On Fri, 2014-05-09 00:48:39 +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> Just found this for iq2000:
>
> g++ -c -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -DCROSS_DIRECTORY_STRUCTURE -fno-exceptions
> -fno-rtti -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -W -Wall -Wno-narrowing
> -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wmissing-format-attribute -Woverlo
On Fri, 2014-05-09 at 00:48 +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> [...]
>
> Just found this for iq2000:
>
> g++ -c -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -DCROSS_DIRECTORY_STRUCTURE -fno-exceptions
> -fno-rtti -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -W -Wall -Wno-narrowing
> -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wmissing-format-attribut
[...]
Just found this for iq2000:
g++ -c -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -DCROSS_DIRECTORY_STRUCTURE -fno-exceptions
-fno-rtti -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -W -Wall -Wno-narrowing -Wwrite-strings
-Wcast-qual -Wmissing-format-attribute -Woverloaded-virtual -pedantic
-Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros -Wno
Snapshot gcc-4.8-20140508 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.8-20140508/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.8 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 10:15:06AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> So, I was wondering about patterns like:
>
> (define_insn_and_split "*setcc_di_1"
> [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand" "=q")
> (match_operator:DI 1 "ix86_comparison_operator"
> [(reg FLAGS_REG) (const_int 0
So, I was wondering about patterns like:
(define_insn_and_split "*setcc_di_1"
[(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand" "=q")
(match_operator:DI 1 "ix86_comparison_operator"
[(reg FLAGS_REG) (const_int 0)]))]
"TARGET_64BIT && !TARGET_PARTIAL_REG_STALL"
"#"
"&& reload_c
Am 05/07/2014 04:20 PM, schrieb Umesh Kalappa:
Hi All ,
We are porting GCC 4.8.1 for the customized hardware, where the
current calling convention used as arguments are passed by stack and
return value by register.
But we do have some intrinsic functions(that are supplied by hardware
folks )
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 05/07/2014 02:43 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>>> The more challenging issue with early GIMPLE is that loops have already
>>> been
>>> lowered to gotos, so adopting the syntax-based Java reachability rules is
>>> impossible. Oh dear.
>>
>
On 05/07/2014 02:43 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
The more challenging issue with early GIMPLE is that loops have already been
lowered to gotos, so adopting the syntax-based Java reachability rules is
impossible. Oh dear.
Perfect is the enemy of the good (no false positives and no false
negatives
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 7:21 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> Given this in tree.h:
>
> struct int_n_trees_t {
> tree signed_type;
> tree unsigned_type;
> };
Mark with GTY(())
> extern struct int_n_trees_t int_n_trees[NUM_INT_N_ENTS];
Likewise. See how global_trees is marked for example.
10 matches
Mail list logo