On Wed, 2017-07-12 at 08:57 -0600, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> On 07/12/2017 05:07 AM, Klaus Kruse Pedersen (Klaus) wrote:
> > I have seen reproducible builds being discussed here, but what is
> > the
> > position on inter c-lib and OS reproducible builds?
>
> I think we consider unstable sort probl
I am looking into reversing loop to increased efficiency. There is
already a PR22041 for this and an old patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-01/msg01851.html by Zdenek
which never made it to mainline.
For constant loop count, ivcanon pass is adding reverse iv but this
not selected by ivo
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Sandra Loosemore
wrote:
> On 07/12/2017 05:07 AM, Klaus Kruse Pedersen (Klaus) wrote:
>>
>> I have seen reproducible builds being discussed here, but what is the
>> position on inter c-lib and OS reproducible builds?
>
>
> I think we consider unstable sort problems
On 07/12/2017 05:07 AM, Klaus Kruse Pedersen (Klaus) wrote:
I have seen reproducible builds being discussed here, but what is the
position on inter c-lib and OS reproducible builds?
I think we consider unstable sort problems bugs and have fixed them in
the past. Bugzilla search turned up #289
On 07/11/2017 11:50 PM, sa...@hederstierna.com wrote:
Hi
Reading about macro pitfalls and eg duplication side-effects
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/cpp/Macro-Pitfalls.html#Macro-Pitfalls
would it be possible to let the preprocessor generate warnings for any of these
pitfalls?
The preprocess
On 07/11/17 22:28, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> On 07/11/17 21:42, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Andrew Pinski
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Andrew Pinski
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Bernd Edlinger
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
Hi,
the current cost computations in rtlanal.c and maybe other places
suffer from the fact that they are hiding parts of the expressions
from the back-end, like SET_DESTs of single_set or the anatomy of
PARALELLs.
Would it be in order to have a hook like the one attached?
I am aware of that, in
Hello,
I've fixed the location issue by generating new STATEMENT_LIST_END tree for
each compound statement and using it to store the location of closing brace.
I do understand that it's rather an ugly workaround than a solution, but still
it resolves the issue for us and doesn't break GCC testsui
I have seen reproducible builds being discussed here, but what is the
position on inter c-lib and OS reproducible builds?
As it happens, I just hit by an interesting case were different OS'es
generate (significant) different code. The difference originate from a
relatively small memory ordering di
