gcc-4.5-20091008 is now available

Snapshot gcc-4.5-20091008 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.5-20091008/ 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

Re: --enable-build-with-cxx bootstrap failure

> Is this known, or should I file a bug report... It looks like .

--enable-build-with-cxx bootstrap failure

I just tried to build gcc configuring it on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu (Fedora 10) with: configure --enable-build-with-cxx --with-arch=core2 --with-tune=core2 --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-svn/ --enable-languages="c,c++" --enable-__cxa_atexit --disable-multilib --enable-libssp and ran into a bootstr

GCC 4.4.2 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

The first release candidate for GCC 4.4.2 is available from ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4.2-RC-20091008 and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from SVN revision 152546. I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on x86_64-linux and i686-linux. Please test

Re: Turning off unrolling to certain loops

Hi, > such an epilogue is needed when the # of iterations is not known in the > compile time; it should be fairly easy to modify the unrolling not to > emit it when it is not necessary, Agreed, that is why I was surprised to see this in my simple example. It seems to me that the whole unrolling p

Re: Turning off unrolling to certain loops

Hi, > 2) I was using a simple example: > > #pragma unroll 2 > for (i=0;i<6;i++) > { > printf ("Hello world\n"); > } > > If I do this, instead of transforming the code into : > for (i=0;i<3;i++) > { > printf ("Hello world\n"); >

Re: Turning off unrolling to certain loops

Dear all, I've been working on a loop unrolling scheme and I have a few questions: 1) Is there an interest in having a loop unrolling scheme for GCC? I'm working on the 4.3.2 version but can port it afterwards to the 4.5 version or any version you think is appropriate. 2) I was using a simple ex

Re: libjava and ada broken on x86_64

On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 6:08 AM, Diego Novillo wrote: > Happens while building 32 bit libjava on x86_64 > > libtool: compile:  [ ... ] -g -O2 -D_GNU_SOURCE -m32 -MT posix.lo -MD > -MP -MF .deps/posix.Tpo -c .../libjava/posix.cc  -fPIC -DPIC -o > .libs/posix.o > > /tmp/cc60L3lJ.s: Assembler messages

libjava and ada broken on x86_64

Happens while building 32 bit libjava on x86_64 libtool: compile: [ ... ] -g -O2 -D_GNU_SOURCE -m32 -MT posix.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/posix.Tpo -c .../libjava/posix.cc -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/posix.o /tmp/cc60L3lJ.s: Assembler messages: /tmp/cc60L3lJ.s:943: Error: junk at end of line, first unrecogni

Re: Any very recent inlining changes (libstdc++' ABI check fails in mainline) ?

Paolo Carlini wrote: > Really, I have no idea what the heck is going on with those 4 symbols > (probably the other are simpler), I cannot find where the first linker > script part, for baseline (GLIBCXX_3.4), lets them through... This issue > is making me crazy, it even persists if I change that fr

Re: Any very recent inlining changes (libstdc++' ABI check fails in mainline) ?

Hi Honza, > There was bug causing some of abstract (unspecialized) methods to be > mistakely output. I fixed it this morning, perhaps this is occurence of > this problem? > Thanks for the hint, but I don't think it's that. The regression tester results are just out for Revision: 152556 and the

Re: Any very recent inlining changes (libstdc++' ABI check fails in mainline) ?

> Richard, Jan, > > I'm confused. Consider this symbol: > > W > _ZN9__gnu_cxx8__detail9__find_ifIPSt4pairIPNS_16bitmap_allocatorIcE12_Alloc_blockES6_ENS0_12_Functor_RefINS0_12_Ffit_finderIS6_EET_SD_SD_T0_ > version status: incompatible > GLIBCXX_3.4 > type: function > status:

Re: [RFA] dwarf2out.c:eliminate_regs() bug

Richard Guenther wrote: ... Yes, though we should probably try to catch the DECL_ABSTRACT case further up the call chain - there shouldn't be any location lists for abstract function. Thus, see why static dw_die_ref gen_formal_parameter_die (tree node, tree origin, dw_die_ref context_die) ...

Re: GCC's switch table code generation

On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 09:05:48PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > Edd Barrett writes: > > > I would be really interested to know how GCC: > > * Decides whether or not to embed tables in the data segment of the binary. > > * Selects the comparisons in the above tree. > > The relevant code is

Re: Any very recent inlining changes (libstdc++' ABI check fails in mainline) ?

Richard, Jan, I'm confused. Consider this symbol: W _ZN9__gnu_cxx8__detail9__find_ifIPSt4pairIPNS_16bitmap_allocatorIcE12_Alloc_blockES6_ENS0_12_Functor_RefINS0_12_Ffit_finderIS6_EET_SD_SD_T0_ version status: incompatible GLIBCXX_3.4 type: function status: added I went multi