Greetings everybody,
I'm seeking your advice on how to best solve a bug. The issue has to do with
folding a bitfield contained in a union. Consider the following example:
union U {
unsigned int a:24;
unsigned int b:20;
} u = { .a = 0x345678 };
int foo (void)
{
return u.b;
}
Currently, fo
On 27/06/2014 07:31, Roman Gareev wrote:
Are you saying we should better not do unit testing at the moment? (This is
perfectly fine with me, I am just verifying what you said)
Yes, I think we should better not to do it. It seems that unit-testing
isn't supported in gcc.
If we don't have a con
> Are you saying we should better not do unit testing at the moment? (This is
> perfectly fine with me, I am just verifying what you said)
Yes, I think we should better not to do it. It seems that unit-testing
isn't supported in gcc.
> If we don't have a convenient way to do unit-testing, we need
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 4:13 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 06/26/14 02:44, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>> I ran into PR60947, in which GCC understands the return value of
>> memset is the first argument passed in, according to standard, then
>> does optimization like below:
>> movip, sp
>>
Snapshot gcc-4.8-20140626 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.8-20140626/
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 06/26/14 02:44, Bin.Cheng wrote:
Hi,
I ran into PR60947, in which GCC understands the return value of
memset is the first argument passed in, according to standard, then
does optimization like below:
movip, sp
stmfdsp!, {r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10, fp, ip, lr, pc}
sub
Sergey Boldyrev writes:
> I've tried to download the latest 4.7.4 version from
> ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/releases/gcc-4.7.4
> and couldn't successfully check the MD5 sum,
> which is given there in the "md5.sum" file.
> gcc-4.7.4.tar.gz appears OK,
> but gcc-4.7.4.tar.bz2 produces an error.
Yup
Dear GCC team,
thank you very much for your many years efforts
in developing and improving the compiler.
I've tried to download the latest 4.7.4 version from
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/releases/gcc-4.7.4
and couldn't successfully check the MD5 sum,
which is given there in the "md5.sum" file.
gcc-
Thanks for elaborating.
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I ran into PR60947, in which GCC understands the return value of
>> memset is the first argument passed in, according to standard, then
>> does optimizati
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> I ran into PR60947, in which GCC understands the return value of
> memset is the first argument passed in, according to standard, then
> does optimization like below:
> movip, sp
> stmfdsp!, {r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10, fp
Hi,
I ran into PR60947, in which GCC understands the return value of
memset is the first argument passed in, according to standard, then
does optimization like below:
movip, sp
stmfdsp!, {r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10, fp, ip, lr, pc}
subfp, ip, #4
subsp, sp, #20
l
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:21:18AM +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> Quoting gcc/cp/mangle.c@34394:
See http://gcc.gnu.org/PR2316 ?
Jakub
Quoting gcc/cp/mangle.c@34394:
/* Non-terminal . NODE is a FUNCTION_TYPE or
METHOD_TYPE. If INCLUDE_RETURN_TYPE is non-zero, the return type
is mangled before the parameter types.
::= F [Y] E */
static void
write_function_type (type, include_return_type)
tree type;
i
13 matches
Mail list logo
