Re: [Open64-devel] Fix to bug 917

2012-03-18 Thread Chandrasekhar Murthy 
My understanding is that the simplifier gets invoked by calling 
WN_CreateExp[0123] instead of WN_CreateExp[0123].

Murthy

-Original Message-
From: Sun Chan [mailto:sun.c...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 2:56 PM
To: Gilmore, Doug
Cc: open64-devel
Subject: Re: [Open64-devel] Fix to bug 917

The BE uses the same const fold in simplifier. I think there is a way
to include simplifier in fortran FE. My question is, are you using
that? Or writing your own? If you are writing your own, I just want to
point out the potential problems in terms of rounding/... IEEE issue
Sun

On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 4:08 AM, Gilmore, Doug doug.gilm...@amd.com wrote:
 -Original Message-
 From: Sun Chan [mailto:sun.c...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 10:37 AM
 To: Gilmore, Doug
 Cc: open64-devel
 Subject: Re: [Open64-devel] Fix to bug 917

 which part of const_fold functions do you intend to use? Or are you
 writing your own?
 I am using the same mechanism as the other folding operations do.  Folding
 is done in a routine written in Fortran.
 Note also that you will need to observe IEEE
 settings for floats
 Sun
 Given that we use the same execution mechanism that used for the
 folding of other operations.  If it is being done incorrectly in this
 patch, it be incorrect for all folding operations.

 Have we seen other constant foldings incorrectly folded?

 Doug

 On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 3:55 AM, Gilmore, Doug doug.gilm...@amd.com
 wrote:
  Other Fortran front ends are capable of folding calls to intrinsics
 that
  have constant arguments in parameter statements, but this
 functionality
  is missing in the Open64 front end.
 
  As a first cut, I went to the process of handling this for the real
  intrinsic.   The patch and test case is attached.
 
  We will be adding more of this functionality for other intrinsics
  in the near future.
 
  Can a gatekeeper review this change for me?
 
  Thanks,
 
  Doug
 
  -
 -
  This SF email is sponsosred by:
  Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here
  http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure
  ___
  Open64-devel mailing list
  Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
  https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
 



--
This SF email is sponsosred by:
Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure
___
Open64-devel mailing list
Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel

--
This SF email is sponsosred by:
Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure
___
Open64-devel mailing list
Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel

[Open64-devel] cleanup change to remove osprey-gcc directory [C/C++ FE]

2012-03-18 Thread David Coakley 
Hi all,

I would like to svn delete the unused osprey-gcc directory to reduce
the size of the Open64 source tree.  This directory contains the GCC
4.0-based front end which has been completely superseded by the GCC
4.2-based front end (osprey-gcc-4.2.0).  All references to osprey-gcc
were removed over a year ago in commit r3276.

Could a gatekeeper give approval?  Thanks,

-David Coakley / AMD Open Source Compiler Engineering

--
This SF email is sponsosred by:
Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure
___
Open64-devel mailing list
Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel