FWIW, I much prefer the navigation bar on the left no matter what
browser I'm using.
Dustin
pgpRTYu9WRFhX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
> Is your concern mainly Lynx users (and similar users)? It should be
> feasible to move the navigation bar to the beginning for these while
> still keeping it on the right side to be in sync with www.gnu.org.
Lynx is an example of a non-GUI browser. All non-GUI browsers would
suffer similarly.
> On this one, we follow the style of http://www.gnu.org. Looking
> into the CSS there, I see that indeed they (and thus us) set a
> different background color, alas that color is #fefefe which is
> white for all practical matters.
>
> Okay?
It addresses that issue, yes.
[Gerald Pfeifer]
> Stephan, if you could provide an egg of about 60% the current
> size, and one of about 70% (so that we can play a bit), that
> would be great.
Of course, my dark lord.
http://stl.nuwen.net/gcc50.png
http://stl.nuwen.net/gcc55.png
http://stl.nuwen.net/gcc60.png
http://stl.nuwen.
Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > (Which technique would you recommend to address what you refer to as
| > the "search engine" issue?)
|
| I have to ask, why do people use lynx these days when links or elinks
| are much faster and better text mode browsers?
some people don't run impe
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Jun 2006, DJ Delorie wrote:
>> Right-side navigation bars are nonstandard. It should be moved to the
>> left side. Don't accept the search engine excuse; that's easily
>> fixable. Also, by fixing the search engine issue you punish Lynx
>> users; the navigation m
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006, DJ Delorie wrote:
> Right-side navigation bars are nonstandard. It should be moved to the
> left side. Don't accept the search engine excuse; that's easily
> fixable. Also, by fixing the search engine issue you punish Lynx
> users; the navigation menu is now near (but not at)
On Wed, 24 May 2006, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
>Proposal: Whenever a new pass or a major functionality is added to
> gcc, a maintainer for it must be found. Preferably the
> author, or in case he from some reason is not considered
> suitable, some other person m
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> But is it really necessary to remove the egg too? Can we have
> it back? Pleaeaeaeaese? :-)
It's still there, just transformed into an Easter egg -- hidden in the
bushes. ;-)
Seriously, it did not really fit the design we inherited. I tried, and
fail
> Mark Mitchell writes:
Mark> That seems unfortunate, but so be it.
Yes it is very unfortunate and not very convenient for the way
that most developers want to use the build infrastructure. There no
longer is an equivalent to "make quickstrap". To rebuild only GCC, one
can use "make
David Edelsohn wrote:
> This is part of the new build infrastructure. One cannot simply
> go into $objdir/gcc and type "make". One either needs to use the
> appropriate incantation at the top-level build directory or go into
> $objdir/gcc and type "make CFLAGS='xxx'", where 'xxx' matches th
Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Typing "make" in $objdir/gcc (after a bootstrap) sometimes results in
| errors like:
|
| build/gencondmd.o: In function `VEC_rtx_heap_reserve':
| /net/sparrowhawk/scratch/mitchell/src/lto/gcc/rtl.h:195: undefined
| reference to `vec_heap_p_reserve'
|
|
This is part of the new build infrastructure. One cannot simply
go into $objdir/gcc and type "make". One either needs to use the
appropriate incantation at the top-level build directory or go into
$objdir/gcc and type "make CFLAGS='xxx'", where 'xxx' matches the
optimization options for t
On Jun 11, 2006, at 1:20 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
I'm using a version of mainline that's a few weeks old; is this
something that has been recently fixed?
Not really fixed, just hidden and the behavior of cgraph reverted to
what it was in 4.1.0 but you can still reproduce the failure with
-fke
Typing "make" in $objdir/gcc (after a bootstrap) sometimes results in
errors like:
build/gencondmd.o: In function `VEC_rtx_heap_reserve':
/net/sparrowhawk/scratch/mitchell/src/lto/gcc/rtl.h:195: undefined
reference to `vec_heap_p_reserve'
For an ordinary "make" the generator programs are built wi
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
| > Why is GCC-4.2.x missing -march=k8 -mtune=athlonxp -mtune=athlon-xp
| > -mtune=athlon_xp -msse3 -m3dnow+ -m32?
|
| I don't think we should have variants for all sorts of spellings
| such as athlonxp vs athlon-xp vs athlon_xp.
