Re: [PATCH] improved algorithm for gcc/expmed.c::choose_multiplier()

Hi Denis, On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Jim Wilson wrote: > At the moment, there is probably no one who understands this code as > well as you do, so you may not get much help from others. In my defence, I'm struggling to get up to speed with all of the issues. The first and obvious comments are that pa

Re: a request

Russell Whitaker wrote on 08/02/06 22:31: > Could I get a copy of the implementation of the OpenMP 2.5 interface, > please? > Try one of the weekly snapshots http://gcc.gnu.org/snapshots.html for mainline (to become 4.2). Or, if you are running Fedora Core 5, the GCC 4.1 version in there already

Re: a request

> > hi > > Could I get a copy of the implementation of the OpenMP 2.5 interface, > please? You download the 4.2 snapshot and you have it. Or you could grab a GCC via svn. Thanks, Andrew Pinski

a request

hi Could I get a copy of the implementation of the OpenMP 2.5 interface, please? thanks, Russ

Eric Botcazou appointed RTL maintainer

Eric -- The GCC SC has appointed you an "RTL maintainer". Congratulations! That means that you have maintainership of all machine-independent RTL optimization passes, like jump, CSE, GCSE, flow, sched2, shorten_branches, etc. This post doesn't cover back ends, dwarf2out.c, or other things that

Re: [PATCH] improved algorithm for gcc/expmed.c::choose_multiplier()

On Tuesday 01 August 2006 00:34, Jim Wilson wrote: > Denis Vlasenko wrote: > > I still cannot figure out what precision is, so I restricted new code to > > (n == HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT && precision == HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT) case. > > Need help here. > > At the moment, there is probably no one who

Re: [PATCH] improved algorithm for gcc/expmed.c::choose_multiplier()

On Wednesday 02 August 2006 08:30, Daniel Berlin wrote: > Denis Vlasenko wrote: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28417 > > > > Right now Bugzilla internal problem prevents me from creating > > an attachement there. So it goes here. > > What problems? > Please let me know. > > The

Re: if() and trailing ;

On Tuesday 01 August 2006 16:54, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > "Denis Vlasenko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > | if() > | (void)0; /* do nothing */ > | > | will make you happy. > > No, I'm not. I find it Very Silly. Do you prefer buggy code like this? | > > After a couple hours debugging code,

Re: native or cross libssp?

Ben Elliston wrote: > The former will be far easier, unless you desparately want ssp support > for your target. libssp's configure script checks for certain > behaviour from vsnprintf and needs to run the test program to > determine that. It's our general policy that all libraries have configura

New branch: insn-select

Hi, I just created the insn-select branch (off of trunk) containing currently the code I wrote shortly after the summit. It intends to implement to what I agreed during the summit register allocation BoF, some sort of instruction and regclass selection, plus compensation code generation when

libgfortran build failure

After the aclocal/automake regeneration, I now am seeing a bootstrap failure on AIX because the generated Makefile is not substituting a variable. My generated Makefile looks like: CC = /tmp/20060801/./gcc/xgcc -B/tmp/20060801/./gcc/ -B/farm/dje/install/powerpc-ibm-aix5.2.0.0-20060801/po

Re: if() and trailing ;

> But it is common to have an empty action on a condition. You'll often > see code like if (condition) /* nothing */; Yes, the intent of the warning is catch people who stick a ; at the end of a line (out of habit) when there should not be one. That is what the warning should target,