Re: scripting interface to GCC ?

On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 16:25 -0700, Tom Tromey wrote: > > "Mike" == Mike Mattie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Mike> Has anyone ever tried to build a scripting interface into the guts of > Mike> GCC with something like SWIG ? > > I've heard of a couple efforts along these lines -- once with S

gcc autovectorization question

Hi All, I am trying to use the latest autovectorization gcc code to generate functionally correct SSE instructions, and I have the following questions: Where is the latest stable gcc version with autovector? (is this 4.1.0?) and where is the latest development code for this? (off of the SVN

Re: Ada subtypes and base types

Jeffrey A Law wrote: > On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 20:08 +0100, Waldek Hebisch wrote: > > > What do you mean by "abuse"? TYPE_MAX_VALUE means maximal value > > allowed by given type. > As long as you're *absolutely* clear that a variable with a > restricted range can never hold a value outside that th

Re: gcc 4.1

On Mar 13, 2006, at 2:05 PM, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf wrote: The appropriate place for such stuff is gcc@gcc.gnu.org No, not really. gcc-help is more appropriate. Am I the only one who gets those: DOMElement.m:283: warning: pointer type mismatch in conditional expression I doubt it. F

Re: Line insn notes in modulo-sched

> Hi Ayal, > > The SMS implementation in GCC, in modulo-sched.c, uses line notes > to find insn locations, see find_line_note. Why are you using > line notes instead of insn locators? Line notes are on the list > of Things That Should Not Be, and insn locators replace them. Is > there a reason

Re: scripting interface to GCC ?

Tom Tromey wrote: >> "Mike" == Mike Mattie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Mike> Has anyone ever tried to build a scripting interface into the guts of > Mike> GCC with something like SWIG ? > > I've heard of a couple efforts along these lines -- once with Scheme > and once with Python. I don

Re: Question about use of C++ copy constructor

David Fang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The relevant text appears in gcc-3.4's release notes: > "When binding an rvalue of class type to a reference, the copy constructor > of the class must be accessible." Thanks. I see that I have managed to ask about a "frequently reported bug." Sorry about

Line insn notes in modulo-sched

Hi Ayal, The SMS implementation in GCC, in modulo-sched.c, uses line notes to find insn locations, see find_line_note. Why are you using line notes instead of insn locators? Line notes are on the list of Things That Should Not Be, and insn locators replace them. Is there a reason for modulo-sch

Re: scripting interface to GCC ?

> "Mike" == Mike Mattie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Mike> Has anyone ever tried to build a scripting interface into the guts of Mike> GCC with something like SWIG ? I've heard of a couple efforts along these lines -- once with Scheme and once with Python. I don't know if either used SWIG. N

Re: Ada subtypes and base types

On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 20:08 +0100, Waldek Hebisch wrote: > What do you mean by "abuse"? TYPE_MAX_VALUE means maximal value > allowed by given type. As long as you're *absolutely* clear that a variable with a restricted range can never hold a value outside that the restricted range in a conformin

Re: gcc 4.1

The appropriate place for such stuff is gcc@gcc.gnu.org Am Montag, 13.03.06 um 17:19 Uhr schrieb Helge Hess: Hi, new gcc release, new warnings ;-) Am I the only one who gets those: DOMElement.m:283: warning: pointer type mismatch in conditional expression For stuff like: objs[1] = _ns

Re: Question about use of C++ copy constructor

Also see CWG issue 391: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#391 which will make our behavior non-conforming in C++0X. -Howard On Mar 13, 2006, at 4:02 PM, David Fang wrote: Hi, Didn't see a reply yet, so I'll chime in. The relevant text appears in gcc-3.4's

Re: -fmudflap and -fmudflapth

"Rafael Espíndola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Use `-fmudflapth' instead of `-fmudflap' to compile and to link if > your program is multi-threaded. [...but...] > gate_mudflap (void) { return flag_mudflap != 0 } Maybe something broke this, but -fmudflapth used to imply setting both flag_mudflap

Re: Question about use of C++ copy constructor

Hi, Didn't see a reply yet, so I'll chime in. The relevant text appears in gcc-3.4's release notes: "When binding an rvalue of class type to a reference, the copy constructor of the class must be accessible." PR 12226 seems to be the mother bug related to this (many dupes). Fang > foo.c

