On Nov 25, 2014, at 12:15 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 03:27:40PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
>> This patch fixes that by ensuring that we print that unsupported message
>> only once.
>>
>> The resulting test result comparison diff is:
>> 2014-11-25 Tom de Vries
>>
>>
On 11/25/14 13:57, Phil Muldoon wrote:
On 25/11/14 20:37, Mike Stump wrote:
On Nov 23, 2014, at 4:06 PM, FX wrote:
One question to build maintainers, and one patch submitted to top-level
configure.ac
So, not sure who wants to review this. From the darwin perspective, Ok.
I mean from my l
On 11/24/2014 06:47 AM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
> All:
>
> The optimization of reducing save and restore of the callee and caller saved
> register has been the attention Of
> increasing the performance of the benchmark. The callee saved registers is
> saved at the entry and restore at the
> ex
Thanks a lot.
As a newbie, I keep reading the gccint manual and the source code.
But, the document is not kind enough for a newbie to jump start in a short
amount of time.
Sometimes an advice from an expert gives a newbie a breakthrough.
I appreciate your help!
David
- Original Message
On 25/11/14 20:37, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Nov 23, 2014, at 4:06 PM, FX wrote:
>> One question to build maintainers, and one patch submitted to top-level
>> configure.ac
>
> So, not sure who wants to review this. From the darwin perspective, Ok.
I mean from my limited viewpoint it looks fine. As
On Nov 23, 2014, at 4:06 PM, FX wrote:
> One question to build maintainers, and one patch submitted to top-level
> configure.ac
So, not sure who wants to review this. From the darwin perspective, Ok.
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 10:45:06AM -0800, David Kang wrote:
> Is the logical operators described similarly?
> I tried "seqf2", "cmpseqf2", and "one_cmplseqf2" for "eq" of two floating
> point numbers as it is shown below.
> But none of them work.
>
> (define_expand "seqf2"
> [(set (match_
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 03:27:40PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
> This patch fixes that by ensuring that we print that unsupported message only
> once.
>
> The resulting test result comparison diff is:
> 2014-11-25 Tom de Vries
>
> * testsuite/libstdc++-prettyprinters/prettyprinters.exp:
Thank you very much.
It solves my problem. Now optab for the conversion is generated properly.
Is the logical operators described similarly?
I tried "seqf2", "cmpseqf2", and "one_cmplseqf2" for "eq" of two floating point
numbers as it is shown below.
But none of them work.
(define_expand "seq
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 08:18:39AM -0800, David Kang wrote:
> (define_expand "fix_sfsi2"
The proper name is "fixsfsi2", no underscore. You might want
"fix_truncsfsi2" instead though.
Segher
Hi,
I'm still a newbie to gcc porting and ask you for help.
I'm porting gcc to generate added hardware FPU unit to an existing architecture
(tile64).
Without the hardware FPU unit, soft-float is used to handle floating point
operations.
Now, arithmetic instructions using FPU is properly gener
On 15-09-14 18:05, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
libstdc++-v3/
* testsuite/Makefile.am (check_p_numbers0, check_p_numbers1,
check_p_numbers2, check_p_numbers3, check_p_numbers4,
check_p_numbers5, check_p_numbers6, check_p_numbers,
check_p_subdirs): New variables.
(c
On 16 November 2014 at 15:51, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Git tags are missing for GCC 4.9.1, 4.9.2, 4.8.3 and 4.7.4.
I can't create the tags but these are the release commits:
git tag gcc-4_9_2-release c1283af40b65f1ad862cf5b27e2d9ed10b2076b6
git tag gcc-4_9_1-release c6fa1b412663593960e6240eb66d82
On 25/11/2014 10:27, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 10:19:21AM +0100, Mason wrote:
Aaah, you want me to post the bug report to BZ, not here...
Yep - the snippet + command-line options you posted was enough to reproduce
the bug. The GCC mailing list is not for reporting bugs.
G
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 10:19:21AM +0100, Mason wrote:
> Aaah, you want me to post the bug report to BZ, not here...
Yep - the snippet + command-line options you posted was enough to reproduce
the bug. The GCC mailing list is not for reporting bugs.
> When you have a minute, can you take a look
Hello Marek,
On 25/11/2014 09:47, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 09:30:05AM +0100, Mason wrote:
This ICE may have gotten lost in the noise of my own message.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2014-11/msg00094.html
(The code snippet might be invalid C)
$ gcc -std=gnu99 -O3 -S tes
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 09:30:05AM +0100, Mason wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This ICE may have gotten lost in the noise of my own message.
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2014-11/msg00094.html
>
> (The code snippet might be invalid C)
>
> $ gcc -std=gnu99 -O3 -S test.c
> test.c: In function 'main':
> t
Hello,
This ICE may have gotten lost in the noise of my own message.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2014-11/msg00094.html
(The code snippet might be invalid C)
$ gcc -std=gnu99 -O3 -S test.c
test.c: In function 'main':
test.c:3:5: internal compiler error: in expand_expr_real_1, at expr.c:10540
18 matches
Mail list logo
