Hi all,
I'm currently trying to find the best way to solve PR 49263 and I've ran
into some questions regarding the combine pass.
Summary of the story:
The SH machine description has a pattern that is supposed to generate
the "tst #imm, r0" instruction as a combination of an and and a
comparison,
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 07:35:17PM -0700, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>> C++11 is essentially binary incompatible with C++98.
>
> Only partially. The layout for user-defined classes is the same, and
PODness has changed from C++98.
> code sequences
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 07:35:17PM -0700, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> C++11 is essentially binary incompatible with C++98.
Only partially. The layout for user-defined classes is the same, and
code sequences for calls that don't include new features like rvalue
references is the same. Some very imp
Well, I just switched to 64-bit host and everything is fine.
Bingfeng
> -Original Message-
> From: harder...@gmail.com [mailto:harder...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Huang Ping
> Sent: 10 October 2011 16:55
> To: Bingfeng Mei
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Porting 64-bit target on 32-b
2011/10/10 Bingfeng Mei :
> I believe that 64-bit target on 32-bit host is not supported by GCC.
> You need a lot of hackings to do so.
>
> Check this thread.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-03/msg00908.html
Then how did you solve your problem in this thread?
do many hackings on 32-bit ho
> I'm porting a 64-bit target gcc on a 32-bit i386 host. I have set
> need_64bit_hwint to yes in config.gcc. But it fails when building
> libgcc.
You need to do the same in libcpp/configure.ac with recent versions.
--
Eric Botcazou
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
> I believe that 64-bit target on 32-bit host is not supported by GCC.
That's ancient information; it's worked fine for over a decade (using
64-bit HOST_WIDE_INT automatically for targets that need it).
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
I believe that 64-bit target on 32-bit host is not supported by GCC.
You need a lot of hackings to do so.
Check this thread.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-03/msg00908.html
Bingfeng Mei
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of
Hi, all
I'm porting a 64-bit target gcc on a 32-bit i386 host. I have set
need_64bit_hwint to yes in config.gcc. But it fails when building
libgcc.
Then I did a simple test. test case like this:
int test ()
{
return 0;
}
I use cc1 compile it with -fdump-tree-all. The 003t.orioginal dump file s
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Shiv Shankar Dayal
wrote:
> So, instead of a stack and a heap, you now have a stack and "something that
> looks
> exactly like a heap but we'll call it a stacky-thing" which will be used for
> all
> the
> allocations that would have gone on the heap.
>
> I think w
On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 11:13:31, Shiv Shankar Dayal wrote:
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Heapless C/C++
>
> I have not thought over it for more than three days. But here is the
> simple answer. You can implement two stacks in one. Keep normal stuff
> which is not allocated by our alloca(
Hi Jeff, Steven,
I have filed a bug at http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50663
Could somebody confirm it?
I am studying this piece of codes and have spent some time on it,
I'm working on a patch and hoping could help on this issue,
Please help me review it later. Thanks.
--
Best Regar
12 matches
Mail list logo
