On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 06:39:40PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> Here's my first cut at trying to tell how well or how bad we perform
> in terms of debug info, that can be dropped into the GCC run-time test
> infrastructure and used by means of #include in new tests that add
> GUALCHK* annotation
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 9:01 PM, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jul 29, 2008, "Richard Guenther" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> why not pair the testcase with a gdb script directly?
>
> Mostly a matter of convenience. Writing code and adding "test this
> here, etc", and not havin
On Jul 29, 2008, "Richard Guenther" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> why not pair the testcase with a gdb script directly?
Mostly a matter of convenience. Writing code and adding "test this
here, etc", and not having to adjust a testcase all over just because
you have to add an #include feels so muc
On Jul 29, 2008, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Here's my first cut at trying to tell how well or how bad we perform
>> in terms of debug info, that can be dropped into the GCC run-time test
>> infrastructure and used by means of #inclu
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 5:17 AM, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Here's my first cut at trying to tell how well or how bad we perform
>> in terms of debug info, that can be dropped into the GCC run-time test
>> infrastructure and used b
Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here's my first cut at trying to tell how well or how bad we perform
> in terms of debug info, that can be dropped into the GCC run-time test
> infrastructure and used by means of #include in new tests that add
> GUALCHK* annotations (or with separate
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> Here's my first cut at trying to tell how well or how bad we perform
> in terms of debug info, that can be dropped into the GCC run-time test
> infrastructure and used by means of #include in new tests that add
> GUALCHK* annotations (or with separate
On Jul 28, 2008, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thoughts, comments, suggestions, tomatoes, eggs? :-)
>Contributed by Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
Heh. So now you know I copied the header from some other file :-)
Fixed, th
Here's my first cut at trying to tell how well or how bad we perform
in terms of debug info, that can be dropped into the GCC run-time test
infrastructure and used by means of #include in new tests that add
GUALCHK* annotations (or with separate compilation, if some stuff is
moved into a separate h
