On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 02:05:45PM -0800, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> > What are the implications (GPL-wise) of using CGEN-generated files in
> > gcc? Specifically, I'm working on a second attempt to contribute the
> > MeP port, and its intrinsics are CGEN-
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > I believe the source code (i.e., what you'd change to modify the
> > intrinsics) needs including in the GCC release tarballs. I don't
> > think CGEN itself needs including, any more than OCaml needs
> > including because the ARM NEON intrinsic generators
> I believe the source code (i.e., what you'd change to modify the
> intrinsics) needs including in the GCC release tarballs. I don't
> think CGEN itself needs including, any more than OCaml needs
> including because the ARM NEON intrinsic generators are written in
> OCaml.
The same cgen files p
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009, DJ Delorie wrote:
> What are the implications (GPL-wise) of using CGEN-generated files in
> gcc? Specifically, I'm working on a second attempt to contribute the
> MeP port, and its intrinsics are CGEN-generated (and there are a *lot*
> of them - most opcodes have an intrinsic
DJ Delorie writes:
> What are the implications (GPL-wise) of using CGEN-generated files in
> gcc? Specifically, I'm working on a second attempt to contribute the
> MeP port, and its intrinsics are CGEN-generated (and there are a *lot*
> of them - most opcodes have an intrinsic). [...]
My under
What are the implications (GPL-wise) of using CGEN-generated files in
gcc? Specifically, I'm working on a second attempt to contribute the
MeP port, and its intrinsics are CGEN-generated (and there are a *lot*
of them - most opcodes have an intrinsic). I'd rather not have to
manually enter all t
