On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 08/31/2009 02:07 PM, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
>>
>> I am going to try this but shouldn't it be :
>>
>> (set (reg:QI new-scratch))
>> (zero_extract:DI ...))
>
> No.
Ok, I think I understand why not:
>> (insn 9 8 10 3 struct4
Hello,
A prerelease tarball of the upcoming MPC 0.7 is available here:
http://www.multiprecision.org/mpc/download/mpc-0.7-dev.tar.gz
Please help test it for portability and bugs by downloading and compiling
it on systems you have access to. I'd like a report to contain your
target triplet and th
My guess, witjout seeing the testcase.
In ccp_initialize we have:
for (i = gsi_start_bb (bb); !gsi_end_p (i); gsi_next (&i))
{
gimple stmt = gsi_stmt (i);
bool is_varying = surely_varying_stmt_p (stmt);
if (is_varying)
{
tree
On Mon, 31 Aug 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Currently, --enable-languages=c --enable-build-with-cxx fails because
> neither the C++ compiler nor libstdc++-v3 are built in Stage 1, but in
> Stage 2, CXX is set to .../prev-gcc/g++ and other variables are set
> accordingly. Is this combination sup
On 08/31/2009 11:11 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
The easiest for now would be (3), the coolest, most difficult and
probably most dangerous one would be (2). Something like
AC_CONFIG_FILES_COMMANDS(some/Makefile, more-user-commands,
[more-init-cmds])
but then the ord
On 08/31/2009 10:41 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Paolo Bonzini wrote on Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 10:00:01PM CEST:
In fact, I think this API shouldn't be even more encouraged. It doesn't
really fix things in an elegant way, and it doesn't help for other
pending issues in the GCC tree (such as the mu
On 08/31/2009 02:07 PM, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
I am going to try this but shouldn't it be :
(set (reg:QI new-scratch))
(zero_extract:DI ...))
No.
Any ideas?
Nope. You'll have to debug it.
r~
Hello,
the current multilibs support code is a bit racy, in a few ways. The
following might be a bit technical, but I'm trying to gauge where to go
from here, even if this is not fixed right away.
gcc/config/multi.m4 provides AM_ENABLE_MULTILIB which allows to specify
the Makefile which is to be
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 08/31/2009 01:07 PM, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
>>
>> If I replace this :
>> (define_insn "extzv"
>> [(set (match_operand 0 "register_operand" "")
>> (zero_extract (match_operand 1 "register_operand" "")
>>
* Paolo Bonzini wrote on Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 10:00:01PM CEST:
> >In fact, I think this API shouldn't be even more encouraged. It doesn't
> >really fix things in an elegant way, and it doesn't help for other
> >pending issues in the GCC tree (such as the multilib fixups that aren't
> >applied in a
On 08/31/2009 01:07 PM, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
If I replace this :
(define_insn "extzv"
[(set (match_operand 0 "register_operand" "")
(zero_extract (match_operand 1 "register_operand" "")
(match_operand 2 "const_int_operand" "")
(ma
Hello Jeff,
* Jeff Law wrote on Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 10:00:57PM CEST:
> On 08/31/09 12:54, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >I found out that current toplevel config.status hits the program length
> >limit of HP-UX 11.11 sed:
> >This is due to the large number of commands added to $extrasub in
> >configu
Sorry, you are correct. That line is the :
gcc_assert (outermode != VOIDmode);
of the simplify_subreg function.
However, I've played around with it and saw that I made a mistake when
writing up this question, I simplified what I had put in my MD file,
and actually made a mistake. I apologize.
I
In fact, I think this API shouldn't be even more encouraged. It doesn't
really fix things in an elegant way, and it doesn't help for other
pending issues in the GCC tree (such as the multilib fixups that aren't
applied in all cases; report coming up).
I agree. However, I did not have any alter
On 08/31/09 12:54, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
While still working to prove Bob wrong on the fixincludes sed issues,
I found out that current toplevel config.status hits the program length
limit of HP-UX 11.11 sed:
$ ./config.status
config.status: creating Makefile
sed: There are too many commands fo
* Paolo Bonzini wrote on Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 09:06:20PM CEST:
> On 08/31/2009 08:54 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >While still working to prove Bob wrong on the fixincludes sed issues,
>
> Bob?
Bruce; sorry about that, Bruce!
> >- require a better sed,
> >- split the script in two inside Autocon
Jean Christophe Beyler writes:
> But I get this message:
> struct4.c: In function 'goo':
> struct4.c:32: internal compiler error: in simplify_subreg, at
> simplify-rtx.c:4923
>
> Does anybody know how can I solve this issue ?
You need to start by looking at line 4923 of simplify-rtx.c to see wha
Ralf Wildenhues writes:
> Currently, --enable-languages=c --enable-build-with-cxx fails because
> neither the C++ compiler nor libstdc++-v3 are built in Stage 1, but in
> Stage 2, CXX is set to .../prev-gcc/g++ and other variables are set
> accordingly. Is this combination supposed to work?
