Michael Meissner wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 01:27:39PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>> Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>>> On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>>>
I am aware of three remaining projects which are or might be appropriate
for Stage 1:
>>> Do we at this point believe that th
Snapshot gcc-4.1-20070611 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.1-20070611/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.1 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
Hi,
As Mark requested, we propose a merge plan for the fixed-point branch
as follows.
1. Merge in machine modes to support signed and unsigned
fract and accum modes. Handle scalar and vector modes.
2. Merge in fixed-value.h and fixed-value.c to handle fixed-point values.
3. Merge in TREE st
On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 06:06:14PM -0400, Dean Anderson wrote:
> This may be a stupid question, but I didn't find anything by googling
> gcc, g++, STL. So:
Please use gcc-help, so that someone can help you with your installation
problem. All g++'s from 3.0 on ship with a standard library that ha
This may be a stupid question, but I didn't find anything by googling
gcc, g++, STL. So:
There are no STL header files in some versions of g++:
The program works on some g++'s, but not on others:
#include
#include
#include
using namespace std;
template
class PrintGt5: public unary_func
On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 06:07:14AM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 10:33:26PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> > I am aware of three remaining projects which are or might be appropriate
> > for Stage 1:
> >
> > In the interests of moving forwards, I therefore plan to close this
> > e
On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 01:27:39PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> >
> >> I am aware of three remaining projects which are or might be appropriate
> >> for Stage 1:
> >
> > Do we at this point believe that the people who were wor
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> I am also considering a "lockdown" period beginning June 15th during
> which we would go into a regressions-only mode (other than possible
> merges of the functionality above) in order to begin eliminating some of
> the problems that have come in with the
> Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 22:47:16 -0700
> From: "=?EUC-KR?B?U2VvbmdiYWUgUGFyayAoudq8urnoLCDa0+D328Yp?=" <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]>
> This little patch:
> [...]
> should fix the problem (thanks to Ian Lance Talyor and Andrew
> Pinski for helping me debug the problem on IRC). I've started
> the bootstr
On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 12:56:26PM -0400, Jim Tison wrote:
> option or standalone program. I'm proposing to create a standalone program,
> as
> I don't know enough about gcc internals to force such maps to be generated
> during compilation ... I'm not certain this would be appropriate, anyway.
Hello,
> I am trying to understand the usage of some functions in tree-affine.c
> file and I appreciate your help.
>
> For example; for the two memory accesses
> arr[b+8].X and arr[b+9].X, how does their affine combinations
> will look like after executing the following sequence of operation?
Hello,
I am trying to understand the usage of some functions in tree-affine.c
file and I appreciate your help.
For example; for the two memory accesses
arr[b+8].X and arr[b+9].X, how does their affine combinations
will look like after executing the following sequence of operation?
(taken from
Mark Shinwell wrote:
> Do you think it should be the case that, at the point below, _any_ reload
> with reg_rtx corresponding to a hard register should have the relevant
> bit set in reload_spill_index?
I think so. I'm attaching a patch below. It appears to have no effect
on all code I've tried
I've run into a case where reload clobbers a register which it had
decided to use for reload inheritance. Reload is given this:
(insn 623 430 431 35 ../../.././gcc/dp-bit.c:734 (set (reg:HI 162 [+6 ])
(mem/c/i:HI (plus:HI (reg/f:HI 10 bp)
(const_int -2 [0xfffe])) [0
I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has
appointed Ken Zadeck, Seongbae Park, Daniel Berlin, and Paolo Bonzini as
Dataflow maintainers.
Please join me in congratulating Ken, Seongbae, Dan, and Paolo on
their new role. Please update your listings in the MAINTAIN
Seongbae Park (박성배, 朴成培) wrote:
> This little patch:
>
> diff -r 9e2b1e62931a gcc/combine.c
> --- a/gcc/combine.c Wed Jun 06 23:08:38 2007 +
> +++ b/gcc/combine.c Mon Jun 11 05:39:25 2007 +
> @@ -4237,7 +4237,7 @@ subst (rtx x, rtx from, rtx to, int in_d
>
> So force this insn not to match
Hi.
Thanks for the help. The problem is solved anyways.
After few trials, i came to know that few memory locations were getting
overwritten by mallacious data and thats bcoz of ggc_realloc. In my prog
ggc_realloc was getting called many times. When i increased the size for
the very first allocation
Hi Richard,
Thanks for the info. I'll ask my OS vendor.
Thanks and Regards
Stephen K. Gadde
Original message
>Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 10:56:51 +0200
>From: "Richard Guenther" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: FW: [gnu.org #336636] Needed Java Compilers for SUSE Linux
>Enterprise Serv
On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 09:22:24AM +0100, Mark Shinwell wrote:
> + if (rld[r].when_needed == RELOAD_FOR_INPUT
> + && rld[r].reg_rtx
> + && REGNO (rld[r].reg_rtx) < FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER)
> + {
$ grep -F -e HARD_REGISTER gcc/rtl.h
#define HARD_REGISTER_P(R
Hi...
I have inserted some code for available analysis in the source code of
GCC4.0.2
But "make" fails at the file mf-runtime.c
the error i got is as follow:
/home/divya/GCC-4.0.2/build/gcc/xgcc -B/home/divya/GCC-4.0.2/build/gcc/
-B/home/divya/GCC-4.0.2/target/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/
-B/home/divya/
On 6/11/07, Krupa Stephen Gadde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
Can I get any help on this???
This is not the right place to ask either. Please ask your OS vendor
(SUSE/Novell)
on how to get Java compilers.
Richard.
Bernd Schmidt wrote:
Mark Shinwell wrote:
and the code following in emit_reload_insns? Perhaps if spill_reg_index
took account of registers selected during find_reloads then this could
be simplified too.
So what do you think is the best approach to fix all of this? :-)
Sounds like you gave
22 matches
Mail list logo