The big problem is that none of these work! I
[ gcc-patches added, Reply-To: set ]
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> Also what about moving the News up to a noticeable spot since right now
> it is down in a corner so it looks out of place. In fact on my screen
> which is set to 1024x768, I have to scroll to get to the news.
I belie
Andrew Pinski wrote:
| | Why is the table gcc/config/i386/i386.c:processor_alias_table[]
small and unextendable?
| |
| What do you mean by unextendable? I just tried to extend it and it
worked.
|
Is it true? The truth is half.
gcc$ for cpu in dothan sonoma sempron venice winchester palermo mero
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-06/msg00120.html
> I imagine that many people missed that announcement. I certainly did.
>
> Whilst I greatly appreciate Mark's GCC 4.2 Status Reports, I don't
> always read them all.
I try to keep the status part of
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006, Anny Blackyew wrote:
> Why is GCC-4.2.x missing -march=sempron -mtune=sempron -msse3 -m3dnow+?
As far as I can tell, tuning for Sempron doesn't make much sense
since this is not one specific design, but at least two different
ones (the Socket A variant and the Socket 754 varia
On Jun 11, 2006, at 11:09 AM, Anny Blackyew wrote:
Why is GCC-4.2.x missing -march=sempron -mtune=sempron -msse3 -
m3dnow+?
Well why don't you submit a patch to fix that?
Why is GCC-4.2.x missing -march=k8 -mtune=athlonxp -mtune=athlon-xp
-mtune=athlon_xp -msse3 -m3dnow+ -m32?
Why don't y
Why is GCC-4.2.x missing -march=sempron -mtune=sempron -msse3 -m3dnow+?
Why is GCC-4.2.x missing -march=k8 -mtune=athlonxp -mtune=athlon-xp
-mtune=athlon_xp -msse3 -m3dnow+ -m32?
Why is the table gcc/config/i386/i386.c:processor_alias_table[] small
and unextendable?
GCC want to say me bad news f
On 11 Jun 2006 10:14:02 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Please, do consider the above suggestions.
I will indeed and I am already thinking about them. Thanks for sharing
your thoughts with me. I will try to make my following emails more
clear on its definitions.
Cheers,
Ma
On 11 Jun 2006 10:31:07 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Manuel López-Ibáñez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| My project is about "risky" coercions in general: assignments,
| operators, prototypes. You can see some (and comment and propose)
| testcases in http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki
[ gcc-patches added, Reply-To: set ]
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006, DJ Delorie wrote:
> Sidebars should have some enclosing detail, such as a border or a
> shading, so set them off from the rest of the page. Don't rely on
> whitespace to do this job.
On this one, we follow the style of http://www.gnu.org.
"Manuel López-Ibáñez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| My project is about "risky" coercions in general: assignments,
| operators, prototypes. You can see some (and comment and propose)
| testcases in http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Wcoercion .
void h2(void)
{
int i;
for(i=0; i < siz
"Manuel López-Ibáñez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 10 Jun 2006 20:07:02 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > I'll like to see a more precise definition of your understanding of
| > "coercion" versus "conversion". Last time we dicussed this I was not
| > quite clear about wha
"Manuel López-Ibáñez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 10/06/06, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| >
| > Here is my vote, have four options:
| > -Wconversion the same as now.
|
| This is bad idea. Currently many people are relying in undocumented
| behaviour or the false perception that
Hello,
GCC 4.1.1 have successfully compiled on this system :
./config.guess:
i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC_EXEC_PREFIX=/usr/local/gcc411; export GCC_EXEC_PREFIX; gcc -v :
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: /usr/src/gcc-4.1.1/configure --prefix=/usr/local/gcc411
--enable-
On 10/06/06, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here is my vote, have four options:
-Wconversion the same as now.
This is bad idea. Currently many people are relying in undocumented
behaviour or the false perception that Wconversion detects risky
conversions. If we keep Wconversion, they
On 10 Jun 2006 20:07:02 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'll like to see a more precise definition of your understanding of
"coercion" versus "conversion". Last time we dicussed this I was not
quite clear about what you consider is "bad" what is not.
I was under the impression
I have a short piece of code that I am using for tuning an application.
"-freduce-all-givs"
makes it run faster with some data types and slower with others. The
info page said you were interested in such results. I know very little
about this all.
The two conditions I
32 matches
Mail list logo
