On 12/15/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 3, 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kenner) wrote:
>
> > In my view, ChangeLog is mostly "write-only" from a developer's
> > perspective. It's a document that the GNU project requires us to produce
> > for
>
> ... a good example of
On 12/15/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 5, 2007, Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 11/25/07 3:43 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>
> >> My suggestion (not as a GCC SC member or GCC RM, but just as a fellow
> >> GCC developer with an interest in improving the compi
On Dec 3, 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kenner) wrote:
> In my view, ChangeLog is mostly "write-only" from a developer's
> perspective. It's a document that the GNU project requires us to produce
> for
... a good example of compliance with the GPL:
5. Conveying Modified Source Versions.
On Dec 14, 2007 4:24 PM, Toon Moene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here are (attached) results for testing HIRLAM with and without
> -ftree-loop-linear.
>
Thanks Toon for checking this.
> Compilation flags:
>
> CCFLAGS := -g -O3 $(MACHINECPP) -ftree-loop-linear -ffast-math
> -fno-associative-math
On Dec 5, 2007, Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/25/07 3:43 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>> My suggestion (not as a GCC SC member or GCC RM, but just as a fellow
>> GCC developer with an interest in improving the compiler in the same way
>> that you're trying to do) is that you stop
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Nov 24, 2007, Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Besides, the Ada RTS compiles differently with -g than without -g,
such that compare-debug doesn't pass if you compare sysdep.o. Nobody
but me seems to care.
We certainly care about thi
On Nov 24, 2007, Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> Besides, the Ada RTS compiles differently with -g than without -g,
>> such that compare-debug doesn't pass if you compare sysdep.o. Nobody
>> but me seems to care.
> We certainly care about this, and appreciate
Hi,
I am trying to build gcc-4.2.2 for this CPU and am surprised or badly
*interpreting* that `arm1026ejs' code is maybe faster than `arm926ejs'?
I tried to find this in the Documentation and by Google but no luck.
$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
Processor : ARM926EJ-Sid(wb) rev 5 (v5l)
BogoMIPS
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 10:12:11PM -0600, Sebastian Pop wrote:
> I've run a build for spec cpu2006 with -O3 -ftree-parallelize-loops=16
> and interestingly there were some fails that I will investigate later.
> So I'm just reporting these, and asking for somebody who could fix
> the link options fo
