Dear Madam or Sir,
I want to start a code analysis project using the "-fdump" debugging
outputs. Therefore I would like to ask if these features / switches are
considered stable in future versions of gcc ( I could not find any
information in the provided docs). Alternatively I have to write a
Hi Ranjit,
Thanks a lot for your help.
May I ask why it has to be native in order to generate jv-convert, grmic, etc?
Also if I replace the section in "libjava/Makefile.am" with the following, will
that work?
- - 8< -
bin_PROGRAMS = j
Yes, of course, but what if you've checked out using a read-only
protocol? Is it going to fall down? Refuse to commit entirely?
You can use svk mirror --relocate before and after svn push --lump.
Paolo
* Hendrik Post:
> I want to start a code analysis project using the "-fdump" debugging
> outputs. Therefore I would like to ask if these features / switches are
> considered stable in future versions of gcc ( I could not find any
> information in the provided docs). Alternatively I have to writ
> - - 8< -
> ## For now, only on native systems. FIXME.
> if NATIVE
> bin_PROGRAMS = jv-convert gij grmic grmiregistry gcj-dbtool
> endif
> - - 8< -
>
> So this is expected behaviour at
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
TJ Laurenzo wrote:
>>- - 8< -
>>## For now, only on native systems. FIXME.
>>if NATIVE
>>bin_PROGRAMS = jv-convert gij grmic grmiregistry gcj-dbtool
>>endif
>>- - 8< -
> Are you talking of a cross-compiler (target != host) or
> a crossed-native compiler (target==host!=build)? I think
> Rui was complaining about these tools not being generated
> in the cross-compiler case while you might have observed
> these being created in the crossed-native compiler case.
>
>
> Basic testing done on i686-linux (built with --languages=c,fortran and
> a shared libgmp in /foo/bar, and regtested). Extended testing (which
> takes ages on my computer) in progress.
>
> OK for mainline? OK for 4.0?
*ping*
This patch has both a toplevel part and a part in gcc/, so I don't
know
Brian Dessent wrote:
> > /home/sherlock/gcc/o/gcc/xgcc -B/home/sherlock/gcc/o/gcc/
> > -B/usr/local/i686-pc-c
> > ygwin/bin/ -B/usr/local/i686-pc-cygwin/lib/ -isystem
> > /usr/local/i686-pc-cygwin/i
> > nclude -isystem /usr/local/i686-pc-cygwin/sys-include -DHAVE_CONFIG_H
> > -I. -I../.
> > ./../.
This patch has both a toplevel part and a part in gcc/, so I don't
know exactly who can approve it.
I haven't really understood why you need this patch.
If you need to set the LD_LIBRARY_PATH manually after installation,
something is broken. If the GMPLIBSDIR is for example something in your
> "Rui" == Rui Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rui> May I ask why it has to be native in order to generate
Rui> jv-convert, grmic, etc?
I think I wrote that code, but I don't remember the reason for this.
Rui> Also if I replace the section in "libjava/Makefile.am" with the
Rui> following, w
> Plain compiler bug. I'm not aware of any existing report to that
> effect,
IMHO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9726
is the same bug
Joerg
hi,
Since the cvs version of gas supports extensions for the dwarf2
basic_block location information, I thought I could try to add support
to gcc for this feature. My use of this feature is related to binary
code analysis: being able to gather the bb boundaries through gcc's
debugging output
>Rui> May I ask why it has to be native in order to generate
>jv-convert,
>Rui> grmic, etc?
>
>I think I wrote that code, but I don't remember the reason for this.
Is it because grmic/grmiregistry is not working well on windows yet?
I have used Thisiscool gcc 4.0.2 to test a sun's RMI example
> "Rui" == Rui Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Tom> I think I wrote that code, but I don't remember the reason for this.
Rui> Is it because grmic/grmiregistry is not working well on windows yet?
No, it is more like some weird configure/build thing having to do
with cross-builds.
Rui> I ha
On Tue, 2005-11-08 at 21:10 -0500, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:
> > I've put a possible patch in the metabug (24639). As I mention in
> > the comments, I'm not comfortable self-approving it given my lack of
> > knowledge about the option processing code and the debate over what
> > we want the defaul
Gaby,
Are you referring to issues with operator new visibility, and RTTI/exception
handling? I'm not throwing objects across DSO boundaries, so this should be
less of an issue.
Gary
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 06 November 2005 12:25
To: Gar
"Gary M Mann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Gaby,
|
| Are you referring to issues with operator new visibility, and RTTI/exception
| handling?
type infos and associates, yes.
-- Gaby
Why does treelang defines signedness of char with flag_signed_char?
IMHO it would be better if it had a fixed definition of it. I have
tried to use
build_common_tree_nodes (true, false);
It bootstraped and tested (make check-treelang).
Thanks,
Rafael
2005-10-25 Rafael Ávila de Espíndola <[EMA
Hi,
I have a question concerning the lowering of return statements during
the gimple pass. Shouldnt the TREE_BLOCK () of the representative
return expr (which is moved to the end of the function) be updated to
reflect its new scope ?.
Or on the other hand is TREE_BLOCK () intended to be an accur
I sent this message a few days ago, but I could not find it in the
archives. I think it may have been stripped out, because I sent it as
HTML the first time. I'm trying it now as plain text.
I apologize if this is the second time you see this post.
I am in the process of learning the C Programmin
Redefined Horizons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am in the process of learning the C Programming Language and
> Assembly Language. I am looking for the opportunity to contribute to
> an open source project while gaining some experience with assembly
> language programming. Is there any projects
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> 2) when we see :0 align to the next unit, which seems to be the
>behavior of GCC pre-3.4.
If by "unit" you mean "size of type for the :0 field" for
targets with PCC_BITFIELD_TYPE_MATTERS==1, and "byte" for
non-PCC_BITFIELD_TYPE_MATTERS targets, fin
23 matches
Mail list logo
