I'm new to the gcc community. I've been asked to modify gcc to allow it
to inject various kinds of instrumentation during compilation. My current
plan is to capture the tree being generated by the front end, augment it,
and pass it on to the back end. It seems like a reasonable approach but I
ca
we're
suddenly seeing a rash of such problems. Jason, as you made this
change, do you have any comments on the proposal?
I don't think my patch changed the handling of class typedefs; certainly
my intent was only to change how we handle
class __attribute ((foo)) C
Previously we r
just that it was an incomplete list. In
removing the incomplete list I also removed the useful separation.
Jason
The SC has appointed Jakub Jelinek as an additional maintainer of the
GNU OpenMP library (libgomp).
Jakub, please update MAINTAINERS accordingly.
Thanks!
Jason
I'm working on a project where every so often one of our games comes
back and we pull the ram off the game for saving, and sometimes for
anaylisis. Currently the only varibles in ram that we can physically
look at are the static members. The information that we would love to
get to is the heap m
I''l give that a shot. Thanks
On 1/25/07, Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 25, 2007, at 2:11 PM, Jason Erickson wrote:
> I'm working on a project where every so often one of our games comes
> back and we pull the ram off the game for saving, an
that can take a .h file and output a nice easy
to parse listing that can give me type, name, and structure it belongs
too? I tried Etags/Ctags, but that doesnt give me type. Any other
ideas?
On 1/25/07, Jason Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I''l give that a shot. Thanks
Mark Mitchell wrote:
* PR 27945 (Merill)
* PR 30590 (Guenther, Merill)
I'll get on these.
Jason
e front end use build_address rather
than build1 (ADDR_EXPR) to avoid this issue.
Jason
e FEs, wouldn't we be better off doing this in build1_stat()?
+ if (DECL_P (node))
+ TREE_ADDRESSABLE (node) = 1;
I'd rather fix mark_addressable and use the langhook.
Jason
d add that wouldn't
also be provided by -Wexception-specs.
Jason
e included.
Jason
h:
>>
>> /asm/atomic.h:33: warning: read-write constraint does not allow a register
>>
>> So is the warning wrong?
>
> Yes, the warning is wrong, and the text in the manual about '+' is also
> nonsense. Support for '+' is asms was specificall
On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 11:49:05 -0800, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IMO, if these are C++-only, it's relatively easy to deprecate these
> extension -- but I'd like to hear from Jason and Nathan, and also the user
> community before we do that. Of all the exten
Using binutils 2.15.96 and gcc 3.4.3... where have I gone wrong?
-Jason
gcc -c -g -DENABLE_CHECKING -DENABLE_ASSERT_CHECKING -DIN_GCC -W -Wall
-Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes
-Wold-style-definition -Wno-error -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DGENERATOR_FILE-I.
-Ibuild -I
insn-conditions.c:97: error: `flag_unsafe_math_optimizations' undeclared
here
Using binutils 2.15.96 and gcc 3.4.3... where have I gone wrong?
Of course if I would have searched the archives first, I would know
that I need a new gawk most likely. [argh]
-Jason
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 11:29:09 -0800, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 19317 C++ problems with temporary return values
>
> This patch breaks Qt builds. One of my patches is implicated, but I
> believe that the consensus is that this is an NRV bug. Jason made
>
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 16:26:23 -0700, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are three outstanding bugs (19317, 19312, 18604) assigned to Jason
> Merrill, but I didn't hear back from him last week. Jason, I'm going to
> assume that you're unable to w
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 10:59:42 -0700, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sadly, it's become clear there's going to have to be a second release
> candidate. In particular, there are some wrong-code bugs that are popping
> up on real packages on primary platforms.
ion across volatile reads and
writes, where before it was fully blocked.
This all makes sense to me, but I'm interested in feedback.
Jason
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:12:37 -0400, "Michael N. Moran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Jason Merrill wrote:
>> The C++ committee (well, a subgroup represented at this meeting by Hans
>> Boehm) is working on a memory model that supports threaded programs.
