Re: Designs for better debug info in GCC

2007-11-23 Thread Richard Kenner
> Yes, catching all such cases hasn't been trivial. If we miss some, > then what happens is that -O2 -g -fvar-tracking-assignments outputs > different executable code than -O2. But that's a very serious type of bug because it means you have situations where a program fails and you can't debug it

Re: Designs for better debug info in GCC

2007-11-23 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Nov 23, 2007, "Steven Bosscher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> So, what's this prejudice against debug insns? Why do you regard them >> as notes rather than insns? > What worries me is that GCC will have to special-case DEBUG_INSN > everywhere where it looks at INSNs. This is just not true.

Re: Infinite loop when trying to bootstrap trunk

2007-11-23 Thread Ismail Dönmez
Saturday 24 November 2007 Tarihinde 03:44:04 yazmıştı: > Hi all, > > I am trying to bootstrap gcc with the following config : [...] Sorry for the noise, looks like my snapshot tarball build from git repo using git-archive has some problems as the gcc-4.3-20071123 snapshot bootstrap

Re: Designs for better debug info in GCC

2007-11-23 Thread Robert Dewar
Richard Guenther wrote: On Nov 22, 2007 8:22 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] Who is "we"? What better debugging are GCC users demanding? What debugging difficulties are they experiencing? Who is that set of users? What fu

Infinite loop when trying to bootstrap trunk

2007-11-23 Thread Ismail Dönmez
Hi all, I am trying to bootstrap gcc with the following config : ../configure --prefix=/usr --bindir=/usr/i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc/4.3.0 --includedir=/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.3.0/include --datadir=/usr/share/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.3.0 --mandir=/usr/share/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.3.0/man

Re: Designs for better debug info in GCC

2007-11-23 Thread Steven Bosscher
On Nov 23, 2007 9:45 PM, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, yes, debug stmts and insns are notes in the sense that they don't > output code. Like USE insns, labels, empty asm insns and other > UNSPECs. But wait, those are insns, not notes. And they do generate > code, just not in t

Re: Re: Does gcc support compiling for windows x86-64?

2007-11-23 Thread NightStrike
On Nov 23, 2007 6:31 PM, Howard Chu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've downloaded a couple of the binary tarballs from the mingw-w64 project > page. Had a lot of trouble getting usable code out of them. I finally figured > out that I had to compile without any optimization to get anything to run. >

Re: Designs for better debug info in GCC

2007-11-23 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Nov 13, 2007, Michael Matz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > On Mon, 12 Nov 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> With the design I've proposed, it is possible to compute the value of i, > No. Only if the function is reservible. Of course. I meant it for that particular case. The generalizati

Re: Designs for better debug info in GCC

2007-11-23 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Nov 12, 2007, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> On Nov 12, 2007, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Clearly, for some users, incorrect debugging information on optimized >>> code is not a terribly big deal. It's certainly less important to many

Re: Designs for better debug info in GCC

2007-11-23 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Nov 13, 2007, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alexandre Oliva wrote: >>> What I don't understand is how it's actually going to work. What >>> are the notes you're inserting? >> >> They're always of the form >> >> DEBUG user-variable = expression > Good, I understand that now. >

Re: Designs for better debug info in GCC

2007-11-23 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Nov 23, 2007, "Frank Ch. Eigler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > It may be asking to belabour the obvious. GCC users do not want to >> > have to compile with "-O0 -g" just to debug during development [...] >> > Developers will accept that optimized code will by its nature make >> > some of the

Re: Designs for better debug info in GCC

2007-11-23 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Nov 13, 2007, Michael Matz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The nice thing is, that there are only few places which really get rid of > SETs: remove_insn. You have to tweak that to keep the information around, > not much else (though that claim remains to be proven :) ). And then, you have to t

Re: Designs for better debug info in GCC

2007-11-23 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Nov 12, 2007, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> And then, optimizations move instructions around, but I don't think >> they should move the assignment notes around, for they should >> reflect the structure of the source program, rather

Re: Designs for better debug info in GCC

2007-11-23 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Nov 12, 2007, "Steven Bosscher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > DEBUG_INSN in RTL (with one noteworthy difference, namely that having > note-like GIPMLE statements is a totally new concept Not quite. There were codeless gimple constructs before (think labels, for one). Or empty asm statements.

Re: Re: Does gcc support compiling for windows x86-64?

2007-11-23 Thread Howard Chu
Ali, Muhammad wrote: but the preliminary gcc/gfortran for mingw 64-bit mode which FX Coudert supplied was a version of gcc-4.3. May you can take a look at the developer project 'mingw-w64' on sourceforge for more details. Thanks for pointing me to the mingw-w64 sourceforge project. As Tim s

gcc-4.3-20071123 is now available

2007-11-23 Thread gccadmin
Snapshot gcc-4.3-20071123 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.3-20071123/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.3 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk

Status of GCC 4.3 on IA64 (Debian)

2007-11-23 Thread Martin Michlmayr
I recently compiled the Debian archive (around 7000 packages that need to be compiled) on IA64 using trunk to identify new issues before GCC 4.3 is released. I compiled the archive with optimization set to -O3 and found the following ICEs with trunk from 20071116: - PR34138: verify_ssa failed (f

Re: Does gcc support compiling for windows x86-64?

2007-11-23 Thread Ali, Muhammad
> >> Why not read the archives of more relevant lists before posting here? I > >> don't know what you are driving at, nor do I think anyone here cares, I guess my initial posting was somewhat misleading. I only mentioned MinGW because MinGW (and Cygwin) are the only ports of gcc I know of that wor

Re: Designs for better debug info in GCC

2007-11-23 Thread Frank Ch. Eigler
Hi - (BTW, sorry for reopening this old thread if people are sick & tired of it.) > > Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > [...] > > > That's what I'm asking. First and foremost, I want to know what, > > > concretely, Alexandre is trying to achieve, beyond "better debugging > > > info

Re: [Fwd: Re: FW: matrix linking]

2007-11-23 Thread Olivier Galibert
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 11:49:03AM +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [Changing the _vptr or C equivalent dynamically] > I would like the community would have considered the idea. I am ready to > answer all the questions you might have. Changing the virtual function pointer dynamically using a seria

[Fwd: Re: FW: matrix linking]

2007-11-23 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I appreciate your reply, Joe. But I do not think this is off-topic, though. If we are going to discuss the details of your project, Ptolomy, right, then it would have been off-topic, I think. But I'm talking about GCC, therefore I believe this is the right place to post these ideas. What I am t