On Fri, 10 Sep 2010, Steven Bosscher wrote:
The docs say...
@item -Os
@opindex Os
Optimize for size. �...@option{-os} enables all @option{-O2} optimizations
that
do not typically increase code size. It also performs further
optimizations designed to reduce code size.
@option{-Os}
Hi all,
I'm trying to see a way forward for PR 42954: when preprocessing Fortran source
files, we used to call the C preprocessor and run the Fortran compiler on the
generated file. We now use libcpp directly, but by doing so, we have lost a
good number of target-dependent CPP builtins that
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 4:21 PM, FX fxcoud...@gmail.com wrote:
How can we fix this? The only way I see would be to have two macros
instead of TARGET_OS_CPP_BUILTINS: one that will be used for source-
preprocessing in all languages (maybe keeping the name
TARGET_OS_CPP_BUILTINS), and one that
On Sun, 26 Sep 2010, FX wrote:
How can we fix this? The only way I see would be to have two macros
instead of TARGET_OS_CPP_BUILTINS: one that will be used for
source-preprocessing in all languages (maybe keeping the name
TARGET_OS_CPP_BUILTINS), and one that will be used only for C-family
Hello all,
given the optimization work which has gone into 4.6, I thought I would
run the Polyhedron Fortran test suite. The system is
- Intel Core2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00GHz
- CentOS release 5.5 (Final) [x86-64]
Tested compilers:
- GCC 4.6 (recent nightly build)
- Intel Fortran compiler
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 04:47:29PM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Hello all,
given the optimization work which has gone into 4.6, I thought I would
run the Polyhedron Fortran test suite.
I was interested in seeing how 4.6 stacks up against previous
versions of gfortran. On x86_64-*-freebsd,
Snapshot gcc-4.3-20100926 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.3-20100926/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.3 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
Hi. You know, gmp/mpfr/mpc are a significant
portion of building any frontend/backend.
So I looked at it.
mpc of course is only for complex numbers.
Our frontend doesn't use them.
Maybe only for builtins as well.
#define do_mpc_arg1(a, b, c) NULL_TREE
and such.
mpfr appears to be used for
i can seem to get this to work:
#define PREFIX p_
#define HIGHER_INTERFACE(id) LOWER_INTERFACE(PREFIX, id)
#define LOWER_INTERFACE(prefix, id) struct prefix##id \
{ \
int i; \
}
int main(void)
{
HIGHER_INTERFACE(0);
/* test if struct declaration went well: */
struct p_0 var;
drives me crazy that i can't get his to work
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/passing--define-d-values-to--define-d-macros-tp29815182p29815215.html
Sent from the gcc - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 06:09:34PM -0700, ir_idjit wrote:
i can seem to get this to work:
#define PREFIX p_
#define HIGHER_INTERFACE(id) LOWER_INTERFACE(PREFIX, id)
#define LOWER_INTERFACE(prefix, id) struct prefix##id \
{ \
int i; \
}
int main(void)
{
Can the severity of signed/unsigned comparisons be raised, since GCC
does not properly handle the comparisons.
Every example below is false compiled with gcc 4.5.0
int main()
{
int s = -2;
unsigned int u = 0xFFFDU;
if( s u )
printf( okay\n );
J Decker d3c...@gmail.com writes:
Can the severity of signed/unsigned comparisons be raised, since GCC
does not properly handle the comparisons.
GCC properly handles the comparisons according to the rules laid down in
the C/C++ language standards.
int main()
{
int s = -2;
The standards did not leave this open. They define precisely what is
supposed to happen.
Really? I'll have to drop this whole lobbying effort then. That
makes me sad that they didn't define it to be comparing of the numbers
where there are overlaps in signed and unsigned instead of causing
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45796
Summary: make targets info-gcc, dvi-gcc etc. should work from
unbuilt configured tree
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35855
--- Comment #2 from Ralf Wildenhues rwild at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-26
06:07:56 UTC ---
Proposed patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg02027.html.
You don't state how exactly the build fails, and what locale you needed to set
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45795
--- Comment #3 from Salvatore Filippone sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2010-09-26 07:33:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
It is very likely a duplicate of pr45783.
The code compiles at r164549
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793
--- Comment #7 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-26
07:41:39 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
does this patch fix the problem for you?
Yes. I've confirmed that all fortran regressions on sh4-unknown-linux-gnu
go away
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45795
--- Comment #4 from Salvatore Filippone sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2010-09-26 07:43:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
(In reply to comment #2)
It is very likely a duplicate of pr45783.
The code compiles at r164549
and fails at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45795
Daniel Kraft domob at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45783
Daniel Kraft domob at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45081
--- Comment #13 from Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-26 09:04:38
UTC ---
I'll do 4.4 and 4.3 when I get back to Barcelona on Tuesday night.
