Hi,
I am writing a decompiler for lib or .o files.
For the application developer, one would have the lib or .o file and a
.h file that would identify the api for the application developer to
use to make use of the lib or .o file.
For my decompiler, I therefore need to be able to process the .h
fil
I forgot to add in my earlier patch that if you are working on
converting a pass and need to enable -O2 in your local tree, you can
apply this reversal patch to opts.c:
Index: opts.c
===
--- opts.c (revision 132051)
+++ opts.c
The GCC 4.2 branch is now open for commits again under normal release
branch rules. The official 4.2.3 release announcement will go out later
(probably on Sunday) after mirrors have had time to update.
The next 4.2 release is likely to be in about two months' time, with
releases continuing at
On 01/02/2008, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 1, 2008 9:55 PM, Andrew MacLeod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > There are a few things that I'm considering working on for the 4.4
> > release, and I figured I'd see what others thought. Is anyone
> > considering/doing similar
Snapshot gcc-4.3-20080201 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.3-20080201/
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
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 12:46:41PM +, Martin Guy wrote:
> 2008/1/31, Manuel López-Ibáñez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Nonetheless, if someone decided to go through the hassle of collecting
> > tutorials and hints for various cross-compiling configurations in the
> > wiki, I think many users will ap
On Feb 1, 2008 9:55 PM, Andrew MacLeod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> There are a few things that I'm considering working on for the 4.4
> release, and I figured I'd see what others thought. Is anyone
> considering/doing similar or related work?
>
> I'll summarize each, and then go into more detai
On Fri, 1 Feb 2008, Paul Koning wrote:
> > "Hans-Peter" == Hans-Peter Nilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hans-Peter> (The "volatile" is redundant; an asm without in/out
> Hans-Peter> operands is always volatile.)
>
> That's what the docs say, but I've seen indications that this is not
> ac
There are a few things that I'm considering working on for the 4.4
release, and I figured I'd see what others thought. Is anyone
considering/doing similar or related work?
I'll summarize each, and then go into more details.
1 - Pass cleanup. There have been rumblings about this, but I hav
Hello Everyone,
I am currently working with GCC 4.0.2 (The OpenRISC port).
Is it possible to add extra instructions (for example, NOPS) into
the instruction ready list. Is it possible for me to do it in
TARGET_MACHINE_SCHED_REORDER2? I tried to just do the following
rtx new_insn = ge
The GCC 4.2 branch is now frozen for the 4.2.3 release. Do not make any
more commits to this branch until the 4.2.3 release is announced (after
which the branch will go back to normal release branch mode).
--
Joseph S. Myers
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pjotr Kourzanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> int main() { const int size=10; struct foo {
> int array[size]; int* p; };// f = { .p=0 };
> struct foo f = { .p = 0 }; }
With gcc mainline, compiled with checking, I get an ICE:
/home/iant/foo1.c: In function
> "Hans-Peter" == Hans-Peter Nilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hans-Peter> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> One issue here is that in some cases const and pure calls can get
>> combined and eliminated even with attribute noinline (unless this
>> changed recently). So in a
NO.
If no "--disable-werror" option, bootstrap will fail. So I use a type
cast, no very care about the pointer type.
2008/2/1, Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 2008-01-31 11:59:32 +0800, Dongsheng Song wrote:
> > - mpfr_inits2 (prec, m1, m2, NULL);
> > + mpfr_inits2 (prec, m1,
On 2008-01-31 11:59:32 +0800, Dongsheng Song wrote:
> - mpfr_inits2 (prec, m1, m2, NULL);
> + mpfr_inits2 (prec, m1, m2, (char *)NULL);
Is there any reason to use (char *) instead of (void *)?
Note that m1 and m2 are MPFR pointers (mpfr_ptr type, which is in
the reality __mpfr_struct
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> One issue here is that in some cases const and pure calls can get
> combined and eliminated even with attribute noinline (unless this
> changed recently). So in addition to attribute noinline, putting an
> asm volatile ("") in the function can help ma
Dear gcc developers,
While trying a code snippet structured as the following code suggests I've
encountered a gcc error recovery bug. Namely, the gcc (versions 4.0-4.3, as well
as 3.2) starts leaking memory (after reporting that a variable-sized object can
not be initialized) and never exists.
17 matches
Mail list logo
