Hi,
I noticed that GCC converts short arithmetic to unsigned short.
short foo2 (short a, short b)
{
return a - b;
}
In .gimple file:
foo2 (short int a, short int b)
{
short int D.3347;
short unsigned int a.0;
short unsigned int b.1;
short unsigned int D.3350;
a.0 = (short unsigned i
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
> Hi,
> I noticed that GCC converts short arithmetic to unsigned short.
>
> short foo2 (short a, short b)
> {
> return a - b;
> }
>
> In .gimple file:
>
> foo2 (short int a, short int b)
> {
> short int D.3347;
> short unsigned int a.0;
> s
On Jun 17, 2011, at 5:26 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I noticed that GCC converts short arithmetic to unsigned short.
>>
>> short foo2 (short a, short b)
>> {
>> return a - b;
>> }
>>
>> In .gimple file:
>>
>> foo2 (short int a
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
>
> On Jun 17, 2011, at 5:26 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> I noticed that GCC converts short arithmetic to unsigned short.
>>>
>>> short foo2 (short a, short b)
>>> {
>>> ret
Hi all,
I am quite confused about the difference between the above two options
in Makefile fragments.
They both seem to be doing the same thing which is to set the options to
build libgcc2 with.
The only thing that comes to mind is that LIBGCC2_CFLAGS only applies to
the main library and M
What is the current state of supporting hardened operating systems
that default to -fpie/-fPIE/-pie in gcc trunk? Do those releases still use
their own patches for gcc or has all of those changes been committed to gcc
trunk?
If so, does anyone recall the specific commits? In particular, I am i
"Paulo J. Matos" writes:
> I am quite confused about the difference between the above two options
> in Makefile fragments.
>
> They both seem to be doing the same thing which is to set the options
> to build libgcc2 with.
>
> The only thing that comes to mind is that LIBGCC2_CFLAGS only applies
>
On 17/06/11 15:22, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
LIBGCC2_CFLAGS applies only to libgcc (all multilib versions of libgcc).
MULTILIB_EXTRA_OPTS applies to all target libraries (libstdc++, libjava,
libgo, etc.).
Thanks for clearing that up for me. Since I am focused on the C frontend
only I actually
Jack Howarth writes:
> What is the current state of supporting hardened operating systems
> that default to -fpie/-fPIE/-pie in gcc trunk? Do those releases still use
> their own patches for gcc or has all of those changes been committed to gcc
> trunk?
> If so, does anyone recall the specif
Hi,
There are some flags that are needed by the target to build libgcc2. I
am keeping those in TARGET_LIBGCC2_FLAGS. However, compilation is failed
even before the building begins because configure fails. While trying to
compile test programs configure is using TARGET_LIBGCC2_FLAGS.
This see
I am looking at an internally reported bug against 4.6 that starts
with something like this:
$ cat a.cc
int bar(int);
struct B {
B(int);
~B() __attribute__((noreturn));
};
int foo(void)
{
B::B f(10);
return 0;
}
int bar(int j)
{
B(10);
}
$ ./cc1plus -Wall -Werror a.cc
int foo()
a.cc:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 14:47, Diego Novillo wrote:
> if (flag_syntax_only || flag_wpa)
> return;
>
> to
>
> if (flag_syntax_only || flag_wpa || errorcount > 0)
> return;
To clarify. It would be 'seen_error ()' instead of 'errorcount > 0',
but the idea is the same.
Diego.
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 07:30:43AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Jack Howarth writes:
>
> > What is the current state of supporting hardened operating systems
> > that default to -fpie/-fPIE/-pie in gcc trunk? Do those releases still use
> > their own patches for gcc or has all of those ch
On 06/17/2011 10:55 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 14:47, Diego Novillo wrote:
if (flag_syntax_only || flag_wpa)
return;
to
if (flag_syntax_only || flag_wpa || errorcount> 0)
return;
To clarify. It would be 'seen_error ()' instead of 'errorcount> 0',
but the id
In GCC 3.3.3, I had a typedef with attribute((mode(byte))) on it. That worked
(the resulting type had size 1).
In GCC 4.5.1, this no longer works; the attribute is silently ignored. It does
work when used on a variable declaration directly, but for the many lines of
code that relied on the ty
Why aren't the BOOT_LDFLAGS settings honored outside of the gcc build
subdirectory?
On darwin, we are now setting...
BOOT_LDFLAGS += `case ${host} in *-*-darwin[1][1-9]*) echo -Wl,-no_pie ;; esac;`
in config/mh-darwin, and while the generated toplevel Makefile shows...
LDFLAGS="$(POS
On 06/17/2011 08:54 AM, Paul Koning wrote:
> In GCC 3.3.3, I had a typedef with attribute((mode(byte))) on it. That
> worked (the resulting type had size 1).
>
> In GCC 4.5.1, this no longer works; the attribute is silently ignored.
It certainly does work. libgcc relies on it.
You'll have to
On Jun 17, 2011, at 2:15 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 06/17/2011 08:54 AM, Paul Koning wrote:
>> In GCC 3.3.3, I had a typedef with attribute((mode(byte))) on it. That
>> worked (the resulting type had size 1).
>>
>> In GCC 4.5.1, this no longer works; the attribute is silently ignored.
>
make[5]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
makeinfo --split-size=500 --split-size=500
--split-size=500 -I ../.././libgomp/../gcc/doc/include -I
../.././libgomp -o libgomp.info ../.././libgomp/libgomp.texi
/bin/sh ./libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile
/Users/gj/Projects/gcc/gcc-4.6-20110610/h
Is there a good technical reason why thumb prologue is
still in text, not rtl?
This is, unfortunately, the only dwarf2-capable target
that outputs anything substantial in the prologue that
has actually been updated to handle dwarf2 cfi info.
If I tried to convert it to rtl, what obstacles would
Snapshot gcc-4.6-20110617 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.6-20110617/
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
"Paulo J. Matos" writes:
> There are some flags that are needed by the target to build libgcc2. I
> am keeping those in TARGET_LIBGCC2_FLAGS. However, compilation is
> failed even before the building begins because configure fails. While
> trying to compile test programs configure is using
> TARG
Jack Howarth writes:
>Why aren't the BOOT_LDFLAGS settings honored outside of the gcc build
> subdirectory?
> On darwin, we are now setting...
>
> BOOT_LDFLAGS += `case ${host} in *-*-darwin[1][1-9]*) echo -Wl,-no_pie ;;
> esac;`
>
> in config/mh-darwin, and while the generated toplevel Mak
Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz writes:
> /Users/gj/Projects/gcc/gcc-4.6-20110610/host-x86_64-apple-darwin10.7.4/gcc/xgcc
> -B/Users/gj/Projects/gcc/gcc-4.6-20110610/host-x86_64-apple-darwin10.7.4/gcc/
> -B/usr/local/x86_64-apple-darwin10.7.4/bin/
> -B/usr/local/x86_64-apple-darwin10.7.4/lib/ -isystem
> /usr
24 matches
Mail list logo