>
> As
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 17:11:58 +0100, Nathan Sidwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jason Merrill wrote:
>> 7 Accessing an object designated by a volatile lvalue (_basic.lval_),
>> modifying an object, calling a library I/O function, or calling a
>> func
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:04:33 -0400, Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 05:40:04PM +0200, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
>> But the memory model for the language must provide semantics that make it
>> possible for threaded programs to be written. C
-volatile reads and writes.
Jason
een two loads, to ensure
proper ordering. Yes, the proposed volatile semantics are more than you
need. But you do need something.
That said, perhaps the current volatile semantics are a useful primitive
for building on with more specific explicit ordering, but that's not clear
to me.
Jason
a multithreaded environment with shared data instead of message
> passing, they'd declare the shared data volatile.
Again, I don't think this is enough with current compilers and hardware.
And with the proposal only the flag which indicates that a new data set is
ready would need to be volatile.
Jason
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 18:03:58 -0700, Per Bothner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does Dwarf support "computed field offsets"?
DWARF 2 does, yes.
Jason
On Apr 27, 2005, at 12:57 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
Maybe the older platform should stick to the older compiler then,
if it is too slow to support the kind of compiler that modern
systems need.
This is an unreasonable request. Consider NetBSD, which runs on new
and old hardware. The OS continu
On Apr 27, 2005, at 7:41 AM, David Edelsohn wrote:
GCC now supports C++, Fortran 90 and Java. Those languages have
extensive, complicated runtimes. The GCC Java environment is becoming
much more complete and standards compliant, which means adding more
and
more features.
Except it's not jus
On Apr 30, 2005, at 12:33 PM, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
I would also like to note that I *myself* requested preprocessed
source code to
NetBSD developers at least 6 times in the past 2 years. I am sure
Andrew Pinski
did too, a comparable amound of times. These requests, as far as I can
understand, w
A little humor from a long time ML lurker...
Via C3-2 Nehemiah 1GHz 512MB ddr
$ ../gcc-4.0.0/configure --prefix=/home/jason/local/gcc-400 --enable-shared
\
--enable-threads=posix --disable-checking --enable-long-long
--enable-__cxa_atexit \ --enable-clocale=gnu --disable-libunwind-exceptions
would
be useful to you--and if I can get the time away from my Real Work(TM) to
fiddle with this...
Jason B.
--
"My interest is in the future; I am going to spend the rest of my life
there."
-- Charles Kettering
numsort
benchmark which had a serious regression:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21485
Jason B.
--
"My interest is in the future; I am going to spend the rest of my life
there."
-- Charles Kettering
On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 11:46:38AM +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> Jason Bucata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> You should try and isolate a single BYTEmark test which shows the
> >> biggest regression. It's better if you manage to pack the whole test
> &
On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 05:52:40PM -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 06:08:43PM -0500, Jason Bucata wrote:
> > Would it help to report some others [regressions]?
> > I might have time later this week to
> > work on some of the others, especially now that I have
entally pass in
"7" anyway in C. You either get the opacity or the type checking (when
compiled as C++), but not both.
Jason
quently results in an ABI change. So we can't freeze the
library ABI until we're willing to commit to the implementation. C++ is
much less friendly to separate compilation than C, at least if you use
templates.
Jason
I suspect this line is the source of your problems:
friend T* func(T* p);
Y isn't a template parameter here, but a (concrete?) class named "Y".
The below compiles with 3.4.3 anyways...
Regards,
-Jason
// Line 1
class A {
public:
A() { };
~A() { };
};
class B {
public:
B
t developers, this isn't a worthwhile tradeoff, but for a
certain class of appliations the stabs debug info is enormous and
this helps to ameloriate that by giving up a small bit of gdb
functionality. This won't be enabled by default even within Apple,
but it is a useful option to have available.
