On May 12, 2017 10:42:34 PM GMT+02:00, Steve Ellcey wrote:
>(Short version of this email, is there a way to recalculate/rebuild
>virtual
>phi nodes after modifying the CFG.)
>
>I have a question about duplicating loops and virtual phi nodes.
>I am trying to implement the following optimization as
Hi,
I redid the build without touching binutils ( is installed on the
system), then it works OK. The issue is when you follow the install
guide's suggestion to unpack binutils within the source tree.
So indeed the issue is with the doc.
Once you start moving dirs from binutils to gcc tree an
On 05/12/2017 10:49 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 05/10/2017 04:14 PM, Daniel Santos wrote:
Well my primary goal is programming with values that are constant in the
compiler. There is no language in any C specification (that I'm aware
of) for a "compile-time constant", but the concept is very impo
On Fri, 12 May 2017, Daniel Santos wrote:
> > Note that while "other forms" might be accepted in initializers, they
> > would still not be integer constant expressions (see DR#312).
>
> What is DR#312?
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/dr_312.htm
(but cf the older
http://www.open
Sorry for my delayed response.
On 05/11/2017 09:35 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2017, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 10 May 2017 at 23:14, Daniel Santos wrote:
Well my primary goal is programming with values that are constant in the
compiler. There is no language in any C specification
(Short version of this email, is there a way to recalculate/rebuild virtual
phi nodes after modifying the CFG.)
I have a question about duplicating loops and virtual phi nodes.
I am trying to implement the following optimization as a pass:
Transform:
for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
A[i] = A
On 05/10/2017 04:14 PM, Daniel Santos wrote:
On 05/10/2017 04:24 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Just because there's already one way to do something doesn't mean
better ways to do it are bad.
I'm only speaking out of jealousy being that most of my recent work has
been in C.
hadn't gone so far as
On 12 May 2017 at 15:05, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 12 May 2017 at 14:03, joris wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The installing GCC guide contains a paragraph that says 'If you also intend
>> to build binutils (either to upgrade an existing installation or for use in
>> place of the corresponding tools of your
On 12 May 2017 at 14:03, joris wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The installing GCC guide contains a paragraph that says 'If you also intend
> to build binutils (either to upgrade an existing installation or for use in
> place of the corresponding tools of your OS), unpack the binutils
> distribution either in the
Hi,
The installing GCC guide contains a paragraph that says 'If you also
intend to build binutils (either to upgrade an existing installation or
for use in place of the corresponding tools of your OS), unpack the
binutils distribution either in the same directory or a separate one.'
Bu accor
Hi Richard,
> On 12 May 2017, at 10:24, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>
> This is a heads-up that I am in the process of implementing the last
> of Jasons review comments on the dwarf2out parts of early LTO debug
> support. I hope to post final patches early next week after thoroughly
> re-testing e
On 05/12/2017 09:24 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> This is a heads-up that I am in the process of implementing the last
> of Jasons review comments on the dwarf2out parts of early LTO debug
> support. I hope to post final patches early next week after thoroughly
> re-testing everything.
>
> Note
This is a heads-up that I am in the process of implementing the last
of Jasons review comments on the dwarf2out parts of early LTO debug
support. I hope to post final patches early next week after thoroughly
re-testing everything.
Note that Mach-O and [X]COFF support in the simple-object machine
13 matches
Mail list logo
