GCC 4.7.1 Status Report (2012-03-22)

[Richard Guenther]

Status
==

The GCC 4.7.0 release will be announced soon.  The branch is open for
regression and documentation fixes again.


Quality Data


Priority  #   Change from Last Report
---   ---
P10   -  2 
P2   66   -  4
P3   13   + 11 
---   ---
Total79   +  5


Previous Report
===

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-02/msg00441.html

The next report will be sent by me.

Ultimul sondaj

[cramer]

http://www.max-media.ro/politica/conform-ultimelor-sondaje-mircea-cosma-isi-surclaseaza-contracandidatii.html
 To unsubscribe please send email to unsubscr...@cc.psd-prahova.ro

GCC 4.7.0 Released

[Richard Guenther]

Today the GCC development team celebrates the 25th anniversary of the GNU
Compiler Collection.

When Richard Stallman announced the first public release of GCC in
1987, few could have imagined the broad impact that it has had.  It
has prototyped many language features that later were adopted as part
of their respective standards -- everything from "long long" type to
transactional memory. It deployed an architecture-neutral automatic
vectorization facility, OpenMP, and Polyhedral loop nest optimization.
It has provided the toolchain infrastructure for the GNU/Linux
ecosystem used everywhere from Google and Facebook to financial
markets and stock exchanges.  We salute and thank the hundreds
of developers who have contributed over the years to make
GCC one of the most long-lasting and successful free software projects
in the history of this industry.

As a special present we have prepared the release of GCC 4.7.0 which
continues the series of free software high-quality industry-standard
compilers.

GCC 4.7.0 is a major release, containing substantial new
functionality not available in GCC 4.6.x or previous GCC releases.

GCC 4.7 features support for software transactional memory on
selected architectures.  The C++ compiler supports a bigger
subset of the new ISO C++11 standard such as support for atomics
and the C++11 memory model, non-static data member initializers,
user-defined literals, alias-declarations, delegating constructors,
explicit override and extended friend syntax.  The C compiler adds support
for more features from the new ISO C11 standard.  GCC now supports
version 3.1 of the OpenMP specification for C, C++ and Fortran.

The link-time optimization (LTO) framework has seen improvements
with regards to scalability, stability and resource needs.  Inlining
and interprocedural constant propagation have been improved.

GCC 4.7 now supports various new GNU extensions to the DWARF debugging
information format, like entry value and call site information, a typed
DWARF stack and a more compact macro representation.

Extending the widest support for hardware architectures in the
industry, GCC 4.7 gains support for Adapteva's Epiphany processor,
National Semiconductor's CR16, and TI's C6X as well as Tilera's
TILE-Gx and TILEPro families of processors.  The x86
family support has been extended by the Intel Haswell and AMD Piledriver
architectures.  ARM has gained support for the Cortex-A7 family.

See

  http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.7/changes.html

for more information about changes in GCC 4.7.

This release is available from the FTP servers listed here:

  http://www.gnu.org/order/ftp.html

The release is in gcc/gcc-4.7.0/ subdirectory.

If you encounter difficulties using GCC 4.7, please do not contact me
directly.  Instead, please visit http://gcc.gnu.org for information
about getting help.


Driving a leading free software project such as GNU Compiler Collection
would not be possible without support from its many contributors.
Not to only mention its developers but especially its regular testers
and users which contribute to its high quality.  The list of individuals
is too large to thank individually!

Re: GCC 5 & modularity

[Peter Dolding]

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Jonathan Wakely  wrote:
> On 21 March 2012 15:35, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
>>>
>>
>> I am not sure what you expect from me. As I said many times, I have not a
>> global understanding of GCC (the "global reviewers" have a much better
>> global understanding than I do). So I cannot propose or initiate a list of
>> modules.
>>
>> Or do you want me to just propose a documentation patch with a canvas or
>> frame for other poeple to fill?
>
> Why not start a wiki page?  There's no need for patch approval and
> anyone can make edits to improve it gradually over time.  If the
> initial version is wrong someone can change it, but at least it will
> have been started.

Really it must happen at code level.  The advantage of modules is for
safer coding.

We have got stacks of docs written from the outside looking in.
Modules have to start in the code base.  Once it clear what is in a
module the module shape of the code base can be become stable.

gccint and work out a cut into a clear define module.  Create a
description for what has been cut.  Repeat.

Sooner or latter it will become module design.

The people who can review if a cut is sane are the ones working on the
code base.

This is the problem you can try to write a global list but until it in
the code base the global list will be open to change.

The gccint gives enough over view to start trying to plan a cut.

Really that the thing we need to focus on what will be the first module to make.

Peter Dolding

Re: GCC 4.7.1 Status Report (2012-03-22)

[Paulo J. Matos]

I notice that on ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/pub/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.7.0/

there's no gcc-core tarball. Is this still going to show up or will it 
not be released anymore?


On 22/03/12 09:49, Richard Guenther wrote:


Status
==

The GCC 4.7.0 release will be announced soon.  The branch is open for
regression and documentation fixes again.


