Jae Hyuk Kwak wrote:
I haven't heard about "MELT" before and still don't know what exactly
it is. Is it able to deal with this kind of problem?
MELT is a GCC branch and a GCC plugin. It provides a Lispy domain
specific language to code GCC extensions in. More details on the GCC
wiki, in parti
Ever since your changes installed on March 12th, I've been getting
fixincludes testsuite failures of the form below.
I also notice that none of these changes added ChangeLog entries, and
furthermore the SVN commit messages were extremely terse so it was
hard to diagnose the intent or reasoning be
On 15/03/2010 07:19, Jae Hyuk Kwak wrote:
> I think that for the "speed" optimization, perfect hash way is the
> best candidate after jump table if it is applicable.
It should be pointed out that your article contains a false assumption
about how fast the various options are relative to each o
I found that I had a wrong assumption on this issue.
In order to use Perfect Hash Table, we need to know every key values
at compile time, but the key values are determined at run-time so that
it is not feasible idea.
On my project, however, the key values were fixed amount, so that I
confused at
On 15/03/2010 22:03, Sean D'Epagnier wrote:
> - { "_Fract", RID_FRACT, D_CONLY | D_EXT },
> - { "_Accum", RID_ACCUM, D_CONLY | D_EXT },
> - { "_Sat", RID_SAT, D_CONLY | D_EXT },
> + { "_Fract", RID_FRACT, D_EXT },
> + { "_Accum",
It looks like my patches for avr target to get native fixed-point
support may be included soon. I realized that many users use avr-g++
for their projects, and I cannot get the fixed point types working in
c++. The question is generic and should apply to all targets.
Compiling a simple test prog
On 03/15/2010 01:00 AM, Amker.Cheng wrote:
1: In pattern "*mul_acc_si", there's constraint like "*?*?".
what does this supposed to do?
'*' is in the Constraint Modifier Characters section of the docs. It
means ignore the next character for register class preferencing. '?' is
in the Multipl
Richard Guenther wrote:
Status
==
The trunk is still in stage 4 which means it is open under the usual
release branch rules. Thus the trunk is open for regression and
documentation fixes only.
What does that means with respect to plugin related code? See my message
on http://gcc.gnu.or
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> As maintainers do not care for P1 bugs in their maintainance area
> so will the release managers not consider them P1.
Probably not the best reason to downgrade a bug, eh?
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 03/15/10 10:18, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > Status
> > ==
> >
> > The trunk is still in stage 4 which means it is open under the usual
> > release branch rules. Thus the trunk is open for regression and
> > documentation fixes only.
> >
> > There ar
On 03/15/10 10:18, Richard Guenther wrote:
Status
==
The trunk is still in stage 4 which means it is open under the usual
release branch rules. Thus the trunk is open for regression and
documentation fixes only.
There are currently 16 P1 bugs that block the release. If you are
assigned to
Status
==
The trunk is still in stage 4 which means it is open under the usual
release branch rules. Thus the trunk is open for regression and
documentation fixes only.
There are currently 16 P1 bugs that block the release. If you are
assigned to any P1 GCC 4.5 regression please either wor
2010/3/13 Basile Starynkevitch :
> b. the plugin invocation convention could be improved. In particular, one
> could have (as it is the case of many other major plugin-ehancable software,
> e.g. Mozilla, Qt, Gtk, ...) a specific directory to install plugins, and
> invoke gcc -fplugin=treehydra inst
Hi :
I am studying multiplication-accumulate patterns for mips
and noticed there are some changes when IRA was merged.
There are two pattern which confused me, as :
1: In pattern "*mul_acc_si", there's constraint like "*?*?".
what does this supposed to do?
I could not connect "*?" with docu
Thank you Basile.
The article you pointed is exactly what I wanted to find.
The paper summarized switch optimization very well, and it enlightened me.
I am also glad that it mentioned imperfect and perfect hash for switch
statement.
Unfortunately, the super-optimization that the paper suggests doe
15 matches
Mail list logo
