Re: Problem in X Windows programming

On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 09:45:52AM +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I am new to X-Windows programming and can't get my program to > work. You are on the wrong list. This is the developer's list for the compiler itself; it is not a place for beginning programmers to ask for help.

a mudflap experiment on freebsd

A customer expressed interest in mudflap, so I tried to see if I could use it compile something large. I used gcc itself for this test. I've attached my notes, and the patches I wrote as part of this. I will probably be able to generate a couple of bug reports and/or patches out of this. -- Jim

Problem in X Windows programming

HI All, I am new to X-Windows programming and can't get my program to work. The program compiles successfully but there is problem in the linking part. Do we do it like other C Prog ie, gcc -o myprog myprog.c or do we have to use some other options. Can someone guide me with a demo prog

Re: warning: conflicting types for built-in function %qD

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Devang Patel wrote: > Would it be OK, if this warnings are disabled for system headers ? What is the built-in function involved and what (and why) is the different system header type? Is this a case where a system reuses a nonstandard name GCC has built in for an entirely

Re: warning: conflicting types for built-in function %qD

Would it be OK, if this warnings are disabled for system headers ? Thanks, - Devang --- c-decl.c.~1~2005-01-06 19:26:09.0 -0800 +++ c-decl.c2005-02-15 11:59:48.0 -0800 @@ -1169,11 +1169,15 @@ diagnose_mismatched_decls (tree newdecl, *oldtypep = oldtype = tryt

Successful build of 3.4.3

I successfully built gcc-3.4.3 on SuSE Linux 9.2: Here is the relevant information: config.guess: i686-pc-linux-gnu gcc -v: Reading specs from /opt/gcc-3.4.3/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.3/specs Configured with: ../gcc-3.4.3/configure --prefix=/opt/gcc-3.4.3 Thread model: posix gcc version 3.4.

Re: RFC: objc_msgSend efficiency patch

On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 05:07:30PM -0800, Dale Johannesen wrote: > - r0 = gimplify_expr (&OBJ_TYPE_REF_OBJECT (*expr_p), pre_p, > post_p, > + /* Postincrements in OBJ_TYPE_REF_OBJECT don't affect the > + value of the OBJ_TYPE_REF, so force them to be emitted > +

Re: Can gfortran compile fftw3?

Redirecting it gcc@ since that is where this part should be taken. On Feb 22, 2005, at 5:32 PM, Steven G. Johnson wrote: PS. A separate question, of course, is whether gcc 4.0's C compiler works with FFTW. The answer, at the moment, is "no" if you try to use SSE/SSE2, thanks to the usual gcc bug

Re: MIPS code generation bug...

On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 14:25 -0800, David Daney wrote: > Richard Sandiford wrote: > > David Daney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >>I know you are a busy guy, but if you have a chance could you look at this: > >> > >>http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19683 > > > > > > 'Fraid my spare-

Re: MIPS code generation bug...

David Daney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Richard Sandiford wrote: >> David Daney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>>I know you are a busy guy, but if you have a chance could you look at this: >>> >>>http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19683 >> 'Fraid my spare-time MIPS stuff doesn't really

Re: MIPS code generation bug...

Richard Sandiford wrote: David Daney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I know you are a busy guy, but if you have a chance could you look at this: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19683 'Fraid my spare-time MIPS stuff doesn't really extend to java. Any chance of a C testcase? Ask any you shal

Re: Question about GCC 3.4.1 -O2 Optimization bug (i386 and rs6000)

Thanks for clearing up my mis-understanding ! --- Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Feb 22, 2005, at 4:29 PM, Vasanth wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I am sure this bug has been reported before, but I > am > > not able to track it down in bugzilla. Someone > kindly > > refer me to the r

Re: Question about GCC 3.4.1 -O2 Optimization bug (i386 and rs6000)

On Feb 22, 2005, at 4:29 PM, Vasanth wrote: Hi, I am sure this bug has been reported before, but I am not able to track it down in bugzilla. Someone kindly refer me to the relevant bug report. You are violating C90/C99 aliasing rules. --Pinski

Question about GCC 3.4.1 -O2 Optimization bug (i386 and rs6000)

Hi, I am sure this bug has been reported before, but I am not able to track it down in bugzilla. Someone kindly refer me to the relevant bug report. -- Bug in -O2 level with following code construct, #define FTYPE float FTYPE fir_basic (FTYPE input, int ntaps, FTYPE h[], FTYPE z[]); for (ii =

