On the day of Saturday 23 February 2008 Prakash Punnoor hast written:
> On the day of Saturday 23 February 2008 Uros Bizjak hast written:
> > Hello!
> >
> > > f7: 0f 7f 5c 24 f0 movq %mm3,-0x10(%rsp)
> > > fc: 0f 7f 54 24 f8 movq %mm2,-0x8(%rsp)
> > > 101: 48 8b 5c
On the day of Saturday 23 February 2008 Uros Bizjak hast written:
> Hello!
>
> > f7: 0f 7f 5c 24 f0 movq %mm3,-0x10(%rsp)
> > fc: 0f 7f 54 24 f8 movq %mm2,-0x8(%rsp)
> > 101: 48 8b 5c 24 f8 mov-0x8(%rsp),%rbx
> > 106: 48 89 5c 38 40 mov%
Hello!
f7: 0f 7f 5c 24 f0 movq %mm3,-0x10(%rsp)
fc: 0f 7f 54 24 f8 movq %mm2,-0x8(%rsp)
101: 48 8b 5c 24 f8 mov-0x8(%rsp),%rbx
106: 48 89 5c 38 40 mov%rbx,0x40(%rax,%rdi,1)
10b: 48 8b 5c 24 f0 mov-0x10(%rsp),%rbx
110:
Hi Grigori,
I work for Mozilla and recently we developed a few plugins for gcc and
improvised a plugin interface to gcc to support it.
So far we have been utilizing the C++ FE, but now I'm moving into
yanking data out of the middleend. I think we should collaborate on the
plugin interface and c
Hey Geoff,
I've learned that you are the author of gengtype/GTY stuff from #gcc.
Would you consider restructuring GTY markers to be more like GCC
attributes? I'm writing code to generate code to convert GCC trees to
JavaScript objects for my GCC plugin. Clearly this is similar to what
gengtype
Hi,
> I'm trying to add a simple statement to GIMPLE code adding a new pass,
> that I put in pass_tree_loop.sub as last pass just before
> pass_tree_loop_done pass. Just as test I'd like to add a call like:
>
> .palp = shmalloc (16);
>
> This is the code I'm using:
>
> t = build_fu
i-bin/cvsweb/SOURCES/gcc4-libjava-multilib.patch
>?rev=HEAD
I just only wanted to check the tarball. I followed the instructions in gcc
web.
I configured
cd objdir
../gcc-4.3.0-RC-20080222/configure
and then build
make
it seems that to build in openSUSE x86_64 we need hacks and patches. I pat
I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has
expanded Jakub Jelinek's OpenMP responsibilities to maintainer for
all of OpenMP.
Please join me in congratulating Jakub on his new role.
Jakub, please update your listing in the MAINTAINERS file.
Happy hacking!
David
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20080222 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20080222/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.4 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
Mike Stump wrote:
On Feb 22, 2008, at 12:14 PM, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:
If someone steps forward, are you allowed to follow the patches list
We can't read the patches nor gcc list.
So you're not allowed to? Except you're cc'ed?
It would explain a few issues to me if so, sad, really sad.
On Feb 22, 2008, at 12:50 PM, Joe Buck wrote:
I guess that I'm still not clear on the restrictions you are under.
We could ask people to cc proposed darwin patches to you, but if
we ask people to do that routinely, then you're effectively on the
list
again.
Not really, the list is much highe
Hi,
I am playing with following code (from ffmpeg) translated to intrinsics:
Original code:
#define MOVQ_ZERO(regd) __asm __volatile ("pxor %%" #regd ", %%" #regd ::)
void diff_pixels_mmx(char *block, const uint8_t *s1, const uint8_t *s2, long
stride)
{
long offset = -128;
MOVQ_ZERO(
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:22:55PM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Feb 22, 2008, at 12:14 PM, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:
> >If someone steps forward, are you allowed to follow the patches list
>
> We can't read the patches nor gcc list.
>
> >and give feedback and/or approve patches for new contributors?
Andrew Pinski escreveu:
This is not the correct mailing list for this really, please use
gcc-help@ or in this case a C++ language list.
Oh sorry, it won't happen again.
