nit and use alternative EH delivery mechanizm,
but it would be a lot of effort to implement faster variant of runtime
that works on so many targets as GCC has and the benefits would be IMO
quite low.
Possibly.
--
Sylvain Pion
INRIA Sophia-Antipolis
Geometrica Project-Team
CGAL, http://cgal.org/
Jan Hubicka a écrit :
Sylvain Pion a écrit :
Naive user question : is this going to improve the efficiency
of throwing exceptions, at least in the restricted cases of :
There is little improvement already via EH cleanup: at least
cleanups/catch regions that turns out to be empty are now
Sylvain Pion a écrit :
Naive user question : is this going to improve the efficiency
of throwing exceptions, at least in the restricted cases of :
- the catch clause contains the throw (after inlining).
I meant the try block, sorry.
- interprocedural analysis can connect
. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6588
--
Sylvain Pion
INRIA Sophia-Antipolis
Geometrica Project-Team
CGAL, http://cgal.org/
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:41 AM, Sylvain Pion
wrote:
Richard Guenther wrote:
The middle-end knows about an explicit association barrier (only
used from the Fortran FE sofar), a PAREN_EXPR. Would exposing
that to C/C++ be of any help? For example it would, even with
with FP. But, IMO, it's an improvement over FP which should
be considered on the same ground as the improvement that FP has been
over integers 2-3 decades ago.
Now, you know the *why*. I'm not sure whether I convinced you,
but I'd be glad to have some help for the *how* ;-)
--
Sylvain Pion
INRIA Sophia-Antipolis
Geometrica Project-Team
CGAL, http://cgal.org/
not clear yet to me how all this
will interact, but I have good hope to see some connections
there (like modeling some associativity rules with axioms).
--
Sylvain Pion
INRIA Sophia-Antipolis
Geometrica Project-Team
CGAL, http://cgal.org/
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Sylvain Pion
wrote:
- Show quoted text -
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009, Sylvain Pion wrote:
Later, 1) started to be taken care of, and it was unfortunately
added under the control of the same -frounding-math option.
Which
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009, Sylvain Pion wrote:
Later, 1) started to be taken care of, and it was unfortunately
added under the control of the same -frounding-math option.
Which now, makes it harder to come back, since we want different
defaults for these two aspects.
I have
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 6:58 AM, Sylvain Pion
wrote:
Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
2009/3/10 Sylvain Pion :
The problem I fear is that variadic templates are already conveniently
used as an implementation detail in libstdc++. And the warning there
is probably hidden by
Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
2009/3/10 Sylvain Pion :
But then probably, variadic templates are implemented as a GCC
extension to C++98 and they work fine with -std=c++98 despite what the
warning says. Or don't they?
Yes, but like any extension, it's nice to be able to disable them
as
Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
2009/3/10 Sylvain Pion :
The problem I fear is that variadic templates are already conveniently
used as an implementation detail in libstdc++. And the warning there
is probably hidden by the "system header" warning removal machinery.
But then probably
code uses it, which triggers lots of warning.
My workaround for this is to test for G++0x mode explicitly in addition,
and #error on it in my test program.
--
Sylvain Pion
INRIA Sophia-Antipolis
Geometrica Project-Team
CGAL, http://cgal.org/
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Sylvain Pion wrote:
Andrew Thomas Pinski wrote:
The fact is that Roger's patch introduced a regression (this word
should be clear enough here), in that some users now have their old
code broken, and they are forced to add the -frounding-math option
(after having lost
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Sun, 8 Mar 2009, Sylvain Pion wrote:
this pragma. I nevertheless try to find grants for funding
people to implement some related things in GCC. And I also
contribute time to help in the guidance of GCC with my
expertise in this particular area, even if it requires a
me -frounding-math option.
Which now, makes it harder to come back, since we want different
defaults for these two aspects.
I have already mentioned in a bugzilla PR that it could be nice
to have 2 options, but IIRC, I did not get any reply to this.
--
Sylvain Pion
INRIA Sophia-Antipolis
Geometrica Project-Team
CGAL, http://cgal.org/
Joseph S. Myers a écrit :
On Sun, 8 Mar 2009, Sylvain Pion wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-09/msg00104.html
introduced the -frounding-math option, and changed
the default behavior of GCC to optimize "unsafely".
That is a misleading description. The cautionary tex
re forced
to add the -frounding-math for correctness.
Somehow, I also think that this -fno-rounding-math default is
inconsistent with the general policy of defaults in GCC which
is to aim at safety and correctness first.
I would be glad to read your opinions on this.
--
Sylvain Pion
INRIA Sophi
particular case is connected to pragma FENV_ACCESS though. )
Also, would this work when the functions is inline?
I mean the case when the caller does not have the same attribute,
but the inlined code of the callee still respects the attribute
set for the inlined callee.
--
Sylvain Pion
IN
skaller wrote :
I can tell you I definitely considered using FS for the
Felix thread frame pointer to save passing that pointer
between every function..
But then, won't you end up with an implementation very similar
to __thread??
--
Sylvain Pion
INRIA Sophia-Antipolis
Geometrica Project
the RVO, even for objects defining an rvalue-ref copy
constructor, right?
BTW, http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html does not yet mention the rvalue
reference patch.
--
Sylvain Pion
INRIA Sophia-Antipolis
Geometrica Project
CGAL, http://cgal.org/
Dear Richard and GCC list,
I am working on a proposal to standardize interval arithmetic in C++.
(http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1843.pdf)
In order to implement it efficiently, one typically needs to use the
FPU rounding modes (e.g. using fegetround and fesetround from
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 12:54:40PM +0200, Mattias Karlsson wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2005, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>
> >On 2005-06-16 17:54:03 -0400, Robert Dewar wrote:
> >>As you well know, not everyone agrees this is a bug, and this does
> >>not have to do with performance. Saying over and over ag
On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 10:28:05AM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> This change is needed to get i387 status word switching instructions in
> (int)->(float) conversions out of the loops, i.e.:
>
> int i;
> double d;
>
> for (x = 0... {
>i[x] = d[x];
> }
I think it would also be very useful to hav
24 matches
Mail list logo