Jason
function calls,
but the Apple debugger UI exposes a feature that sits on top of
those ("custom data formatters"), where you can specify how objects
of a given type should be displayed in the variables window. For
complex OO types, these are often expressions involving an inferior
function call.
Jason
I think that the underlying problem here, as with pointers to data members,
comes from using POINTER_TYPE in the first type. Pointers to members are
not pointers, and so using POINTER_TYPE just causes confusion.
Jason
On Fri, Oct 14, 2005 at 01:43:03PM -0700, Kean Johnston wrote:
> Also, when you say "stack going into main is 16 byte aligned",
> what specifically do you mean? that its 16-byte aligned before
> the call to main() itself? That at the first insn in main, most
> likely a push %ebp, its 16-byte align
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
Would prefer to have
build_function_type() also modified to be nice to error_mark_node?
Yes, I see no reason for it not to.
Jason
copy of the compiler that I can use
for debugging problems? There has to be an easier way to do that. My
laptop builds stage1 reasonably fast, but a bootstrap takes several hours.
This is a serious regression for me.
Jason
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 wasn't aware of the option. Guess I'll do that, then.
Jason
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 12:12 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 14/01/20 10:07 -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> >As somewhat of a git newbie and given gcc developers will do a git push of
> >our changes rather than employing a git pull development model, I'd like
> >a little hand holding on what my new
and were referenced by the cloned
repository, then the cloned repository will become corrupt.
I notice that git.html on the website doesn't match what's currently in
wwwdocs git, is automatic updating broken?
Jason
it from another branch and applies it to the current branch,
roughly equivalent to creating a patch and then manually applying it.
If the branch has been reshaped to be all master-ready commits, you can
push the branch directly, or rebase your local master on top of it
rather than cherry-pick.
Jason
have linear history from the merge parent?
There's no point. If you have a simple linear history where each
commit has a single parent, there is no merge commit.
The only point is the grouping richi mentions.
To that purpose we *could* allow --no-ff merges that otherwise would
have been fast-forward, but allowing such merges without allowing any
other merges would be difficult to enforce. I don't think it's worth
bothering.
Jason
On 1/15/20 9:56 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Or, if that is not possible, disable gcc-cvs mail for vendor and private
branches altogether?
I think this is desirable. gcc-cvs should only mail about changes to
master and release branches.
Jason
On 1/15/20 11:30 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 1/15/20 9:56 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Or, if that is not possible, disable gcc-cvs mail for vendor and private
branches altogether?
I think this is desirable
On 1/15/20 11:37 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
Joseph Myers wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 1/15/20 9:56 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Or, if that is not possible, disable gcc-cvs mail for vendor and private
branches altogether?
I think
end a single email for a merge commit or non-fast-forward push?
Jason
will be is helpful
feedback. Thank you, and sorry I got snarky above.
Jason
to trunk is verboeten.
>
> In the sense 'integrate' your change into trunk. In practice I mean by
> a fast-forward push, of course.
>
My commit messages while I'm working on something rarely have anything to
do with the commit messages that I eventually push to trunk; there's no
point in writing extensive description of stuff I might discard anyway.
When I'm done developing a change I then squash and reorganize commits and
write the commit message for public consumption.
Jason
Fix anon-namespace reference temp clash between TUs
(PR91476)
which can no longer be shared with the ChangeLog.
Jason
't follow that rule and anticipate we will not follow
> it either?
>
And perhaps something shorter? "committed" is a long word. [PUSHED]?
Jason
t we need *some* way to do it.
>
git notes?
Jason
On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 1:44 PM Tom Tromey wrote:
>
> > "Jonathan" == Jonathan Wakely writes:
>
> Jonathan> I have a script that does the opposite, which I've been using for
> Jonathan> years. I edit the ChangeLog files as before, and a Git
> Jonathan> prepare-commit-msg hook extracts the top
rom C++11:
> > 1. Better Rounding and Stricter Integer and other number type rules 2.
