On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 07:57:17PM +0400, Sergei Organov wrote:
> Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Jun 20, 2005, at 11:28 AM, Sergei Organov wrote:
> >
> > > Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > >> On Jun 20, 2005, at 10:54 AM, Sergei Organov wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>
Hi all,
I am sending this to gnustep-dev crossposted to gcc. Maybe this isn't
the right mailing list. See at the end of the post for a 40 line program
that exhibit the bad behavior.
Problem:
If a is a fault (ie: changes its isa pointer during forwardInvocation),
then:
[a method1:[a method2
Michael Meissner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 07:57:17PM +0400, Sergei Organov wrote:
> > Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > On Jun 20, 2005, at 11:28 AM, Sergei Organov wrote:
> > >
> > > > Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > >
> > > >> On J
Hello.
I would like to point out to those that may be interested and don't read
comp.std.c++:
http://russ.hn.org/rref/
The thread is:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.std.c++/browse_thread/thread/64bf775bdf069dad/de55703ebbe063ce#de55703ebbe063ce
--
Pedro Lamarão
Hi,
I want to write a testcase. The compiler gives two separated warnings on one
statement. How to write this with Dejagnu?
I tried:
{ dg-warning "Warning1" "Warning2" }
and
{ dg-warning "Warning1" 8}
{ dg-warning "Warning2" 8}
8 is the line number of the statment.
But alwarys get excess errors
Quoting Feng Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
>
> I want to write a testcase. The compiler gives two separated warnings on one
> statement. How to write this with Dejagnu?
I don't think this is possible if both warnings are issued for the same location
(which is probably not something we want). I
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> Quoting Feng Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I want to write a testcase. The compiler gives two separated warnings on
> one
> > statement. How to write this with Dejagnu?
>
> If the loci are different, it is
> possible to split the line between the warnings
Sebastian Pop wrote:
This is the best the compiler can do: it has warned the user of a
possible undefined behavior in the code, and that it will use this
assumption for transforming the code.
As with all warnings, you have to run this over a large test suite
of real applications to find out wh
Pedro Lamarão <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Hello.
|
| I would like to point out to those that may be interested and don't read
| comp.std.c++:
Thanks.
GCC/g++ developer are also members of the ISO C++ committee and
participate in C++ works on regular basis.
-- Gaby
Feng Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I want to write a testcase. The compiler gives two separated warnings on
one
> statement. How to write this with Dejagnu?
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/HowToPrepareATestcase
--
Giovanni Bajo
I've noticed that -floop-optimize2 tends to be a pessimism on many
algorithms.
I'm hesitant to file this as a "bug", given that -floop-optimize2 is a
"new" replacement for the older loop optimizer.
Is -floop-optimize2 still in development, and not ready yet -- or are
the problems I'm seeing somet
On Jun 21, 2005, at 12:08 PM, Scott Robert Ladd wrote:
I've noticed that -floop-optimize2 tends to be a pessimism on many
algorithms.
What version of GCC, if not the mainline, we don't care that much as
the new tree based loop and rtl based loop (-floop-optimize2) optimizers
don't implement a
On Tuesday 21 June 2005 18:08, Scott Robert Ladd wrote:
> I've noticed that -floop-optimize2 tends to be a pessimism on many
> algorithms.
>
> I'm hesitant to file this as a "bug", given that -floop-optimize2 is a
> "new" replacement for the older loop optimizer.
It is not that new anymore ;-) Bu
On 6/21/05, Scott Robert Ladd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've noticed that -floop-optimize2 tends to be a pessimism on many
> algorithms.
>
> I'm hesitant to file this as a "bug", given that -floop-optimize2 is a
> "new" replacement for the older loop optimizer.
>
> Is -floop-optimize2 still in
Richard Guenther wrote:
> As the old loop optimizer is (hopefully) going away sooner or later
> small testcases are surely welcome that identify weak spots of the new
> loop optimizer.
I shall attempt the creation of small test cases, then. SHouldn;t be too
difficult, given the nature of my test c
Andrew Pinski wrote:
> What version of GCC, if not the mainline, we don't care...
I'm speaking terms of mainline at the moment. I've just started running
Acovea through a new set of benchmarks with 4.1-cvs.
..Scott
Given:
void f(void)
{
template class A
{
};
}
g++ 4.0/3.4 gives:
bug.cpp:4: error: expected primary-expression before 'template'
Can a language lawer please confirm that this is even valid before I
create a PR?
* Mattias Karlsson:
> Given:
>
> void f(void)
> {
>template class A
>{
>};
> }
>
> g++ 4.0/3.4 gives:
> bug.cpp:4: error: expected primary-expression before 'template'
>
> Can a language lawer please confirm that this is even valid before I
> create a PR?
