>int* array = (int*)&argv;
>>
>> This looks like undefined behaviour. Don't you get a warning?
>
> no warnin
See bug entry for more details: b.android.com/73728
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Andrew Hsieh wrote:
> Bionic headers prior to android-L (for L-preview) aren't changed
> except for bug fixes since last major update in android-9 (gingerbread
> era), the API level used to build
odes
> into unrelated forest, we can parallel it, is this way feasible?
I suspect it is, but would require a lot of re-engineering.
The GCC approach is to split source into compilation units
of reasonable size and to optimize at link time.
Andrew.
On 07/31/2014 11:25 AM, Gengyulei (Gengyl) wrote:
> How to explain it?
We can't. You haven't told us what is being parsed or even which
language it's written in. Note that GCC's parsing pass isn't simply
a parse: it has to build trees, which can be an expensive process.
Andrew.
lll be the types, then we'll see about the decls... trees
may never be fully removed, we'll see if that has any merit after types
and maybe decls are done...
Im on vacation so wont be able to respond for a couple of more weeks
after this.
Andrew
inter would be much
> appreciated.
default_options_table in opts.c.
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> Steve Ellcey
rom Ex2. Is this patch OK? Or maybe CSE
>> should be fixed in a different way? Or maybe partial substitution is OK?
>>
>> Main question: Are there any plans to fix/upgrade IRA?
>>
>> --Marat
>
>
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> 2014-07-30 Marat Zakirov
>
>
gt; source file.
>
> I prefer to modify the C compiler.
>
> Can you please explain the source file organisation of gcc?
Yes GCC uses a custom top-down parser for the C parser (and the C++
parser also).
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> Tomsy Paul,
> Research Scholar,
> School of Engg.,
> CUSAT, India.
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Jul 2014, Geert Bosch wrote:
>> Can we use the switch to 5.0, a supposedly stable C++11 ABI etc,
>> also as an excuse to finally configure for --with-sse2 by default
>> for 32-bit x86? Maybe then we can finally retire PR 323 and
e;
> + error_at (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (*node),
> + "section attributes are not supported for this target");
> + goto fail;
Why not move this to a different function and then do:
if (function(...))
set_decl_section_name (decl, TREE_STRING_POINTER (TR
t; effective solution to prevent spam is found. There is another spam
> attack going on where thousands of users are created automatically.
> Without some CAPTCHA or approval process, gcc bugzilla is sitting
> duck.
Also all accounts from the wowring.ru domain has been spam.
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> Uros.
1001 - 1100 of 3432 matches
Mail list logo
