cc Andrew Sutton
From: gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org on behalf of Christopher Di
Bella
Sent: April 2, 2017 8:57 AM
To: gcc Mailing List
Subject: g++ extension for Concepts TS
Hey all,
I've been working on a concept extension that permits type aliases
inside the
Hi all,
I recently checked this old discussion about when/why to use lxvd2x instead of
lvsl/lvx/vperm/lvx to load elements from memory to vector:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2015-03/msg00135.html
I had the same doubt and I was also concerned how performance influences on
these approaches. So th
> On Apr 10, 2017, at 8:17 AM, David Edelsohn wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Simon Wright wrote:
>> I see that, in the GCC 7 Release Criteria, the Secondary Platforms list
>> includes i686-apple-darwin.
>>
>> Should this now be x86_64-apple-darwin? I've been building this since
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Simon Wright wrote:
> I see that, in the GCC 7 Release Criteria, the Secondary Platforms list
> includes i686-apple-darwin.
>
> Should this now be x86_64-apple-darwin? I've been building this since GCC
> 4.5.0, Darwin 10, in 2011.
If the Darwin maintainers conc
I see that, in the GCC 7 Release Criteria, the Secondary Platforms list
includes i686-apple-darwin.
Should this now be x86_64-apple-darwin? I've been building this since GCC
4.5.0, Darwin 10, in 2011.
On 2017.04.10 at 13:14 +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 10/04/17 12:06, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 12:52:15PM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> >>> --param ggc-min-heapsize=131072
> >>> 11264.89user 311.88system 24:18.69elapsed 793%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata
>
On 10/04/17 12:06, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 12:52:15PM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
>>> --param ggc-min-heapsize=131072
>>> 11264.89user 311.88system 24:18.69elapsed 793%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata
>>> 1265352maxresident)k
>>
>> --param ggc-min-heapsize=262144
>> 10778
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 12:52:15PM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> > --param ggc-min-heapsize=131072
> > 11264.89user 311.88system 24:18.69elapsed 793%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata
> > 1265352maxresident)k
>
> --param ggc-min-heapsize=262144
> 10778.52user 336.34system 23:15.71elapsed 796%CPU (0av
On 2017.04.10 at 12:15 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2017.04.10 at 10:56 +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> >
> > What are the numbers with 256M?
>
> Here are the numbers from a 4core/8thread 16GB RAM Skylake machine.
> They look less stellar than the ppc64le ones (variability is s
On 2017.04.10 at 10:56 +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 09/04/17 21:06, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> > On 2017.04.09 at 21:10 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> >> On 2017.04.09 at 21:25 +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 9 Apr 2017, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> >>>
> Th
On 09/04/17 21:06, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2017.04.09 at 21:10 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
>> On 2017.04.09 at 21:25 +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote:
>>> On Sun, 9 Apr 2017, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
>>>
The minimum size heuristic for the garbage collector's heap, before it
On Sun, Apr 09, 2017 at 10:06:21PM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2017.04.09 at 21:10 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> > On 2017.04.09 at 21:25 +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> > > On Sun, 9 Apr 2017, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> > >
> > > > The minimum size heuristic for the garbage c
On Sun, Apr 09, 2017 at 03:52:30PM -0500, Daniel Santos wrote:
> So I've been browsing through the gcc docs for other archs and
> noticed that they all use different terminology for their options that
> call or jump to stubs as a substitute for emitting inline saves &
> restores for registers.
>
13 matches
Mail list logo