gcc-python-plugin is a plugin for GCC 4.6 onwards which embeds the
CPython interpreter within GCC, allowing you to write new compiler
warnings in Python, generate code visualizations, etc.
It ships with "gcc-with-cpychecker", which implements static analysis
passes for GCC aimed at finding bugs in
Correct, you can run tests from llvm tree with any compiler.
https://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/wiki/AddressSanitizerTestSuite
Note that lsan does not depend on the compiler, it is a library-only feature.
--kcc
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Yury Gribov wrote:
> On 09/30/2014 07:15 P
On 09/30/2014 07:15 PM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Hello,
After I've recently enabled Address Sanitizer for AArch64 in GCC, I'd
like to enable Leak Sanitizer.
I'd like to know what are the requirements wrt testing it? IIUC there
are no lsan tests in the GCC testsuite so far.
Should I just test a f
Hello,
After I've recently enabled Address Sanitizer for AArch64 in GCC, I'd
like to enable Leak Sanitizer.
I'd like to know what are the requirements wrt testing it? IIUC there
are no lsan tests in the GCC testsuite so far.
Should I just test a few sample programs to check if basic functionalit
On 22-09-14 10:28, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 09-09-14 12:56, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, 9 Sep 2014, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 18-08-14 14:16, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 06-08-14 17:10, Tom de Vries wrote:
We could insert a pass-group here that only deals
On 30 September 2014 01:08, George R Goffe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to get some help here.
>
> I have two problems
> with the mailing list software. #1) I have tried to get into digest mode
> by unsubscribing and re-subscribing to the list but that's not working.
> #2) I'm trying to get some hel
On 30 September 2014 01:25, wrote:
>
> On Sep 29, 2014, at 7:59 PM, George R Goffe wrote:
>
>>
>> Jonathan,
>>
>> I'll give it a try. Thanks.
>>
>>
>> What is the problem with the mailing list software? Can't handle rich-text?
>> What a pain!
>
> I don’t know if that is true, but if so, a lot o