On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 01/27/2016 04:17 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> We are trying to support
>>
>> t.c
>> ---
>> void *foo();
>>
>> int bar()
>> {
>> return ((int (*)())foo) ();
>> }
first?)
>
> Conclusion: IMHO, If ghc fetches the return value from the wrong register,
> then ghc is broken, not gcc.
We are trying to support
t.c
---
void *foo();
int bar()
{
return ((int (*)())foo) ();
}
t2.c
-
int foo () { return 0; }
thus doing a direct call to a function with a
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Michael Karcher
wrote:
> On 26.01.2016 21:47, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>> So, hookize and change to
>>>>
>>>> if (outgoing && POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE (func
>>>> ...
>&
On January 26, 2016 8:03:35 PM GMT+01:00, Michael Karcher
wrote:
>On 26.01.2016 16:40, Richard Biener wrote:
>> No, the patch looks somewhat broken to me. A complete fix would
>replace
>> the target macro FUNCTION_VALUE implementation by implementing the
>> function_val
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 10:21 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
> Hi Richard!
>
> On 01/26/2016 08:01 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> I developed a gcc patch that does not change the code generation for
>>> conforming programs but fixes this non-conforming use-ca
On January 26, 2016 8:25:50 AM GMT+01:00, Jeff Law wrote:
>On 01/26/2016 12:01 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On January 25, 2016 10:47:10 PM GMT+01:00, Michael Karcher
> wrote:
>>> Hello gcc developers,
>>>
>>> as discussed in https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/gh
On January 25, 2016 10:47:10 PM GMT+01:00, Michael Karcher
wrote:
>Hello gcc developers,
>
>as discussed in https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/11395 (and
>forwarded as PR c/69221), ghc generates non-compliant C code that is
>not
>compiled as intended on m68k. This is because its internal Cmm
7 matches
Mail list logo