It's not valid (local templa
On Jun 21, 2005, at 4:12 AM, Frederic Stark wrote:
I am sending this to gnustep-dev crossposted to gcc. Maybe this
isn't the right mailing list. See at the end of the post for a 40
line program that exhibit the bad behavior.
Problem:
If a is a fault (ie: changes its isa pointer during
fo
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Mattias Karlsson:
Given:
void f(void)
{
template class A
{
};
}
g++ 4.0/3.4 gives:
bug.cpp:4: error: expected primary-expression before 'template'
Can a language lawer please confirm that this is even valid before I
create a PR?
It's n
Timothy J. Wood wrote:
[crunch]
The code works correctly under Mac OS X.
I just checked under linux/gcc 3.4 and the code works fine there. Maybe
this is a gcc 3.2 specific problem. I'll check gcc 3.4 windows one of
those days.
The Apple runtime doesn't have this design choice, so it can'
On Jun 21, 2005, at 1:20 PM, Frederic Stark wrote:
Timothy J. Wood wrote:
[crunch]
The code works correctly under Mac OS X.
I just checked under linux/gcc 3.4 and the code works fine there.
Maybe this is a gcc 3.2 specific problem. I'll check gcc 3.4 windows
one of those days.
It is a
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005, Feng Wang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I want to write a testcase. The compiler gives two separated warnings on one
> statement. How to write this with Dejagnu?
>
> I tried:
> { dg-warning "Warning1" "Warning2" }
> and
> { dg-warning "Warning1" 8}
> { dg-warning "Warning2" 8}
> 8 is t
hi,
This is to follow up on a patch for PR8972 [1] submitted by me on the
gcc-patches list some time back. it would be really nice if someone
could have a look at the patch and commit it in. Presently all the
execute tests time out because of the bug in code generation for
multiple shift operations
>
> If someone wishes to submit a patch for that bug for 4.0 branch, I expect
> it could be considered for 4.0.2 but might be too risky for 4.0.1 now.
>
Like so? Tested by building outside the source directory and attempting
to build in the source directory. Did we want something like this for
> Like so? Tested by building outside the source directory and
> attempting to build in the source directory. Did we want something
> like this for mainline too?
We've historically put a lot of effort into making "./configure" work,
so I'd hate to snub anyone willing to work on it. Perhaps an "a
On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 18:24 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > Like so? Tested by building outside the source directory and
> > attempting to build in the source directory. Did we want something
> > like this for mainline too?
>
> We've historically put a lot of effort into making "./configure" work,
>
I'm trying to create a cross compiler hosted on i386 linux targetting an
embedded arm thumb device with thumb-interworking on.
When I attempt to link my app which has some ARM
code in it (hence the need for interwork) I get this message...
/opt/gcc4thumb/lib/gcc/arm-elf/4.1.0/../../../../arm
On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 15:31 -0700, Eric Christopher wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 18:24 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > > Like so? Tested by building outside the source directory and
> > > attempting to build in the source directory. Did we want something
> > > like this for mainline too?
> >
> > We
> I also changed the error message to read:
>
> "... is not supported in this release"
>
> Which might work and we can, of course, remove the error message if that
> ever changes :)
>
> OK?
I have no objections, not that I'm the release manager.
Snapshot gcc-3.4-20050621 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/3.4-20050621/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 3.4 CVS branch
with the following options: -rgcc-ss-3_4-20050621
You'll
--- "Joseph S. Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>写道:
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2005, Feng Wang wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I want to write a testcase. The compiler gives two separated warnings on
> one
> > statement. How to write this with Dejagnu?
> >
> > I tried:
> > { dg-warning "Warning1" "Warning2" }
> > a
Running "make check-g++" for GCC 4.0.0 fails any tests that need to
link on powerpc-apple-darwin7.9.0, with error messages such as:
/usr/bin/ld: warning suggest use of -bind_at_load, as lazy binding may
result in
errors or different symbols being used
symbol _tanl used from dynamic library
On Jun 21, 2005, at 11:53 PM, Douglas Gregor wrote:
Running "make check-g++" for GCC 4.0.0 fails any tests that need to
link on powerpc-apple-darwin7.9.0, with error messages such as:
/usr/bin/ld: warning suggest use of -bind_at_load, as lazy binding may
result in
errors or different sym
John Carter wrote:
I'm trying to create a cross compiler hosted on i386 linux targetting an
embedded arm thumb device with thumb-interworking on.
You need to the modify gcc-4.X/gcc/config/arm/t-arm-elf file to enable multilib for thumb
interworking before building gcc. For gcc 4.0 targetting e
35 matches
Mail list logo