> > Template
> > Aliasing 3. Auto and for each style loops 4. Move and R Value Semantics
> >
>
> Agreed on these features. I really like having access to 'for (const auto &
> foo : bar)'
> > There was a little discussion about lambas and anonymous functions but I
> > don't
> > recall that being clear in terms of one of the above areas for sure.
For information, bootstrap with 4.8.5 -std=gnu++11 works now with no
other changes. It seems the only other changes needed will be to
documentation.
Jason
Any notable ABI changes from 9 to 10?
Thanks!
-Jason
(Sorry for asking here, there was no response from gcc-help in January.)
zilla and httpd are very slow, but I haven't had any git timeouts.
> If you're using anonymous access that gets throttled more aggressively
> than authenticated access (using git+ssh:// for the protocol).
>
Yes, I used to use git:// for pulls and ssh:// for pushes, but switched to
ssh:// for both because I was getting too many rejected connections.
Jason
his without breaking a significant amount of
code, and better to break it now than after we've settled into the new
library ABI. We should certainly mention it prominently in the release
notes if we do, and I've added a -Wabi warning for the field alignment
change.
Does this make sense to you?
Jason
class instantiation.
Jason
. I don't know if that's the basis for the
difference.
Jason
anches are lighter
weight and so more transient.
Jason
ing stage 1 somewhere.
One interesting thing that they do is to keep earlier branches merged
into later branches, so 4.9 into 5, 5 into trunk, trunk into next. This
is an interesting discipline, but I'm not sure it is of much practical
value.
Jason
On 08/20/2015 03:31 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
On Thu, 2015-08-20 at 13:57 -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
I hear that at Cauldron people were generally supportive of switching
over to git as the primary GCC repository, and talked about me being
involved in that transition. Does anyone have more
ask enough
questions on the mailing list you do get some answers.
Do you have pointers to relevant email threads?
Jason
On 08/20/2015 04:33 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015, Jason Merrill wrote:
It should be pretty straightforward to use the existing git mirror as the
master repository; the main adjustment I'd want to make is rewriting the
I think using the existing git mirror for this is
And many bonus points
if we don't have to repeat the changelog in the commit message (it's in
the commit already, the bugzilla hook could just pull it from out there).
Or we could have another discussion about if we want to have changelogs
at all...
That's a good question, but I think it's definitely independent.
Jason
On 08/21/2015 04:26 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
ISTM that within that namespace, folks ought to have the freedom to use
whatever works for them. If folks want to create a transient branch,
push-rebase-push on that branch, then later remove
way to merge a feature branch.
Jason
rge from a feature branch that doesn't
achieve this (as I expect many don't, in early WIP stages), then you can
tell bisect to avoid descending into other branches.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5638211/how-do-you-get-git-bisect-to-ignore-merged-branches
Jason
the developer can just
use git merge --squash and then decide whether to commit it in one hunk
or several.
Jason
On 08/21/2015 10:38 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Jason Merrill writes:
On 08/21/2015 04:26 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Can we limit the namespace one can create branches in? Like force all
branches created by $user to be in namespace $user?
git will create new namespaces for its own purpose in
On 08/21/2015 02:28 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Jason Merrill writes:
I would expect feature branches to merge from trunk when needed during
development. When merging the feature into trunk the developer can just
use git merge --squash and then decide whether to commit it in one hunk or
On 08/21/2015 03:21 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Jason Merrill writes:
Hmm, it occurs to me that a squash commit (or series of commits) followed
by a merge -s ours could have the advantages of both approaches: the
patches land on trunk in a sensible order, but the history is available.
That
On 08/21/2015 04:10 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2015, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 08/21/2015 10:38 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Jason Merrill writes:
On 08/21/2015 04:26 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Can we limit the namespace one can create branches in? Like force all
branches created by
On 08/21/2015 06:44 PM, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
On 08/20/2015 11:09 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
Absolutely, a non-fast-forward push is anathema for anything other people might
be working on. The git repository already prohibits this; people that want to
push-rebase-push their own branches need to
On 08/21/2015 07:54 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
Here's an actual check-in session for a patch John Carr recently
Can this really be described as an actual check-in session when we're
changing the contents? :)
Jason
sed on the
git-svn-id in the git log; I don't see why we would need to break that
moving forward, though I'm not sure how well it would work without
reference to an actual SVN server.
