Robert Dewar writes:
> I am actually a bit dubious about automatic extraction of documentation
> from code. The kind of thing you can get this way is in any case easily
> obtained by browsing the code.
Presumably it saves the effort of browsing the code, which is not a
small thing... (If I'm lear
I ran gcc 162830 on x86 under a tool that checks for integer undefined
behaviors. The attached error messages show up when running "make
check" and when recompiling gcc.
Each line in the attachment is an error message giving the problematic
operator, its srcloc, the types of its operands, and exa
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20100803 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20100803/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.4 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 8:48 PM, Robert Dewar wrote:
> Joe Buck wrote:
>
>> So one way to move forward is to effectively have two manuals, one
>> containing traditional user-written text (GFDL), the other containing
>> generated text (GPL). If you print it out as a book, the generated
>> part woul
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 05:51:13PM -0700, Paul Koning wrote:
> > gcc and gccint docs are actually pretty reasonable. (Certainly gccint is
> > vastly better than some of its siblings, like gdbint.) But very little of
> > it is generated and very little of w
Joe Buck wrote:
So one way to move forward is to effectively have two manuals, one
containing traditional user-written text (GFDL), the other containing
generated text (GPL). If you print it out as a book, the generated
part would just appear as an appendix to the manual, it's "mere
aggregation
It's interesting to note that in the case of GNAT, we have no
licensing constraints on the documentation that would restrict
automatic generation, but we just don't do it.
The GNAT documentation is pretty complete, and certainly
gets a lot of attention and constant improvement, since
we regard it
Diego Novillo wrote:
We are already having trouble keeping our documentation up-to-date.
Some of it is in such a poor shape as to be laughable. Yes, it's
mostly our fault, but if we were able to generate documentation by
simply extracting it from the code. Tools exist for this, and
properly ma
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 03 August 2010 17:22
> To: Bingfeng Mei
> Cc: Alexander Monakov; gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Restrict qualifier still not working?
>
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
> > Ric
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
> Richard,
> I applied the patch. The simple example in my previous mail is
> compiled as expected. However, for a bit more complex example,
> restrict qualifier still doesn't work as expected. This happens
> even on trunk compiler so it is not d
On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 05:51:13PM -0700, Paul Koning wrote:
> gcc and gccint docs are actually pretty reasonable. (Certainly gccint is
> vastly better than some of its siblings, like gdbint.) But very little of it
> is generated and very little of what comes to mind as possible subject matter
Richard,
I applied the patch. The simple example in my previous mail is
compiled as expected. However, for a bit more complex example,
restrict qualifier still doesn't work as expected. This happens
even on trunk compiler so it is not due to some missing patches on 4.5.
void foo (int * restrict a
Hi All,
If I don't use a constraint, is it possible that during ira I get a
register which is not acceptable by the predicate?
In my port I have the following to support HW loops:
(define_predicate "lc_operand"
(match_operand 0 "register_operand")
{
unsigned int regno;
if (GET
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 3 Aug 2010, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
>
>> Thanks, I can reproduce it with trunk compiler but not 4.5.0.
>> Do you know how alias set are represented and used now.
>
> I'm not aware of any changes regarding alias sets.
>
>> It used
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
> Thanks, I can reproduce it with trunk compiler but not 4.5.0.
> Do you know how alias set are represented and used now.
I'm not aware of any changes regarding alias sets.
> It used to
> be each alias set is assigned a unique number and there won't
>
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Alexander Monakov [mailto:amona...@ispras.ru]
>> Sent: 02 August 2010 17:48
>> To: Bingfeng Mei
>> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Richard Guenther
>> Subject: Re: Restrict qualifier still not working?
>>
>>
>>
>> On
On 08/03/2010 01:35 AM, Richard Kenner wrote:
That is true, but very often the documentation is needed in two
places: in the code and in the manual. Especially for things like
machine constraints, flags and options.
Yes, but the audiences are different between users who read the manual and
deve
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexander Monakov [mailto:amona...@ispras.ru]
> Sent: 02 August 2010 17:48
> To: Bingfeng Mei
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Richard Guenther
> Subject: Re: Restrict qualifier still not working?
>
>
>
> On Mon, 2 Aug 2010, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > I ran a s
18 matches
Mail list logo