It
Dear all,
I am currently working on handling bit-fields on my port and am having
difficulties understanding why GCC is having problems with what I
wrote in.
Following what mips did:
(define_expand "extzv"
[(set (match_operand 0 "register_operand")
(zero_extract (match_operand 1 "nonimmedia
On 08/31/2009 08:54 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
While still working to prove Bob wrong on the fixincludes sed issues,
Bob?
- require a better sed,
- split the script in two inside Autoconf (if $extrasub is nonempty),
- allow for extra sed scripts here.
Like a new variable $ac_presub, that is
Currently, --enable-languages=c --enable-build-with-cxx fails because
neither the C++ compiler nor libstdc++-v3 are built in Stage 1, but in
Stage 2, CXX is set to .../prev-gcc/g++ and other variables are set
accordingly. Is this combination supposed to work?
If yes, is it supposed to only build
While still working to prove Bob wrong on the fixincludes sed issues,
I found out that current toplevel config.status hits the program length
limit of HP-UX 11.11 sed:
$ ./config.status
config.status: creating Makefile
sed: There are too many commands for the
s&@abs_builddir@&/home/rwild/gcc/buil
On Sun, 2009-08-30 at 21:39 +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> Danny Backx wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Does anyone know how well gcc-4.4 works with ARM and wmmx instructions ?
> >
> > I'm working on cegcc. It currently says :
> > pavilion: {86} arm-mingw32ce-gcc -mcpu=iwmmxt t.c
> > t.c:1: error: iwmmxt requir
Hi!
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 08:44:24AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I think we should drop the reference to previous gcc versions and the
> old scheme. I don't think it helps in understanding the code.
>
> It's still necessary to set RID_LAST_MODIFIER correctly as
> declspecs_add_type uses i
Adam Rak writes:
> We are a forming company (StreamNovation Ltd.) from Hungary, and we
> would like to ask your attitude about our plans. We are intending to
> implement a plugin for GCC 4.5 which makes it possible to utilize the
> GPU (graphics processing unit) semi-automatically (later
> fully-
2009/8/28 Pedro Lamarão :
> I have not yet made complete size and execution speed measurements, though.
> I've run the test suite and there are some failures; I think many of
> them are not regressions when compared with a pure build with C++.
Comparing trunk -r151160 and trunk -t151160 --enabl
On 08/31/2009 09:09 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
In which case you'd need a strathegic using namespace std; somewhere.
system.h? :-)
r~
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 08/31/2009 08:26 AM, Pedro Lamarão wrote:
>>
>> I'll try to include cstdlib in system.h to see if that's enough.
>
> Note the existing
>
> #ifdef HAVE_STDLIB_H
> # include
> #endif
>
> You may wish to convert this to
>
> #ifdef __cplus
On 08/31/2009 08:26 AM, Pedro Lamarão wrote:
I'll try to include cstdlib in system.h to see if that's enough.
Note the existing
#ifdef HAVE_STDLIB_H
# include
#endif
You may wish to convert this to
#ifdef __cplusplus
# include
#elif defined(HAVE_STDLIB_H)
# include
#endif
and similarly f
l...@dm.botik.ru (Alexey I. Adamovich) writes:
> Forgot RID_LAST_MODIFIER
>
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 08:29:21PM +0400, Alexei I. Adamovich wrote:
>> So for the sake of those who will develop C-derived front ends, should
>> we change the comment like below:
>> > /* Reserved identifiers. This is t
"Joseph S. Myers" writes:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2009, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
>> Link a small program with -rdynamic, one which defines a globally
>> visible function which is not called. Run objdump -T and see if you can
>> see that symbol in the output.
>>
>> If you follow this path you must do
2009/8/31 Richard Henderson :
> On 08/29/2009 03:49 PM, Pedro Lamarão wrote:
>>
>> 2009/8/29 Magnus Fromreide:
>>>
>>> Why the changes to gcc/system.h where you unpoision malloc and realloc?
>>> Why the changes to libcpp/system.h where you unpoision malloc, realloc,
>>> calloc and strdup?
>>
>> In
On 08/29/2009 03:49 PM, Pedro Lamarão wrote:
2009/8/29 Magnus Fromreide:
Why the changes to gcc/system.h where you unpoision malloc and realloc?
Why the changes to libcpp/system.h where you unpoision malloc, realloc,
calloc and strdup?
Including requires them for some reason.
I haven't reall
Mikael Pettersson writes:
> Laurent GUERBY writes:
> > On Sat, 2009-08-22 at 23:33 +0200, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 12:00 +0200, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 23:08:00 +0200, Matthias Klose
> wrote:
> > > > >On 12.08.2009 23:07, Martin Guy
34 matches
Mail list logo