Because of an ambiguous in the C++ syntax, the C++ standard decided
that this will be a function named a returning the type
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Rodolfo Schulz de Lima
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, I'd like to know why this rather simple code doesn't compile on gcc
> (from 4.2 to 4.3, haven't tested on earlier compilers):
This is not the correct mailing list for this really, please use
gcc-help@ or in t
Hi, I'd like to know why this rather simple code doesn't compile on gcc
(from 4.2 to 4.3, haven't tested on earlier compilers):
struct data {};
class test
{
public:
test(data) {}
int member;
};
int main()
{
test a(data());
a.member = 3;
}
The error output is:
error: request f
On Feb 22, 2008, at 12:14 PM, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:
If someone steps forward, are you allowed to follow the patches list
We can't read the patches nor gcc list.
and give feedback and/or approve patches for new contributors? I
assume this is possible since you helped out with objc++ review f
On Friday 22 of February 2008 21:08:10 Guillermo Ballester Valor wrote:
> ../../../native/jni/classpath/.libs/jcl.o -ljack -m32 -m32 -m32
> -Wl,-soname -Wl,libgjsmdssi.so -o .libs/libgjsmdssi.so
> /usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-suse-linux/4.2.1/../../../../x86_64-suse-linux/bin/ld
>: skipping incompatib
From: "Stan Shebs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mike Stump wrote:
Yes. The SC knows of the issue, and I've recommended
soliciting/accepting more darwin/Objective-C/C++ maintainers. If
anyone would like to step up, just send an email to a SC member and
have them forward it on to the SC for considerat
From: "Mike Stump" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Feb 21, 2008, at 8:31 PM, Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote:
Are current Darwin maintainers working on fixing anything in the FSF
sources?
Currently no. The transition to GPL v3 is problematic for us in the
short/mid term. :-( Longer term, we'll see how it goe
Hello,
El Friday 22 February 2008 14:41:30 Jakub Jelinek escribió:
> GCC 4.3.0 release candidate 1 is now available at:
>
> ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.3.0-RC-20080222/
>
> Please test the tarballs there and report any problems to Bugzilla. CC me
> on the bugs if yo
Hallo!
I've ideas when there are repetitive processes as e.g. the testing processes.
Q1. Why to lose time testing the same reiterated files that always had worked
for many months or years?
A1. To cache them the worked testsuite's files that had worked for many
months or years and put it t
Mike Stump wrote:
Yes. The SC knows of the issue, and I've recommended
soliciting/accepting more darwin/Objective-C/C++ maintainers. If
anyone would like to step up, just send an email to a SC member and
have them forward it on to the SC for consideration.
Heh, that sounds like my cue. :-) I'
On Feb 21, 2008, at 8:31 PM, Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote:
Are current Darwin maintainers working on fixing anything in the FSF
sources?
Currently no. The transition to GPL v3 is problematic for us in the
short/mid term. :-( Longer term, we'll see how it goes.
If not, maybe we need more Darwi
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 06:29:20PM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> I think Fortran is way down the list. That's not about how good of a
> language Fortran is, or how solid the Fortran front-end is; it's just a
> comment about usage of GCC.
>
> That said, I think that the RMs do -- and should -- p
Hi,
I'm trying to add a simple statement to GIMPLE code adding a new pass,
that I put in pass_tree_loop.sub as last pass just before
pass_tree_loop_done pass. Just as test I'd like to add a call like:
.palp = shmalloc (16);
This is the code I'm using:
t = build_function_type_list (
On 22 February 2008 11:24, J.C. Pizarro wrote:
> Hallo,
>
> i'm comparing minor differences between testresults of 4.4/4.3 (20080221
> x64) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-02/msg01486.html
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-02/msg01487.html
> and i found superfluous reporting
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20080222 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20080222/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.4 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
GCC 4.3.0 release candidate 1 is now available at:
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.3.0-RC-20080222/
Please test the tarballs there and report any problems to Bugzilla. CC me
on the bugs if you believe they are regressions from previous releases
severe enough that they should block the
"Naveen H.S." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The option "-mfmovd" is enabled by default for SH2A which generates
> "fmov.d" instruction by default. However, SH4 and SH4A targets
> generates "fmov.d" instruction only after passing the option "-mfmovd".
fmov.d has a byte order problem in little endia
Hallo,
i'm comparing minor differences between testresults of 4.4/4.3 (20080221 x64)
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-02/msg01486.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-02/msg01487.html
and i found superfluous reporting in 4.4.0:
FAIL: foo/bar.mm (test for excess errors)
UNRESO
31 matches
Mail list logo
