On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:32 PM, niXman wrote:
> No, I have not tested your patch.
> I only agreed that your patch is easier, and suggested that you check it.
>
Well then, next time I will strive to understand hidden meanings in
other people's text
At any rate, I applied the attached minor patch
Hi and thanks for the answeg!
Ok, this sound a little Bit tricky.
Do you have any Experiemce using the OpenSource Version of Intel
Parallel Build Blocks?
I guess OpenMP is more for C layer and can parallel for loops fine but
the rest is not usefull this Time.TBB are more C++ ortiented and
suppo
No, I have not tested your patch.
I only agreed that your patch is easier, and suggested that you check it.
2012/1/4 Ozkan Sezer :
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Ruben Van Boxem
> wrote:
>> 2012/1/4 niXman
>>>
>>> Hi Ozkan.
>>>
>>> I test the winpthread(rev 4706) with you patch. But clock_* f
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Ruben Van Boxem
wrote:
> 2012/1/4 niXman
>>
>> Hi Ozkan.
>>
>> I test the winpthread(rev 4706) with you patch. But clock_* functions
>> also not exported.
>
I don't have the earlier mails from this thread, but I remember
that you reported success with the patch on
2012/1/4 niXman
> Hi Ozkan.
>
> I test the winpthread(rev 4706) with you patch. But clock_* functions
> also not exported.
>
I saw the same behavior yesterday. The dll does not contain the
clock_gettime and nanosleep. The static lib does.
I'm starting to think this might be causing the libstdc+
Hi Ozkan.
I test the winpthread(rev 4706) with you patch. But clock_* functions
also not exported.
2011/12/28 Ozkan Sezer :
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 1:02 PM, niXman wrote:
>> Patch is attached.
>> May be useful.
>>
>> 2011/12/28 niXman :
>>> If I move declarations of clock_* functions from pth
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 2:57 AM, Peter Meyer wrote:
> History:
> As far as i know. The MinGW64 Project was forked from the MinGW32
> Project because of foolery from the MinGW32 Project Staff. Some Members
> of the MinGW32
> Teams wanted to have a 64-Bit 64-Bit 86_64 Version of the MinGW Project
> b
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Jim Michaels wrote:
> http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/ISO-updates-C-standard-1400814.html
>
> new ISO C standard, C1X, more C++ features, including threads...
>
Jim, can you please put this link in some appropriate spot on the wiki?
Thanks,
--
Earnie
-- h
Hello Brian,
exactly those reported crashes in winptrhead on thread-termination are
the cause why we didn't merged it into our trunk version. Any hint on
reason for it, or a testcase for debugging it are most welcome.
Regards,
Kai
2012/1/4 Prof Brian Ripley :
> Let me have a go at answering bas
Let me have a go at answering based on my experiences.
There is OpenMP 3 support in recent versions of gcc. But to make it
usable you need two more pieces:
(a) libgomp to have been built with the compiler (it is optional). This
can be built statically or as a DLL: if the latter it needs to be
2012/1/4 Peter Meyer
> Hi William,
>
> Am 03.01.2012 18:53, schrieb r...@libertysurf.fr:
> > Dear both lists,
> > I would like to understand better what is the difference between your
> two projects, in term of cross-compilation capabilities (linux -> windows).
> > mingw-64 seems to be a much bi
11 matches
Mail list logo
