Re: Links to release criteria?

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 07:54, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Thu, 17 Nov 2011, Diego Novillo wrote: >> I was thinking changing the text: >> >> Active development: GCC 4.7.0 (changes) >> >> to >> >> Active development: GCC 4.7.0 (changes, release criteria) > > Sounds good to me! > >> Or simply make 'G

gcc-4.6-20111118 is now available

Snapshot gcc-4.6-2018 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.6-2018/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.6 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches

Re: ICE

On 11/18/2011 10:05 PM, François Dumont wrote: I know that 4.7 is going to be released soon so I prefer to report it quickly. I should be able to submit a complete patch for hashtable generating this ICE if the error message is not enough. Well, the error message is very, very often not enough.

more pointer mode madness

I can't produce a small test case for this because it involves copied variables vanishing, but... in expand_debug_locations() we have an assert thusly: gcc_assert (mode == GET_MODE (val) In the failing case I'm seeing (s390) I've got a pointer variable that's SImode, being set from the

ICE

Hi While working on hashtable I have added this kind of expression to decide to cache or not hash code: template, class _Pred = std::equal_to<_Value>, class _Alloc = std::allocator<_Value>, bool __cache_hash_code = __not_<__and_,

Re: ICE in int_mode_for_mode()

David, See PR 50325. - David On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 3:22 PM, David Miller wrote: > > For a few days a lot of new testsuite failures have popped up on sparc, > wherein int_mode_for_mode() gets called with "VOIDmode" as an argument > from extract_bit_field_1 because "op0" is "(const_int 0)" > >

ICE in int_mode_for_mode()

For a few days a lot of new testsuite failures have popped up on sparc, wherein int_mode_for_mode() gets called with "VOIDmode" as an argument from extract_bit_field_1 because "op0" is "(const_int 0)" I have a feeling this is a known problem, but I couldn't find any discussions about this. I str

The Linux binutils 2.22.51.0.1 is released

Hi, This release has been delayed for several months. There are no tarballs. Please get it directly from linux/release/2.22.51.0.1 branch at http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/hjl/binutils.git;a=summary H.J. This is the beta release of binutils 2.22.51.0.1 for Linux, which is based

GNU Tools Cauldron 2012 - Call for Abstracts and Participation

== GNU Tools Cauldron 2012 http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/cauldron2012 Call for Abstracts July 2012 Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic

Re: Links to release criteria?

On Thu, 17 Nov 2011, Diego Novillo wrote: > I was thinking changing the text: > > Active development: GCC 4.7.0 (changes) > > to > > Active development: GCC 4.7.0 (changes, release criteria) Sounds good to me! > Or simply make 'GCC 4.7.0' a link to a 4.7-specific page. I'm not sure one would

Re: Stack allocation

On 18/11/2011 14:38, Alexandru Juncu wrote: On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 1:24 PM, David Brown wrote: On 18/11/2011 10:27, Alexandru Juncu wrote: Hello! I have a curiosity with something I once tested. I took a simple C program and made an assembly file with gcc -S. The C file looks something lik

Re: Stack allocation

On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:38:25 +0200 Alexandru Juncu wrote: > Thank you for still answering. I apologize, but I looked at the lists > and this one seemed the most generic. Can you redirect me to another > list where this thread would be appropriate? > See 'gcc-help': http://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html

Re: Stack allocation

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 1:24 PM, David Brown wrote: > On 18/11/2011 10:27, Alexandru Juncu wrote: >> >> Hello! >> >> I have a curiosity with something I once tested. I took a simple C >> program and made an assembly file with gcc -S. >> >> The C file looks something like this: >> int main(void) >>

About TYPE_DECL, typedefs and TYPE_NEXT_VARIANT

Hello. First at all. This is my first message in this mailing list. I'm developing a static source analyzer from c++ frontend (in future it will be a gcc plugin) and I get problems when I access to type of typedef. When I get a typedef, I would like to show the definition. I use: tree v_next_type

Re: Stack allocation

On 18/11/2011 10:27, Alexandru Juncu wrote: Hello! I have a curiosity with something I once tested. I took a simple C program and made an assembly file with gcc -S. The C file looks something like this: int main(void) { int a=1, b=2; return 0; } The assembly instructions look like this

Re: installing cross compiler

On 18 November 2011 09:57, esmaeil mirzaee wrote: > Hi > apologize for interrupt and weak English. This email is not appropriate for this mailing list, for help using or installing gcc please use the gcc-h...@gcc.gnu.org mailing list. Please follow up on that list instead, thanks. > I need to ins

installing cross compiler

Hi apologize for interrupt and weak English. I need to install gcc cross compiler into Ubuntu 11.10 operating system on Intel core2due. -- Best Esmaeil https://sites.google.com/site/esmaeilmirzaee

Re: a question about IVOPTS: find_interesting_uses_address

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 2:07 AM, Yuehai Du wrote: > 2011/11/18 Richard Guenther : >> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Yuehai Du wrote: >>> 2011/11/17 Richard Guenther : On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> Huh, IVOPTs should never cause a different size memory

Stack allocation

Hello! I have a curiosity with something I once tested. I took a simple C program and made an assembly file with gcc -S. The C file looks something like this: int main(void) { int a=1, b=2; return 0; } The assembly instructions look like this: subl$16, %esp movl$1, -4(%ebp) movl