If you don't want to change the generated code other than inserting
the nops, and you can restrict yourself to a processor which does not
need to track addresses to avoid out-of-range branches, then you could
approximate what you want by emitting a nop in final_scan_insn when
you see a CODE_LABEL,
Snapshot gcc-4.0-20060810 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.0-20060810/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.0 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 05:34:16AM +, Kapil Dhawan wrote:
> >From: Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: Kapil Dhawan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >CC: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> >Subject: Re: Increment Operator
> >Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 10:00:34 -0700
> >
> >On Aug 7, 2006, at 2:31 AM, Kapil Dhawan wrote:
> >>
Hello,
I'm interested in the code factoring optimization project
http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cfo.html
I checked out the code ( svn checkout svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk cfo )
but I just find the RTL implementation in rtl-factoring.c . I just wonder in
which file I can find the tree-ssa for
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006 09:09:56 -0700, Bruce Korb wrote:
> const char * pOptTitle;
const char * pOptTitle = pOptTitle;
is another possibility to shut the warning... without adding any
generated code...
There was another discussion about this issue here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-01/msg00274
Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It would be cleaner if I know how to modify the gcc source code and
> let it insert a nop to each basic block. This shouldn't be a hard job
> for an experienced gcc developer, should this?
It's doable but it's probably harder than you seem to think it is.
gcc i
> > Haase Bjoern (PT-BEU/EMT) writes:
>
> Haase> Meanwhile, I have reduced a test case for the issue. It's 6
lines long.
>
> Haase> #include
>
> Haase> using namespace std;
> Haase> const complex should_be_in_rodata (42,-42);
> Haase> complex should_be_in_data (-42,42);
> Haase> complex shoul
> Haase Bjoern (PT-BEU/EMT) writes:
Haase> Meanwhile, I have reduced a test case for the issue. It's 6 lines long.
Haase> #include
Haase> using namespace std;
Haase> const complex should_be_in_rodata (42,-42);
Haase> complex should_be_in_data (-42,42);
Haase> complex should_be_in_bss;
Haa
2006/8/10, Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
jeff jeff wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm doing an experiment with gcc. I need to modify gcc so that a NOP
> instruction will be inserted into each basic block in binary code that
> gcc generates. I know this sounds weird but it is part of my
> experiment.
>Seongbae Park wrote:
>
>Of course, it's best if this can be implemented in the compiler,
>but if the size and the number of the readonly data is manageable,
>you can do this by hand -
>inspect what the layout of the class is by writing a test program
>and looking at how the fields are layed out,
>
Hello people,
I tried to build and install gcc-4.2-20060805 snapshot.
First, I needed to add some initializers.
gcc seem to use -Werror at some stage and
"might be used uninitialized" warnings were terminating the build.
The patch is attached.
Then "make bootstrap" failed in a different way:
Th
jeff jeff wrote:
Hi all,
I'm doing an experiment with gcc. I need to modify gcc so that a NOP
instruction will be inserted into each basic block in binary code that
gcc generates. I know this sounds weird but it is part of my
experiment. As I'm unfamiliar with gcc, is there someone willing to
Hi all,
I'm doing an experiment with gcc. I need to modify gcc so that a NOP
instruction will be inserted into each basic block in binary code that
gcc generates. I know this sounds weird but it is part of my
experiment. As I'm unfamiliar with gcc, is there someone willing to
help me out and d
13 matches
Mail list logo