Paul
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45795
--- Comment #6 from Salvatore Filippone sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2010-09-26 10:27:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Confirmed. I do not yet see how this is related to my commit, but will look
into it of course. Thanks for the report!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45797
Summary: ICE (segfault) with
gfortran.dg/derived_constr_func_1.f90
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793
--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-26
12:30:57 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Sep 26 12:30:54 2010
New Revision: 164631
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=164631
Log:
2010-09-26 Jerry
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793
Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44621
Ralf Wildenhues rwild at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42954
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45798
Summary: bugzilla: line-wrapping issues with description and
comments.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37888
Ralf Wildenhues rwild at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42954
--- Comment #7 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-09-26 13:44:10 UTC ---
After some auditing: TARGET_OBJFMT_CPP_BUILTINS is safe (it's only called in
config/elfos.h and config/alpha/elf.h, and contains a single,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37210
--- Comment #5 from Ralf Wildenhues rwild at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-26
13:44:43 UTC ---
status update: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg02033.html.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45248
--- Comment #9 from margali at imapmail dot org 2010-09-26 14:04:21 UTC ---
So in the end I did the following and it finally compiled:
- uninstall binutils
- apply cumulative fink patch to source directory
- hack configure to include the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45787
--- Comment #5 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2010-09-26
14:11:34 UTC ---
Patch posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg02037.html and
test results at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-09/msg02343.html.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45799
Summary: ICE + segfault when compiling Qt's WebKit
JavaScriptCore
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45787
--- Comment #6 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2010-09-26
15:12:36 UTC ---
Revised patch with corrected changelog at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg02054.html.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45800
Summary: [M32C] compile error on increment volatile long var
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45763
Nicola Pero nicola at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25450
Nicola Pero nicola at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25464
Nicola Pero nicola at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25361
Nicola Pero nicola at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25672
Pawel Sikora pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|ppc64-pld-linux |x86_64-pc-mingw32
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45798
--- Comment #1 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net 2010-09-26
17:47:19 UTC ---
This is not supposed to happen. Maybe a bug in your browser?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45801
Summary: [4.6 regression] powerpc64-linux bootstrap comparison
failure
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45798
--- Comment #2 from Ralf Wildenhues rwild at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-26
17:59:13 UTC ---
Surely possible, but I'd wonder if I'm the only one seeing that then. Running
Debian's iceweasel 3.0.6, Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; de; rv:1.9.0.19)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45770
MichieldeB at aim dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45798
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-26 18:15:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Surely possible, but I'd wonder if I'm the only one seeing that then. Running
Debian's iceweasel 3.0.6, Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; de;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45770
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45802
Summary: [bugzilla] driver component description needs
updating
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45798
--- Comment #4 from Ralf Wildenhues rwild at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-26
18:31:50 UTC ---
Hmm, that's not what I meant though. I see e.g., in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37888#c1
the word as being wrapped to a line of its own.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45802
Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|other |web
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45798
Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45783
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Kraft domob at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-26 19:25:55
UTC ---
Author: domob
Date: Sun Sep 26 19:25:52 2010
New Revision: 164638
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=164638
Log:
2010-09-26 Daniel Kraft
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45795
--- Comment #7 from Daniel Kraft domob at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-26 19:25:55
UTC ---
Author: domob
Date: Sun Sep 26 19:25:52 2010
New Revision: 164638
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=164638
Log:
2010-09-26 Daniel Kraft
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45783
Daniel Kraft domob at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45795
Daniel Kraft domob at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45770
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45248
Vincent Lefèvre vincent at vinc17 dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincent at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35855
--- Comment #3 from Mike Frysinger vapier at gentoo dot org 2010-09-26
20:16:07 UTC ---
the same locale that breaks every time: et_EE
example build failure:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/215828
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43601
--- Comment #29 from Vadim Zeitlin vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org 2010-09-26
22:09:16 UTC ---
Thanks Cesar for your analysis, I was doing the same thing but you beat me to
it. Anyhow, I can confirm your results, i.e. that the increase in size is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40569
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-26
22:30:52 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Sep 26 22:30:48 2010
New Revision: 164639
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=164639
Log:
2010-09-27 Tobias Burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40568
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-26
22:30:52 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Sep 26 22:30:48 2010
New Revision: 164639
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=164639
Log:
2010-09-27 Tobias Burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40568
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|F2008: C_SIZEOF is in the |F2008: rejected
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40569
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-26
22:40:26 UTC ---
Basic implementation works. Remains to do:
(a) COMPILER_OPTIONS(): Return a more useful string than
(b) -Wall gives a bogus warning:
Warning: Type
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40569
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-26
22:46:10 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Basic implementation works. Remains to do:
...
(c) CLASS_INQUIRY instead of CLASS_IMPURE?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42954
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45388
--- Comment #7 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-09-26 23:21:44 UTC ---
Hi Steve,
I have a patch I am testing. It worked on the test case but I haven't fully
bootstrapped it.
Keep plugging away on this.
I have the sense that the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44803
--- Comment #3 from Felipe Contreras felipe.contreras at gmail dot com
2010-09-27 01:28:24 UTC ---
Is this not clear?
It would be useful to cross-compile like this:
export C_INCLUDE_PATH=/opt/arm/ffmpeg/include
export
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45804
Summary: ARM: unnecessary sign extension
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45805
Summary: VFP/Neon double precision register expected --
`vmovl.s16 q2,s8
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45806
Summary: gcc build failure
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
72 matches
Mail list logo
