Takis Psarogiannakopoulos writes:
> On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>
>> >> I think there's some confusion here. There is no relationship between
>> >> the ASM_SPEC definition in a config *.h file regarding options to be
>> >> passed to the assembler and the old "asmspec" parameter to
>
> I agree--please put in at least the date of the change being reverted,
> which should be the date of the ChangeLog entry.
There is no ChangeLog entry at all. I've replaced the rev by the date.
--
Eric Botcazou
On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> >> I think there's some confusion here. There is no relationship between
> >> the ASM_SPEC definition in a config *.h file regarding options to be
> >> passed to the assembler and the old "asmspec" parameter to
> >> rest_of_decl_compilation, which relat
Ben Elliston writes:
> On Sat, 2009-02-28 at 18:31 +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>
>> * gcc-interface/Makefile.in (cygwin/mingw): Revert accidental
>> EH_MECHANISM change in r130816.
>
> I've seen a few ChangeLog entries like this of late, so thought I would
> raise something: is it now a
On Sat, 2009-02-28 at 18:31 +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> * gcc-interface/Makefile.in (cygwin/mingw): Revert accidental
> EH_MECHANISM change in r130816.
I've seen a few ChangeLog entries like this of late, so thought I would
raise something: is it now accepted practice to mention SVN
Since LOCAL_LABELS_DOLLAR doesn't work on any x86 targets where
'$' is used as immediate prefix, I am planning to check in this
patch. If I don't get any objections within 2 weeks, I will check
it in.
Thanks.
H.J.
---
2009-03-01 H.J. Lu
PR gas/9915
* config/tc-i386.h (LOCAL_L
Arnaud Charlet wrote:
>>> I doubt that this can be deemed an experiment, we know that it works.
>> We know that it works with our sources and GCC 4.3. We have no idea how
>> well it works with GCC 4.4: we don't do mingw builds there.
>
> BTW, we have local patches not yet integrated that are neede
Takis Psarogiannakopoulos wrote:
>> I think there's some confusion here. There is no relationship between
>> the ASM_SPEC definition in a config *.h file regarding options to be
>> passed to the assembler and the old "asmspec" parameter to
>> rest_of_decl_compilation, which related to uses of the
Hi Mark,
Thanks for answering.
On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> I think there's some confusion here. There is no relationship between
> the ASM_SPEC definition in a config *.h file regarding options to be
> passed to the assembler and the old "asmspec" parameter to
> rest_of_decl_co
Takis Psarogiannakopoulos wrote:
> #undef ASM_SPEC
> #define ASM_SPEC " \
> Seems that on the latest GCC 4.3.x tree the argumnet asmspecs has
> been dropped from the function rest_of_decl_compilation in gcc/toplev.c
> (see also make_decl_rtl procedure).
I think there's some confusion here. The
Georg-Johann Lay schrieb:
source, or if they are dead and just pollute backend. Introducing extzv
and insv could bring some effort (I didn't try what impact they have)
Sorry for the typo. Please replace "effort" with "improvement" or "relief".
Hi,
Also another thing I dont see in GCC 4.x.x but I know it was alive and
kicking on the GCC 3.4.6 branch is the subtarget switches custom macro.
Eg in the gcc.config/.h OS specific file we could define something like
that:
#define MASK_STANDARD0x4000 /* Retain standard information
In order to improve bit manipulations for avr, patterns like the following can
be used:
+;; [0].log[4] |= [2].log[4]+[3]
+(define_insn "*iorqi2_shiftrt_bit"
+ [(set (match_operand:QI 0 "register_operand" "=d,r")
+(ior:QI (and:QI (match_operator:QI 1 "shiftrt_operator"
+
Hello,
I want to build 4.3.3 on an SVR4 (obviously port is required as its not a
std target) but I have stumble on the following issue regarding ASM_SPEC
extra switches:
On the host's (*.h) file in gcc/config we define
#undef ASM_SPEC
#define ASM_SPEC " \
%{mno-legend:-Wc,off} \
%{g:%{!mno-leg
14 matches
Mail list logo