Re: moving v16sf reg with multiple sub-regs

Ah, ok, sorry about that, I read it as being the equivalent of the whole operation. I'll throw op1 in there, thanks again. Dylan "James E Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Dylan Cuthbert wrote: For the last parameter (equiv) of emit_no_conflict_block I am puttin

Re: moving v16sf reg with multiple sub-regs

Dylan Cuthbert wrote: For the last parameter (equiv) of emit_no_conflict_block I am putting in "gen_rtx_SET ( V16SFmode, op0, op1 )", does this seem correct to you? This is supposed to be the value of op0 after the no conflict block. So it should just be op1. -- Jim Wilson, GNU Tools Support, ht

Re: Problem in GCC porting...

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to fix the already ported GCC 2.95 on the ABACUS processor. ABACUS processor is very much similar to SPARC from SUN. We don't maintain gcc-2.95 anymore, and we don't have a copy of the ABACUS port. Probably not much that volunteers can do to help you. 1. Va

Re: Does backend need to worry about overlap?

Andy Hutchinson wrote: do I need to guard against the possibility that the two operands overlap? Generally, overlapping operands won't happen because of the language rules, except in special cases. If you are defining builtins for string/memory operations, like strcpy or memmove, then you have

Re: RFC: objc_msgSend efficiency patch

On Feb 21, 2005, at 10:59 PM, Kai Henningsen wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale Johannesen) wrote on 21.02.05 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Simple Objective C programs such as #include void foo(void) { Object *o; [o++ free]; } result in calling objc_msgSend indirectly through a pointer, instead of

Re: moving v16sf reg with multiple sub-regs

Brilliant! This got rid of the warnings, *and* got rid of the spurious move I was getting. Thanks for the advice! The problem with the spurious move was with the move from memory to the v16sf register, because it was doing it with subregs it thought it still had to preserve the previous (unini

Re: MMX built-ins performance oddities

On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 05:13:14PM +0100, Prakash Punnoor wrote: > ... but gcc 3.4.3 has serious issues. It even miscompiles SSE code. > Are plans to fix this ... No. r~

Re: RFC: objc_msgSend efficiency patch

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale Johannesen) wrote on 21.02.05 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Simple Objective C programs such as > > #include > void foo(void) { >Object *o; >[o++ free]; > } > > result in calling objc_msgSend indirectly through a pointer, instead > of directly as they did in 3.3. Thi

Re: moving v16sf reg with multiple sub-regs

Dylan Cuthbert wrote: The assembler instructions themselves don't allow the target to be the same as the source unfortunately so removing the '&' is difficult. (If I enforce the same thing without a '&' in inline asm using builtins and building the expression manually to generate a new reg rtx

Re: moving v16sf reg with multiple sub-regs

Dylan Cuthbert wrote: Is there someway I can flag the moves to say that is moving the v16sf "whole" so it doesn't need to be initialised and hence avoid the warning? See emit_no_conflict_block in optabs.c. -- Jim Wilson, GNU Tools Support, http://www.SpecifixInc.com

DWARF Website

The DWARF Workgroup of the Free Standards Group (http://www.freestandards.org) is pleased to announce the creation of a website for the DWARF debugging format (http://dwarf.freestandards.org). The DWARF debugging format is used by compilers and debuggers to convey a description of the source code a

Re: Propagation of "pointer" attribute on registers

On Fri, 2005-02-18 at 13:28 -0600, Pat Haugen wrote: > > > > Is there a reason REG_POINTER isn't propagated to the target register for > rtl insns of the form "reg_x = regP_y + reg_z", where regP_y is a reg > marked as REG_POINTER? It seems the attribute is only propagated when we > have "reg_x

Re: RFC -- CSE compile-time stupidity

On Mon, 2005-02-21 at 16:36 -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Jeffrey A Law wrote: > > Sigh. I can't wait for this code to become less critical, both in terms > > of runtime and compile time performance. There are so many things in > > cse.c that are just plain bad > > > > cse.c has a fair amou

Re: Default constructor and uninitialized const

On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 04:32:33PM +0100, Peter Seiderer wrote: > Thanks, reproducable with intel: > > # icc -strict_ansi default_constructor.cpp > default_constructor.cpp(17): warning #854: const variable "a2" requires an > initializer -- class "A2" has no explicitly declared default constructor

