-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 11:47:15PM +0200, J.C. Pizarro wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainfuck
If you're going to insult the contributors to GCC's code base by
comparing the code they work on to bf, then I think you should write
better English
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 02:22:06PM -0700, Jim Wilson wrote:
> Revital1 Eres wrote:
> >ERROR: tcl error sourcing
> >/home/eres/mve_mainline_zero_12_3/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/compat/compat.exp.
> >ER
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 11:15:27AM -0700, Brian Dessent wrote:
> Kai Tietz wrote:
> > Ok, I will try for this. I have to find a different editor, which is
> > not too smart as to remove trailing whitespaces ...
>
> Or just add -w to the diff options w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 03:09:41PM +0200, Robert Dewar wrote:
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> > "Jie Zhang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> But now gcc seems to optimize it away. For the following function:
> >>
> >> $ cat t.c
> >> #include
> >> void foo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 10:04:51AM +0200, Ricardo FERNANDEZ PASCUAL wrote:
> I am sorry, but I fail to see the relation of this with rpcgen (which
> as far I know is a code generator for the RPC protocol). Am I looking
> at the wrong rpcgen?
It's the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 02:58:26PM +0200, Ricardo FERNANDEZ PASCUAL wrote:
>I am writing a new GCC front end. One of the features provided by my
> language (CIL) is explicit field layout and size for records.
>Any pointers would be greatly ap
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 07:35:58AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> If you're willing to use integers, you'll have an easy time. If you
> want the more elegant language semantics of multiple pointer sizes,
> you'll have to take the time to read through t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 01:11:54PM +0200, Mohamed Boukaa wrote:
> --->Also when I compile a simple program by myself I got :
>
> ~ $ ./testaz
> bash: ./testaz: Permission denied
> However the portage is working fine , it can compile C
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 06:20:19AM -0500, John Love-Jensen wrote:
> One of my project's general on-going tasks is to eliminate dead code.
> Sort of following the Extreme Programming principle.
If you're doing XP then you also have a test suite that co
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 02:45:50PM -0700, Gary Funck wrote:
> Beginning with this simple example,
>
> 1 int j;
> 2 volatile int jv;
> 3 void p()
> 4 {
> 5++j;
> 6++jv;
> 7 }
>
> when compiled with "gcc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 05:25:55PM +, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
> In http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-12/msg00642.html, Bernd Jendrissek
> wrote:
> > Which leads me to the subject. Would it be a win to have a macro
> > HARD_REGNO
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I think so, at least.
The problem I seem to be having is related to this bit of code in
reload1.c:find_reg():
for (j = 1; j < this_nregs; j++)
{
this_cost += spill_add_cost[regno + j];
if ((TEST_HARD_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 03:43:15PM -0700, Eric Christopher wrote:
> >Don't you think it is reasonable to fix horrible coding errors like
> >this, you are just asking for maintenance problems. In the short
> >term, kludging may make sense, in the long t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 02:22:55AM -0700, Kean Johnston wrote:
> If you're working in an ISO9000 environment where every single source
> line change is tracked by a rather burdensome process, the last thing
> you want to do is invoke that process for s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 09:35:22AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 07:32:46AM -0400, Richard Kenner wrote:
> > The real fix is below, though I haven't run it throuh a testing
> > cycle yet. I was wondering how this ever worke
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 02:16:39PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > X can be run time selectable, OMF selectable, OS defined...
>
> No.
>
> Making the stack bigger by inlining is no different from making it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 11:42:05AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> no obvious answer.
May I bash my head against the wall? :)
> In short, the issue is, when given the following code:
>
> struct A {...};
> struct B { ...; struct A a; ...; };
Telli
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 05:52:33PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Bruce Lilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Earlier versions of gcc retain static character strings in object
> > files which can be used for identification via ident (RCS) or what
> > (S
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 10:13:00AM +0100, Josef Angermeier wrote:
> Rehi
> > It's been done a couple of times already, first by me, and later my
> > code was extended by a couple of other people. Don't know if you
> > want to start from scratch "on pr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 05:04:51AM +0100, Sam Lauber wrote:
> I am thinking of including a front-end for INTERCAL for GCC. INTERCAL
> is an estoric programming langauge that was created in 1972 with the
> goal of having nothing in common with other la
20 matches
Mail list logo