Quality Data


Priority  #   Change from Last Report
---   ---
P10   -  2
P2   66   -  4
P3   13   + 11
---   ---
Total79   +  5


Previous Report
===

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-02/msg00441.html

The next report will be sent by me.




--
PMatos

Re: GCC 4.7.1 Status Report (2012-03-22)

[Paulo J. Matos]

I notice that on ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/pub/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.7.0/

there's no gcc-core tarball. Is this still going to show up or will it 
not be released anymore?


On 22/03/12 09:49, Richard Guenther wrote:


Status
==

The GCC 4.7.0 release will be announced soon.  The branch is open for
regression and documentation fixes again.


Quality Data


Priority  #   Change from Last Report
---   ---
P10   -  2
P2   66   -  4
P3   13   + 11
---   ---
Total79   +  5


Previous Report
===

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-02/msg00441.html

The next report will be sent by me.




--
PMatos

Re: GCC 4.7.1 Status Report (2012-03-22)

[Jakub Jelinek]

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 01:36:58PM +, Paulo J. Matos wrote:
> I notice that on ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/pub/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.7.0/
> 
> there's no gcc-core tarball. Is this still going to show up or will
> it not be released anymore?

They won't be provided for 4.7+, see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg01525.html

Jakub

Re: GCC 4.7.1 Status Report (2012-03-22)

[Paulo J. Matos]

On 22/03/12 13:58, Jakub Jelinek wrote:

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 01:36:58PM +, Paulo J. Matos wrote:

I notice that on ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/pub/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.7.0/

there's no gcc-core tarball. Is this still going to show up or will
it not be released anymore?


They won't be provided for 4.7+, see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg01525.html

Jakub




Thanks Jakub and sorry for the previous duplicate message.

--
PMatos

Re: The state of glibc libm

[Vincent Lefevre]

On 2012-03-15 10:52:05 -0500, Steven Munroe wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-03-15 at 03:07 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > On 2012-03-14 14:40:06 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > > On Wed, 14 Mar 2012, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > 
> > > > For double-double (IBM long double), I don't think the notion of
> > > > correct rounding makes much sense anyway. Actually the double-double
> > > > arithmetic is mainly useful for the basic operations in order to be
> > > > able to implement elementary functions accurately (first step in
> > > > Ziv's strategy, possibly a second step as well). IMHO, on such a
> > > > platform, if expl() (for instance) just calls exp(), this is OK.
> > > 
> Why would that be OK? If we have higher precision long double then the
> libm should deliver that higher precision.

I initially thought that the only goal of a double-double format
(instead of the standard quadruple precision) was to get an
accurate implementation of the elementary functions in double
precision (BTW, that's probably why expl() and so on didn't
exist before C99).

Now, since expl() now exists, if the user calls it, perhaps his
goal is to get more precision, so finally I agree that expl()
should really have an accuracy close to LDBL_MANT_DIG. However
this is quite useless in portable programs, where long double
can have the same precision as double (as this is the case on
ARM).

For the same reason, if the user chose long double instead of
double, this may be because he wanted more precision than double.
So, in the long term, the ABI should probably be changed to have
long double = quadruple precision (binary128).

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre  - Web: 
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: 
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

Re: The state of glibc libm

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Thu, 22 Mar 2012, Vincent Lefevre wrote:

> I initially thought that the only goal of a double-double format
> (instead of the standard quadruple precision) was to get an
> accurate implementation of the elementary functions in double
> precision (BTW, that's probably why expl() and so on didn't
> exist before C99).

I'd imagine the point is to be faster than pure software quad-precision 
floating point.

> Now, since expl() now exists, if the user calls it, perhaps his
> goal is to get more precision, so finally I agree that expl()
> should really have an accuracy close to LDBL_MANT_DIG. However
> this is quite useless in portable programs, where long double
> can have the same precision as double (as this is the case on
> ARM).

(FWIW, the ABI for AArch64 - ARMv8 in 64-bit mode - uses quad precision 
for long double.)

> For the same reason, if the user chose long double instead of
> double, this may be because he wanted more precision than double.

You mean range?  IBM long double provides more precision, but not more 
range.

> So, in the long term, the ABI should probably be changed to have
> long double = quadruple precision (binary128).

The ABI for Power Architecture changed away from quad precision to using 
IBM long double (the original SysV ABI for PowerPC used quad precision, 
the current ABI uses IBM long double)

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com

[txcorp.com #40791] Resolved: GCC 4.7.0 Released

[Tech-X Internal IT Support via RT]

According to our records, your request has been resolved. If you have any
further questions or concerns, please reply to this email.

Mirror

[Игорь]

Good day!
I've set up a new mirror for GCC.
Here are the details:
Server name – Webhostinggeeks
Server admin – Igor, whg@gmail.com
Server location – Riga, Latvia
Server address – http://mirrors.webhostinggeeks.com/
Server protocol – http
Connection speed – 100 Mbps
Mirror location – http://mirrors.webhostinggeeks.com/gcc/
Frequency of updates – Once a day
Please, add my mirror to your mirrors list if it’s possible.
Thank you.