Jason
9
will give you the hash.
So that seems like a suitable monotonically increasing identifier. What
do you think, Jakub?
Jason
branch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GitMirror#Subdirectory_branches
but you might want to improve reposurgeon to handle this pattern directly.
Jason
mprove reposurgeon to handle this pattern directly.
Look closely at branchify_map. I think we may be able to use it to get the
effect you want.
Aha, I hadn't noticed that yet. I'll give it a try, thanks.
Is 'jason' your preferred username everywhere? I'll set up
mestamp is sufficient.
Jason
st-parent; }; f"
shs = "!f(){ git show $(git smaster $1); }; f"
slog = "!f(){ s=$1; shift; git log $(git smaster $s) $*; }; f"
sco = "!f(){ git checkout $(git smaster $1); }; f"
and an action stamp 2015-08-20T20:55:15Z!jason, then
git sco 2015-08-20
On 09/01/2015 05:21 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Jason Merrill :
Given git aliases:
stamp = show -s --format='%cI!%ce'
scommit = "!f(){ d=${1%%!*}; a=${1##*!}; arg=\"--until=$d -1\"; if [ $a != $1 ]; then
arg=\"$arg --committer=$a\"
On 09/01/2015 11:59 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Jason Merrill :
Here's an improved version:
You wrote:
# git scommit - list most recent commit that matches
.
# Must also specify a branch to search or --all.
Where must the branch argument appear with respect to the other arguments?
-svn-id:.*@1234 ' --all -1
git log --grep '^Legacy-ID: 1234$' --all -1
Jason
branch and let interested people choose how to deal with it.
David, you were the last committer; any opinions?
Jason
he right choice for the *merge* tags: they are just
artifacts of the difficulty of SVN merges, and I think we should discard
them.
For most old branches and tags, I like #4; that takes them out of the
set that is fetched by default, but keeps the history on the server.
Make sense?
Jason
Note that _Complex isn't part of C++11, so you shouldn't be using it in
code that's intended to be portable to any C++11 implementation.
But certainly the current G++ behavior can be improved.
Jason
efine order of evaluation of function arguments as left-to-right, since
GCC does right-to-left on PUSH_ARGS_REVERSED targets, including x86_64.
Any thoughts?
Jason
On 11/25/2015 01:25 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/24/2015 02:55 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 23/11/15 23:01, Jason Merrill wrote:
There's a proposal working through the C++ committee to define the order
of evaluation of subexpressions that previously had unspecified
ordering:
http://www
On 12/10/2015 01:00 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Jason,
I just want to make sure we still want the -Wplacement-new option
I added some time ago enabled by default.
I think I had initially intended it to be on because the original
implementation was more permissive and didn't diagnose cases
peat this until people get it.
Other language ABIs can handle language specific calling conventions as
appropriate for them. The psABI can only talk about things that are in
its domain.
Jason
On 03/01/2016 11:43 AM, Michael Matz wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 29 Feb 2016, Jason Merrill wrote:
Also this insistence that all of "trivially copyable" is already quite
nicely specified in the C++ ABI is still not really relevant because
C++ _is not the only language out there_. I'
on this topic. There seems to be some GNU support for
subtyping in C++. But I had no luck finding any information
specifically for 'C'.
Thanks,
Jason
How to use $Super$$ and $Sub$$ for patching data?:
http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.faqs/ka15416.html
Us
> GNU ld has an option --wrap=symbol. Does that roughly match your need?
That seems to do the trick, even if that may require also modifying
the Makefile for every wrapper function.
> the best list would have been gcc-h...@gcc.gnu.org)
Will do next time.
Many thanks,
Jason
1 - 100 of 587 matches
Mail list logo
