Piotr Wyderski wrote:
> Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
>> i386 did not have atomic locks at all but 486 and above does.
>
> Thanks, now it is obvious to me. So how should
> I configure my GCC-trunk build? It seems that
> --with-cpu is not enough:
You need to look closer at the definition of -mcpu, -mt
Andrew Pinski wrote:
> i386 did not have atomic locks at all but 486 and above does.
Thanks, now it is obvious to me. So how should
I configure my GCC-trunk build? It seems that
--with-cpu is not enough:
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-cygwin
Configured with: ../configure --prefix
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Piotr Wyderski
wrote:
> is not, as Cygwin does not use glibc. Its underlying
> processor architecture, however, supports the fullest
> set of atomic primitives, so is there really a need to
> make it glibc-dependent? If I enforce the macro
> definition from the com
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2009, Dave Korn wrote:
>
>> So, is the testcase invalid, and should the compiler be warning about this
>> declaration? I couldn't get any complaint out of it even with "-W -Wall
>> -Wextra -pedantic -std=c89"? Or should the linker be allocating some spac
It is impossible to use std::exception_ptr and related
functionality on Cygwin in C++0x mode, despite the
fact the necessary classes seem to be implemented.
That is because in there is a conditional
block:
#if (defined(__GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__) \
&& defined(_GLIBCXX_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_4))
#in
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2009, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
>> Of course we have to fix the assembler output. For ant two declarations
>> a and b, &a != &b, even when a is a zero-length array. So, you have to
>> allocate at least one byte.
>
> I don't think this is necessarily part of t
Snapshot gcc-4.5-20090528 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.5-20090528/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.5 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
On Wed, 27 May 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> > Should we tell them (the other users using the future gcc-4.5-dev Debian
> > package) in our documentation how to build a plugin (I mean what are the
> > actual commands to run, what kind of Makefile for them, what are the
> > required CFLAGS or
On Mon, 25 May 2009, Chris Lattner wrote:
> On May 13, 2009, at 5:26 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
>
> > Hi Richard,
> >
> > > -mpc64 sets the x87 floating point control register to not use the 80bit
> > > extended precision. This causes some x87 floating point operations
> > > to operate faster and
On Sun, 24 May 2009, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Of course we have to fix the assembler output. For ant two declarations
> a and b, &a != &b, even when a is a zero-length array. So, you have to
> allocate at least one byte.
I don't think this is necessarily part of the semantics for the GNU
extensio
On Sun, 24 May 2009, Dave Korn wrote:
> So, is the testcase invalid, and should the compiler be warning about this
> declaration? I couldn't get any complaint out of it even with "-W -Wall
> -Wextra -pedantic -std=c89"? Or should the linker be allocating some space
> for this zero-sized common
On 05/28/09 11:42, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Larry Evans writes:
>
>> While attempting to debug the compiler on:
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40092
>>
>> I'm having great difficulty understanding the output
>> of debug_c_tree or debug_tree because the child
>> tree's are not
> From: Andrew Haley
> To: Jamie Prescott
> Cc: Adam Nemet ; "gcc-h...@gcc.gnu.org"
>
> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 11:48:30 AM
> Subject: Re: Forgetting return values
>
> Jamie Prescott wrote:
> >> From: Adam Nemet
>
> >>> Why is the memory clobber required, and why GCC does not understan
Jamie Prescott writes:
> > From: Adam Nemet
> > Jamie Prescott writes:
> > > static inline int set_prop(char const *path, char const *name,
> > > void const *data, int size)
> > > {
> > > int error;
> > >
> > > asm volatile ("int\t11\n\t"
>
> From: Adam Nemet
> To: Jamie Prescott
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 11:10:49 AM
> Subject: Re: Forgetting return values
>
> Jamie Prescott writes:
> > static inline int set_prop(char const *path, char const *name,
> > void const
Jamie Prescott writes:
> static inline int set_prop(char const *path, char const *name,
> void const *data, int size)
> {
> int error;
>
> asm volatile ("int\t11\n\t"
> : "=a0" (error): "a0" (path), "a1" (name), "a2" (
What am I missing?
I have a simple:
static inline int set_prop(char const *path, char const *name,
void const *data, int size)
{
int error;
asm volatile ("int\t11\n\t"
: "=a0" (error): "a0" (path), "a1" (name), "a2"
Larry Evans writes:
> While attempting to debug the compiler on:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40092
>
> I'm having great difficulty understanding the output
> of debug_c_tree or debug_tree because the child
> tree's are not shown.
Can you give an example of what you mean? deb
While attempting to debug the compiler on:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40092
I'm having great difficulty understanding the output
of debug_c_tree or debug_tree because the child
tree's are not shown. The ddd debugger:
http://www.gnu.org/software/ddd/
is some help; however, e
Weddington, Eric schrieb:
Hi All,
This may be a dumb question, but I'm having difficulty finding the answer to
this.
I'm working on a back-end and I have a function being called for the
FUNCTION_ARG macro, and in that function I need to find out the attributes of
the called function as this
Hi All,
This may be a dumb question, but I'm having difficulty finding the answer to
this.
I'm working on a back-end and I have a function being called for the
FUNCTION_ARG macro, and in that function I need to find out the attributes of
the called function as this will affect the calling conv
21 matches
Mail list logo
