[Abe wrote:]
After finishing fixing the known regressions, I intend/plan to reg-test for
AArch64;
after that, I think I`m going to need some community help to reg-test for other
ISAs.
[Alan wrote:]
OK, I'm confused. When you write "making the new if-converter not mangle IR"...
> does "the n
On 07/20/2015 09:55 AM, Nikolai Bozhenov wrote:
On 07/17/2015 08:31 PM, Michael Eager wrote:
A related issue is where the breakpoint is taken. GCC sets breakpoints
at the first instruction generated for a statement, which in this case,
appears to be before any of the arguments to bar are eva
Abe wrote:
of course this says nothing about whether there is *some* other ISA that gets
regressed!
After finishing fixing the known regressions, I intend/plan to reg-test for
AArch64;
after that, I think I`m going to need some community help to reg-test for other
ISAs.
OK, I'm confused.
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 07:55:46PM +0300, Nikolai Bozhenov wrote:
> On 07/17/2015 08:31 PM, Michael Eager wrote:
> >On 07/17/2015 03:43 AM, Nikolai Bozhenov wrote:
> >>Consider the following example:
> >>
> >> 1 extern void bar(int *i1, int *i2, int *i3);
> >> 2
> >> 3 int __attribute__
On 07/17/2015 08:31 PM, Michael Eager wrote:
On 07/17/2015 03:43 AM, Nikolai Bozhenov wrote:
Consider the following example:
1 extern void bar(int *i1, int *i2, int *i3);
2
3 int __attribute__((noinline)) foo(int i1, int i2) {
4 int a, b, c;
5 a = i1 << i2;
6
Hello All,
In GCC trunk svn 225726 the file gcc/jit/jit-recording.c contains the
following code near line 4168:
/* The get_wide_int specialization for . */
template <>
bool
memento_of_new_rvalue_from_const ::get_wide_int (wide_int *out) const
{
*out = wi::shwi (m_value, sizeof (m_value) * 8)
