(define_expand "negsf2"
[(set (match_operand:SF 0 "gpc_reg_operand" "")
(neg:SF (match_operand:SF 1 "gpc_reg_operand" "")))]
"TARGET_HARD_FLOAT"
"")
(define_insn "*negsf2"
[(set (match_operand:SF 0 "gpc_reg_operand" "=f")
(neg:SF (match_operand:SF 1 "gpc_reg_operand" "f")))]
"
> 1) Any advise on selecting Linux distro?
Any one will do. Or Windows, MS-DOS, AIX, IRIX, Solaris, Mac OS/X, or
any other platform GCC runs on. Use whatever you're comfortable with.
But note that on Windows (Cygwin) GCC testsuite runs several orders of
magnitude slower than on Linux: it lite
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Aug 15, 2006, at 6:11 PM, Mahafuzur Rahaman wrote:
> > 1) Any advise on selecting Linux distro?
>
> This is akin to asking ones religion. :-) We generally don't push
> religion around here... gnu.misc.discuss would be the usual place to
> discuss reli
Thanks DJ & Mike for your quick replies.
This is to summarise my plan so that others can
guide/help me.
Considering that GCC has no garbage code (Right?
Mike!) I would like to rephrase my task as removing
dead code, unwanted code, any fat that we can get rid
of from the source tree ..
[Somebody
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Is this version for windows or linux?
this is not a binary release; it is source release.
-- Gaby
> 1) Any advise on selecting Linux distro?
Any one will do. Or Windows, MS-DOS, AIX, IRIX, Solaris, Mac OS/X, or
any other platform GCC runs on. Use whatever you're comfortable with.
On Aug 15, 2006, at 6:11 PM, Mahafuzur Rahaman wrote:
1) Any advise on selecting Linux distro?
This is akin to asking ones religion. :-) We generally don't push
religion around here... gnu.misc.discuss would be the usual place to
discuss religious questions. Just select one and follow i
Hi,
I guess will refer me to read the web site. While I am
doing that, I am not clear about my issue. It goes..
I want to contribute to GCC dev and I will start at
basic projects for beginners.
While I am setting up my dev box for GCC work, I want
to know?
1) Any advise on selecting Linux distr
> > Bug reports should be filed for these two problems. Do you have
> > PHCO_20721 and PHCO_26158 installed? Locale might the behavior
> > of awk in generating options.h.
>
> I have PHCO_20721 installed, but not PHCO_26158. And I just wasted
> about a half hour of my life trying to *find* it.
Hi,
for the following test case:
struct A {
virtual int x () {return 1;}
};
struct B: A {
virtual int x () {return 0;}
};
struct C: B{
using A::x;
};
int main()
{
C c;
return c.x();
}
all g++ 4.x will return 1
It seems C++ standard would want to see 0.
Using-declaration introduces t
>
All the above and more. It is a source release of GCC.
-- Pinski
Is this version for windows or linux?
Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I'm pleased to announce that GCC 3.4.5 has been released.
>
> This version is a minor release, from the 3.4.x series, fixing
>regressions with respect to previous versions of GCC. It can be
>downloaded from th
> I'm not sure if I understand. In ISO C++, it would be fine for "char *"
> to have more bits than all other pointers. The standard says X* -> Y*
> -> X* is value-preserving if Y has no stricter alignment than X. Since
> "char" has weak alignment requirements, Y can be "char". Is that what
> y
> I think having pointers be the same size is ingrained in the whole
> compiler, not just the front ends.
Having *implicit* pointers be *a specific* size certainly is. Made
the m32c project a lot harder. There's a lot of places that use
POINTER_SIZE instead of MODE_SIZE(x), or Pmode instead of
On 14/08/06, Manuel López-Ibáñez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Does this mean that I should remove the corresponding code from
gcc/c-typeck.c:convert_arguments() and also remove
gcc.dg/dfp/Wconversion-2.c ?
add also the testcase gcc.dg/dfp/wtr-conversion-1.c to the list.
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 10:52:01AM -0700, Michael Eager wrote:
> (define_expand "negsf2"
> [(set (match_operand:SF 0 "gpc_reg_operand" "")
> (neg:SF (match_operand:SF 1 "gpc_reg_operand" "")))]
> "TARGET_HARD_FLOAT"
> "")
> I've read the docs (sect 13.15) which describe define_expand,
I'm having trouble understanding part of the machine description
for PowerPC floating point operations.
There are a number of places where there are pairs of templates,
one with define_expand, the other with define_insn or
define_insn_and_split. For example, the fp negate templates:
(define_exp
On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 10:06 -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 08:38:38PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 22:44 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > > Try -Werror-implicit-function-declaration. Not the same, but pretty
> > > close.