Re: Problem with pex-win32.c

Danny Smith wrote: > In my experience, following test is not necessary. Win9x just ignores > the CREATE_NO_WINDOWS flag so setting it is a harmless no-op on these > platforms. It's OK with me not to do it; I just didn't have those platforms to use for testing, and it seems more pedantically corr

Re: Problem with pex-win32.c

Mark Mitchell wrote at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-03/msg00441.html > Here is a sample program which does the right thing (no spurious console > windows, all output visible) when run either from a console or from

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On Mar 13, 2006, at 12:16 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: PR/21195 is about inlining the SSE builtins. These are special because, for example, you probably would prefer GDB to not step into them, but just execute them. :-) We have an APPLE LOCAL patch to remove the debug information associated

Question about use of C++ copy constructor

When I compile the attached test case with mainline, I get this: foo.cc: In function ‘void foo(const B&)’: foo.cc:3: error: ‘B::B(const B&)’ is private foo.cc:13: error: within this context I don't understand why, as I don't see the copy constructor being used anywhere. It seems to me this code

Re: GCC Port (gcc backend) for Microchip PICMicro microcontroller

On Mar 13, 2006, at 5:29 AM, Colm O' Flaherty wrote: I've been thinking a bit more about this (no code yet: I was busy trying to find and fix a bug in gpsim), and I'm still not sure what the optimal development mode is.. by this, I mean.. "what should the proposed PIC port of GCC produce"?

Re: Problem with pex-win32.c

Here is a sample program which does the right thing (no spurious console windows, all output visible) when run either from a console or from a console-free environment, such as a Cygwin xterm. This is the code we'll be working into libiberty -- unless someone has a better solution! -- Mark Mitch

emit-rtl.c: 5048 assert

All- I'm having problems with an assert on line 5048 of emit-rtl.c gcc_assert (i < MAX_RECOG_OPERANDS); The assert is in the copy_insn_1() function and is asserted when the number of copied scratch registers exceeds MAX_RECOG_OPERANDS. For my particular machine (IA-64) this number is 30.

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On 3/13/06, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/13/06, Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is there a bugzilla entry describing the bug Richard is fixing? > > If not, it'd be nice to have, if for no other reason than > > it would show up naturally when people look for bugs fixed

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On 3/13/06, Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there a bugzilla entry describing the bug Richard is fixing? > If not, it'd be nice to have, if for no other reason than > it would show up naturally when people look for bugs fixed in gcc-4.1.1. > > I can create one, but it'd be better if someo

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

Is there a bugzilla entry describing the bug Richard is fixing? If not, it'd be nice to have, if for no other reason than it would show up naturally when people look for bugs fixed in gcc-4.1.1. I can create one, but it'd be better if someone actually involved in the action did. - Dan -- Wine for

Re: [M32C-ELF] : Improper follow-up of bss section

This is all binutils specific, nothing to do with gcc as such. Please re-post your queries to the binutils list. Andrew.

[M32C-ELF] : Improper follow-up of bss section

Hi, I have downloaded latest GCC and Binutils sources from FSF for M32C port. Using these sources, I could successfully build the cross toolchain i.e. m32c-elf-*. I have observed the following behavior while building an application, Case 1 - Initialized global variables are not present in the app

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On 3/13/06, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't think this is related, and a quick check with the patch shows > still unaligned > moves to the stack. Patience is a virtue i guess :) Is there good chances your inlining fix will hit mainline soon?

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On 3/13/06, tbp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/13/06, tbp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 3/13/06, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg00739.html > > /me ventilates. > > You're my hero. > A double+ hero on top of that. > http://gcc.gnu

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On 3/13/06, tbp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/13/06, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg00739.html > /me ventilates. > You're my hero. A double+ hero on top of that. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg00737.html I think i've hi

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On 3/13/06, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg00739.html /me ventilates. You're my hero.

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On 3/13/06, tbp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/13/06, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I see the bug and will have a fix in a moment. > You made my day. Or you're about to. Unless you're lying and i'll have > to curse you for 7 generations. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On 3/13/06, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I see the bug and will have a fix in a moment. You made my day. Or you're about to. Unless you're lying and i'll have to curse you for 7 generations.

