* H. J. Lu:
> Here are diffs of SPEC CPU 2K between before and after with gcc 4.1
> using "-O2 -ffast-math" on Nocona:
And what about Opterons? IOW, how "generic" is the optimization?
Snapshot gcc-4.1-20060303 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.1-20060303/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.1 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
Andrew Haley and I had a long talk about gcj and the eclipse java
compiler (we call it "ecj" for short) while we were at FOSDEM last
week. We concluded that we didn't foresee any serious technical
problems with using ecj as the java language front end to gcj, and
that we would like to move forward
Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
Hello,
here is a proposal for the patch to remove loop notes (I still need to
benchmark it, and probably split into smaller parts). However, I do not
understand some of the code from that it removes loop note usage, so I
would appreciate comments on them:
cse.c:cse_end_of_
Hello,
here is a proposal for the patch to remove loop notes (I still need to
benchmark it, and probably split into smaller parts). However, I do not
understand some of the code from that it removes loop note usage, so I
would appreciate comments on them:
cse.c:cse_end_of_basic_block -- somethin
> 2006-03-03Shrirang Khisti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>=20=20=20=09
> =20=09=20
>
> *config.sub : Add xc16x entry xc16x*-*-*) so that GCC will
> understand new xc16x processor
This should go upstream and GCC should just import the newest versions
of config.su
Hi all,
KPIT Cummins is contributing the complete GCC port for Infineon
XC16X
architecture. We would like to request you to send in your comments
on this port.
As we are putting our best efforts on this port its quality will
successively improve and fit more and more
On 03 March 2006 11:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello Respected Sir/Madam,
>
> We are using the GCC Torture which has been downloaded from your
> website. It would be highly helpful if we could the documentation for
> these GCC Torture as to what each test case is testing, and intension of
> t
--- Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 03 March 2006 11:38, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>
>
> >> Programs that do
> >> not support it are buggy and should be reported
> to
> >> the author.
> >
> > This might be good in theory, but in practice it's
> not
> > that simple. I am screening _all
the only trouble is that the tree generated unpacking and compiling
libmpfr.2.2.0.tar.bz2 is not compatible with what --with-mpfr-dir
expects, so that configure exits; I had to copy the mpfr include files
in foo/include, the libraries in foo/lib and use --with-mpfr=../../foo .
You have to sp
On 03 March 2006 11:38, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>> Programs that do
>> not support it are buggy and should be reported to
>> the author.
>
> This might be good in theory, but in practice it's not
> that simple. I am screening _all_ GNU projects, and
> I'm testing, contacting the maintainers, adv
Hello Respected Sir/Madam,
We are using the GCC Torture which has been downloaded from your
website. It would be highly helpful if we could the documentation for
these GCC Torture as to what each test case is testing, and intension of
the testcase in the Torture testsuite.
Your help with this re
Hello,
--- Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That's sad news. Maybe they would would consider a
> > well-written patch; I have to try.
> If you want to remain sane, don't look at their
> makefiles. :-)
> >> (Note that GCC 4.1.x is just building with
> builddir
> >> != srcdir under your
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 14:28:40 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
The MPFR version distributed with GMP 4.1.4 is old, very buggy, and
no longer maintained. It is highly recommended to compile GMP without
MPFR support and compile the latest MPFR version separately. You can
get it here:
http://www.mpfr.
That's sad news. Maybe they would would consider a
well-written patch; I have to try.
If you want to remain sane, don't look at their makefiles. :-)
(Note that GCC 4.1.x is just building with builddir
!= srcdir under your feet).
That's perfectly good for me.
That was to mean, that the
Ciao Paolo,
--- Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha
scritto:
> > I'm happy to hear that. I've tried 4.1 and it
> works
> > like a charm. I hope that the same happens with
> glibc.
>
> I doubt that. And glibc is much harder to set up
> and is usually built
> only by "people that know what th
Yes, i know it's a long time since 2.95.3 but actually trying to improve new
functionalities for that release due it's working for ARC targets specially.
ARC was not supported after 2.95.3 if im not in mistake.
Next release, 3.0 it's containing a testsuite folder within, but that's not the
same f
I'm happy to hear that. I've tried 4.1 and it works
like a charm. I hope that the same happens with glibc.
I doubt that. And glibc is much harder to set up and is usually built
only by "people that know what they're doing"; which means you have a ~0
chance of getting the maintainers to do t
> This code only works for one-complement machines, since it assumes a
> symmetric range for Int. It breaks when UI_To_Int returns Integer'First, as
> it did in this case. When it does, the abs produces an erroneous result
> (since checking is disabled). So it almost doesn't matter what it puts
19 matches
Mail list logo