> >
> > Thanks! I know. In fact,
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
> Mark Mitchell
> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 12:50 PM
> To: DJ Delorie
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: does gcc support multiple sizes, or not?
>
> DJ Delorie wrote:
> >> And ba
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 08:38:38PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 22:44 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > Try -Werror-implicit-function-declaration. Not the same, but pretty
> > close.
>
> Thanks! I know. In fact, I'm using at least "-Wall -Werror" for my
> code and for the c
gengtype doesn't support anonymous structures or unions, you need to
give them a name. (I don't remember if this is simply a limitation of
the existing implementation or if it's more fundamental.)
OK, naming them has helped. Out of curiosity, why does following
typedef int *lambda_vector;
typ
At the risk of stating the obvious, those parentheses after "GTY" look
unbalanced to me.
Of course, these were fixed very soon :)
--
Laurynas
Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
> Nick Clifton wrote:
>> Hi Diego,
>>
>>> Jeff's point about our optimizers is also true. Nick, remember that
>>> issue with MIPS optimizations you were discussing with Jeff a few days
>>> ago? I didn't follow most of the details, but it involved ivopts and
>>> sign issues.
Diego Novillo wrote:
> Kenneth Zadeck wrote on 08/15/06 11:57:
>
>
>> We should be looking at the back end to see where it cannot see what it
>> needs to see rather than trying to stop getting the middle end code into
>> a reasonable form.
>>
>>
> You're confused. This is a middle-end mis-
On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 11:57 -0400, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
> Nick Clifton wrote:
> > Hi Diego,
> >
> >> Jeff's point about our optimizers is also true. Nick, remember that
> >> issue with MIPS optimizations you were discussing with Jeff a few days
> >> ago? I didn't follow most of the details, but
On 8/15/06, Tim Schmielau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, Asher Langton wrote:
> Tim Schmielau wrote on 08/15/06:
> > The problem appears for any OMP_NUM_THREADS value other than 1 (I tried
> > up to 8 on an 8-way machine).
> > Extracting a testcase from the 18.000 lines of code
Kenneth Zadeck wrote on 08/15/06 11:57:
> We should be looking at the back end to see where it cannot see what it
> needs to see rather than trying to stop getting the middle end code into
> a reasonable form.
>
You're confused. This is a middle-end mis-optimization. However, it is
true that we
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, Asher Langton wrote:
> Tim Schmielau wrote on 08/15/06:
> > The problem appears for any OMP_NUM_THREADS value other than 1 (I tried
> > up to 8 on an 8-way machine).
> > Extracting a testcase from the 18.000 lines of code will probably require
> > some work, so I was looking f
Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Diego,
>
>> Jeff's point about our optimizers is also true. Nick, remember that
>> issue with MIPS optimizations you were discussing with Jeff a few days
>> ago? I didn't follow most of the details, but it involved ivopts and
>> sign issues. Could you send a summary?
>
>
Please seend me the copyright assignment form required for
contribution to gcc. Thanks in advance.
Jack Howarth
Hi Diego,
Jeff's point about our optimizers is also true. Nick, remember that
issue with MIPS optimizations you were discussing with Jeff a few days
ago? I didn't follow most of the details, but it involved ivopts and
sign issues. Could you send a summary?
Sure:
I was looking at how a gc
Tim Schmielau wrote on 08/15/06:
The problem appears for any OMP_NUM_THREADS value other than 1 (I tried
up to 8 on an 8-way machine).
Extracting a testcase from the 18.000 lines of code will probably require
some work, so I was looking for easier things to chek first. But I'll try
to do that, th
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Tim Schmielau wrote on 08/15/06 10:15:
>
> > How to further debug this problem?
> > I am currently using gcc-4.2-20060812 on i686 and x86_64 SuSE 10.0 Linux
> > systems.
> >
> Please submit a bug report including the code you are trying to compile.
>
Tim Schmielau wrote on 08/15/06 10:15:
> How to further debug this problem?
> I am currently using gcc-4.2-20060812 on i686 and x86_64 SuSE 10.0 Linux
> systems.
>
Please submit a bug report including the code you are trying to compile.
( http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html)
How many threads are you t
I am very happy to see that gfortran from current gcc snapshots can
successfully compile an 18000 lines Fortran 77 numerics program I wrote.
Results are indeed the same as obtained with other compilers (g77, PGI,
ifort), and also execution speed seems roughly comparable, although I
haven't yet
35 matches
Mail list logo