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On 3/13/06, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Of course from 4.1.0 on you can easier stick an > __attribute__((flatten)) on the function you want everything inlined to > (finalblow) and get everything inlined into it. But that's not really what i'm after: i expect trivial functions to g

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On 3/13/06, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/13/06, tbp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 3/13/06, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Starting with gcc 4.1.0 we have inline heuristics in place that will > > _always_ > > > inline such simple "wrappers". So, if thi

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On 3/13/06, tbp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/13/06, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Starting with gcc 4.1.0 we have inline heuristics in place that will > _always_ > > inline such simple "wrappers". So, if this still happens, there is a bug > > in the > > heuristics and tha

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On 3/13/06, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Starting with gcc 4.1.0 we have inline heuristics in place that will _always_ > inline such simple "wrappers". So, if this still happens, there is a bug in > the > heuristics and that should be reported. Before 4.1.0 the heuristics were

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On 3/13/06, tbp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/13/06, Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Wait wait. PR/21195 is about inlining > > the SSE builtins. > No. PR/21195 was really about inline heuristic going ballistic. > Those intrinsics are thin wrappers around builtins, and ultimately >

Re: bootstrap broken on tunk for combined source tree

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Paolo Bonzini schrieb: > >> config.log in libiberty contains: >> >> configure:2272: >> /SCRATCH/gcc-build/Linux/i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-4.2/gcc-4.2/./prev-gcc/xgcc >> >> -B/SCRATCH/gcc-build/Linux/i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-4.2/gcc-4.2/./prev-gcc/ >> -B/SC

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

On 3/13/06, Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Wait wait. PR/21195 is about inlining > the SSE builtins. No. PR/21195 was really about inline heuristic going ballistic. Those intrinsics are thin wrappers around builtins, and ultimately resolve to a couple of operations. Typical C++ (accesso

Re: bootstrap broken on tunk for combined source tree

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Paolo Bonzini schrieb: > >> config.log in libiberty contains: >> >> configure:2272: >> /SCRATCH/gcc-build/Linux/i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-4.2/gcc-4.2/./prev-gcc/xgcc >> >> -B/SCRATCH/gcc-build/Linux/i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-4.2/gcc-4.2/./prev-gcc/ >> -B/SC

Re: [PATCH] Add new target-hook truncated_to_mode

Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> bool >>> truncated_to_mode (enum machine_mode mode, rtx x) >>> { >>>if (REG_P (x) && rtl_hooks.reg_truncated_to_mode (mode, x)) >>> return true; >>> >>>gcc_assert (!TRULY_NOOP_TRUNCATION (GET_MODE_BITSIZE (mode), >>>

Re: bootstrap broken on tunk for combined source tree

config.log in libiberty contains: configure:2272: /SCRATCH/gcc-build/Linux/i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-4.2/gcc-4.2/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/SCRATCH/gcc-build/Linux/i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-4.2/gcc-4.2/./prev-gcc/ -B/SCRATCH/gcc-build/Linux/i686-pc-linux-gnu/install/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -c -g -O2 conftes

bootstrap broken on tunk for combined source tree

bootstrap compiler gcc-4.1.0 binutils-2.16.1 build system: i686-pc-linux-gnu Configuring stage 2 in ./libiberty configure: creating cache ./config.cache checking whether to enable maintainer-specific portions of Makefiles... no checking for makeinfo... makeinfo --split-size=500 --split-size=50

Re: [PATCH] Add new target-hook truncated_to_mode

bool truncated_to_mode (enum machine_mode mode, rtx x) { if (REG_P (x) && rtl_hooks.reg_truncated_to_mode (mode, x)) return true; gcc_assert (!TRULY_NOOP_TRUNCATION (GET_MODE_BITSIZE (mode), GET_MODE_BITSIZE (GET_MODE (x))); return num_sign_b

Re: 100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X

tbp wrote: On 3/13/06, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Actually the best way of improving the inline heuristics is to get a real testcase (and not some benchmark) where the inline heuristics is messed up. Ah, you mean a brand new testcase because PR-21195 wasn't good enough? show u