Snapshot gcc-4.6-20110506 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.6-20110506/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.6 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On 6 May 2011 21:19, Jon Grant wrote:
> Hello. thank you for your reply.
>
> Jonathan Wakely wrote, On 05/05/11 22:47:
>>
>> On 5 May 2011 22:30, Jon Grant wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> Just looking at this page:
>>>
>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/faq.html#gas
>>>
>>> I saw this text "(the GNU loader)". Is
Hello. thank you for your reply.
Jonathan Wakely wrote, On 05/05/11 22:47:
On 5 May 2011 22:30, Jon Grant wrote:
Hello
Just looking at this page:
http://gcc.gnu.org/faq.html#gas
I saw this text "(the GNU loader)". Is this really an alternative name
for gas? I've not seen it called GNU loader
On 05/06/2011 01:29 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Feb 15, 2011, David Daney wrote:
On 02/15/2011 09:56 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Feb 14, 2011, David Daney wrote:
So, sorry if this is a dumb question, but wouldn't it be much easier to
keep on using sign-extended addresses, and just ma
Dear Ismail,
On Fri, 6 May 2011, ismail wrote:
TinySTM 1.0 uses implicit transaction descriptor by default (same as
0.9.9) but you can compile it with EXPLICIT_TX_PARAMETER (Makefile) and
then the transaction descriptor is explicit.
But functions are the same from 0.9.9 to 1.0.0 so I don't reall
On 6 May 2011 12:25, ankit wrote:
>
> Problem Statement : Given a C file which has several macros defined (eg.
> #define MACRO 10) . I need to know what all macros are defined and their
> usage point(eg. line number) in the code.
>
> Need to know this information during or after gcc pre-process
Hi Vlad,
I found a problem with your IRA improvement checkin r171649 on
29-3-2011. I can't get picochip port to build with this change. The
problem is in the function "clarify_prohibited_class_mode_regs" in
ira.c:1413. The code reproduced here is
/* Clarify IRA_PROHIBITED_CLASS_MODE_REGS by e
ankit writes:
> Problem Statement : Given a C file which has several macros defined (eg.
> #define MACRO 10) . I need to know what all macros are defined and their
> usage point(eg. line number) in the code.
>
> Need to know this information during or after gcc pre-processing phase.
>
> Pos
Richard Guenther writes:
> What happens if the indirect call is optimized to a jump via tailcall
> optimization? We'd bogously skip one function then, no?
But that always happens with backtraces through tailcalls. It's nothing
new.
Ian
Problem Statement : Given a C file which has several macros defined (eg.
#define MACRO 10) . I need to know what all macros are defined and their
usage point(eg. line number) in the code.
Need to know this information during or after gcc pre-processing phase.
Possible solution may dump this ma
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 3:24 AM, David Daney wrote:
> Consider this program under GNU/Linux (x86_64):
>
> - np.c ---
> #include
> #include
> #include
> #include
>
> static void handler(int sig)
> {
> printf("got signal %d\n", sig);
> throw 1;
> }
>
> int (*my_vecto
On Feb 15, 2011, David Daney wrote:
> On 02/15/2011 09:56 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Feb 14, 2011, David Daney wrote:
>> So, sorry if this is a dumb question, but wouldn't it be much easier to
>> keep on using sign-extended addresses, and just make sure the kernel
>> never allocates a vir
Ian Lance Taylor writes:
> The difference is that with -E the -o option is passed to cc1, whereas
> without it the -o option is passed to the assembler or the linker. The
> GNU assembler and linker both have the usual Unix behaviour of only
> using the last -o option.
Nevertheless it might be a
13 matches
Mail list logo
