You want
"=m" (*( struct foo { char x[8]; } __attribute__((may_alias)) *)Dest)
Thank you. With your help, that worse-than-useless sample in the docs
is getting closer to something people can actually use.
Except for one last serious problem: This trick only works for very
specific (and
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 09:52:31PM +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > It seems that a full bootstrap including Ada got broken somewhere in
> > the range of r215789 .. r215799.
>
> I'm bisecting it (on powerpc64-linux, where it also shows up); it needs
> full bootstrapping every time, so will be
On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 07:32:10PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 09:52:31PM +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > It seems that a full bootstrap including Ada got broken somewhere in
> > the range of r215789 .. r215799.
>
> I'm bisecting it (on powerpc64-linux, where it
On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 09:52:31PM +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> It seems that a full bootstrap including Ada got broken somewhere in
> the range of r215789 .. r215799.
I'm bisecting it (on powerpc64-linux, where it also shows up); it needs
full bootstrapping every time, so will be another one
Snapshot gcc-4.8-20141002 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.8-20141002/
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
Apparently Chrome has the same problem.
Here's what I tried to send you earlier but bounced.
Argh!
George...
Jonathan,
The problem I have is that my yahoo email account ALWAYS
switches to rich text. (Yahoo is going down the tube because they don't
seem to care what their customer base wants
cc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?limit_changes=0&view=revision&revision=215791
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?limit_changes=0&view=revision&revision=215790
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?limit_changes=0&view=revision&revision=215789
(See the builds between 20141002 0200 and 120
Dear programming language types,
I wrote this to try once again to explain what is the nature of the
problem that one would have in verifying the integrity of _any_
software toolchain, whether it is aimed ultimately at the production
of other software, or of hardware.
http://livelogic.blogspo
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Gary
> Funck
> Sent: 28 September 2014 20:02
> To: Andi Kleen
> Cc: Robert Stevenson; gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Autotuning parameters/heuristics within gcc - best place to
> start?
>
> On 09
On 10/02/2014 11:35 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 11:30:50AM +0400, Yury Gribov wrote:
On 10/01/2014 10:39 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Toon Moene wrote:
On 10/01/2014 08:00 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
-gcc folks.
Why not use clang then?
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Yury Gribov wrote:
> On 10/01/2014 10:39 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Toon Moene wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/01/2014 08:00 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
-gcc folks.
Why not use clang then?
It offers many
On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 11:30:50AM +0400, Yury Gribov wrote:
> On 10/01/2014 10:39 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Toon Moene wrote:
> >>On 10/01/2014 08:00 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
> >>>
> >>>-gcc folks.
> >>>
> >>>Why not use clang then?
> >>>It offers many m
On 10/01/2014 10:39 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Toon Moene wrote:
On 10/01/2014 08:00 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
-gcc folks.
Why not use clang then?
It offers many more nice features.
What's the Fortran front-end called for clang (or do you really think
13 matches
Mail list logo