Re: Default constructor and uninitialized const

> Peter Seiderer wrote: > > >Any hints to relevant documentation? > > > > > 8.5/9. > > Paolo. > Thank you for the quick answers. Peter -- Lassen Sie Ihren Gedanken freien Lauf... z.B. per FreeSMS GMX bietet bis zu 100 FreeSMS/Monat: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/mail

Re: moving v16sf reg with multiple sub-regs

One reason that occurred to me is that I am issueing the v16sf move as four subreg v4sf moves. One thing I get are "variable may not be initialised" warnings: v16sf test; test = _builtin_matrix_mul( left, right ); return test; Is there someway I can flag the moves to say that is moving the v16s

Re: Default constructor and uninitialized const

Peter Seiderer wrote: Any hints to relevant documentation? 8.5/9. Paolo.

Re: Default constructor and uninitialized const

> Peter Seiderer wrote: > > ># /opt/gcc-3.4.2/bin/g++ -Wall -ansi default_constructor.cpp > >default_constructor.cpp:17: error: uninitialized const `a2' > > > > > :) :) what *intel* calls "-strict_ansi", of course. > > Paolo. > Thanks, reproducable with intel: # icc -strict_ansi default_cons

Re: Default constructor and uninitialized const

Peter Seiderer wrote: # /opt/gcc-3.4.2/bin/g++ -Wall -ansi default_constructor.cpp default_constructor.cpp:17: error: uninitialized const `a2' :) :) what *intel* calls "-strict_ansi", of course. Paolo.

Re: Default constructor and uninitialized const

> Peter Seiderer wrote: > > >/* > > * Gives error when compiled with gcc (eg. 3.4.2, gcc-4.0-20050123). > > * No error with intel (8.1) or windows compiler. > > */ > > > > > ... try what they call "strict-ansi" mode... > > Paolo. > # /opt/gcc-3.4.2/bin/g++ -Wall -ansi default_constructor.cpp

Re: Default constructor and uninitialized const

Peter Seiderer wrote: /* * Gives error when compiled with gcc (eg. 3.4.2, gcc-4.0-20050123). * No error with intel (8.1) or windows compiler. */ ... try what they call "strict-ansi" mode... Paolo.

Default constructor and uninitialized const

Hello, the following short C++ programm does not compile with gcc (but with intel and windows): /* * Gives error when compiled with gcc (eg. 3.4.2, gcc-4.0-20050123). * No error with intel (8.1) or windows compiler. */ class A1 { public: A1() {} }; static const A1 a1; class A2 { }; stat

Re: C++ function pointer weirdness

eturn 0, GCC 3.4.1 - 3.4.4-20050222 return 2, | and now mainline again returns 0. I would say that is the behaviour I would expect. I don't understand the answer 2. I'll check with the C++ Core Working Group. | So the question is: What is the correct return value? | | Btw, we really should

Re: How does g++ implement error handling?

On 22 Feb 2005, Aaron W. LaFramboise murmured woefully: > I'm also interested in any overview-level information about the Dwarf2 > unwinding mechanism. Aldy Hernandez wrote one: . -- > ...Hires Root Beer... What we need these days is a stable, fas

Re: Re, interworking problem

On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 10:09, aram bharathi wrote: > hi, > normally in thumb mode add instruction supports immediate > values in the range of 0-255( same source and destination register) > . i like to increase the range(for architecture analysis as > curriculam project). i have added this instr

C++ function pointer weirdness

32; } void foo() {} int main() { return ref(foo) + ptr(&foo); } == GCC 2.95.3 - 3.4.0 return 0, GCC 3.4.1 - 3.4.4-20050222 return 2, and now mainline again returns 0. So the question is: What is the correct return value? B

Re: moving v16sf reg with multiple sub-regs

Hi there, The assembler instructions themselves don't allow the target to be the same as the source unfortunately so removing the '&' is difficult. (If I enforce the same thing without a '&' in inline asm using builtins and building the expression manually to generate a new reg rtx if the dest/

Re: [RFA:] change back name of initial rtl dump suffix to ".rtl".

Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > > ISTR the name change was to avoid a switch named -fdump-rtl-rtl. | > To invent an option name alias and use a minor repetition in it | > as a reason for changing the old behavior is Bad. | | It is not merely an option name ali

Re: interworking problem

Hi Aram, i have gone through the a.out file after this error. > that is producing full of arm instructions other than the main function(which is compiled for -mthumb). where should i change for this corresponding error. It is not clear what question you are asking here. Ian has pointed out th