On 12/24/2011 10:08 AM, Chase Douglas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't really follow gcc much, so I hope I'm asking this in the right
> place :).
>
> I would like to ask that the fix in revision 180159 be backported to the
> gcc 4.6 branch. It's a trivial change, but without it clang cannot
> compile any
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> Hi,
>
> currently alpha/vms backend emits a trampoline entry point for all nested
> functions. This is a waste of code space, as although nested functions are
> very common in Ada, address of nested functions are only seldom taken.
>
> T
Hi,
I don't really follow gcc much, so I hope I'm asking this in the right
place :).
I would like to ask that the fix in revision 180159 be backported to the
gcc 4.6 branch. It's a trivial change, but without it clang cannot
compile anything using the default std::shared_ptr constructor. That's
m
On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 06:09:58PM -0500, Andreas Kloeckner wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> please find attached the patch and the Changelog entry for our work on
> the fortran bug #48426.
>
> The attached patch implements the options
>
> -finteger-4-integer-8
> -freal-4-real-8
> -freal-4-real-10
> -frea
On 24 December 2011 12:14, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>
> Would it be technically possible to implement a binary patching
> approach in a user space shared library similar to the binary patching
> technique used in the kprobe implementation in the Linux kernel ?
>
> For more information, see also
> htt
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 24 December 2011 11:46, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> Would it be acceptable to replace the
>> _GLIBCXX_SYNCHRONIZATION_HAPPENS_BEFORE() and ..._AFTER() macros by
>> something like this:
>>
>> if (pf) (*pf)(addr, before_or_after_flag)
>>
>
On 24 December 2011 11:46, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>
> Would it be acceptable to replace the
> _GLIBCXX_SYNCHRONIZATION_HAPPENS_BEFORE() and ..._AFTER() macros by
> something like this:
>
> if (pf) (*pf)(addr, before_or_after_flag)
>
> where pf is a function pointer that is NULL by default and can
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 24 December 2011 11:11, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> Apart from that, I prefer to keep the thread-launching logic in the
>> library rather than headers, as it allows us to change it more easily
>> and for users to benefit just by linking t
On 24 December 2011 11:11, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> Apart from that, I prefer to keep the thread-launching logic in the
> library rather than headers, as it allows us to change it more easily
> and for users to benefit just by linking to a newer library rather
> than recompiling. I don't think th
On 24 December 2011 09:53, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> As documented in the libstdc++ manual, the shared pointer operations in
> libstdc++ headers can be instrumented by defining the macros
> _GLIBCXX_SYNCHRONIZATION_HAPPENS_BEFORE()/AFTER() and either libstdc++ or
> thread.cc has to be rebuilt in ord
Hi.
Hi Anatoly,
I cannot apply your patch to a lean tree. I tried to save your email
as a text file, copy from thunderbird, copy from gmail, copy from the
mailing list archive. But neither works.
Regards,
Jie
You can use a patch now?
Index: gcc/config/bfin/bfin-protos.h
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> First, do you have already a Copyright assignment on file? It's a
> precondition for any non trivial contribution.
I've just started the procedure to get a copyright assignment form filed.
> That said, please leave alone the baselines. Oth
12 matches
Mail list logo
