On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 00:30 -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Andrew,
> I think I have this puzzled out now. The correct patch is...
Most of the testcases that are failing (except for the
objc.dg-struct-layout-encoding-1/* ones) are failing because they depend
on the fact the default on darwin is -
Hi Joern,
I have decided to accept employment at ARC International, so effective
11th December 2006, I will step down as an active SH maitainer.
Thank you very much for all the hard work you have out in to maintaining
the SH port (not just in binutils, but in gcc as well).
Cheers
Nick
On Saturday 23 September 2006 17:08, Robert Dewar wrote:
> Duncan Sands wrote:
> >> We are working on a project to add fixed-point arithmetic support to GCC.
> >> A GCC project description page is available here
> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FixedPointArithmetic
> >> and we will create a GCC branch
Fu, Chao-Ying wrote:
We are working on a project to add fixed-point arithmetic support to GCC.
A GCC project description page is available here
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FixedPointArithmetic
and we will create a GCC branch in the near future. If you have
any suggestions or comments, please respo
> I think it is the combination of:
> * Combine doesn't pick tuples of three to attempt to combine, so it
> would never
> pick mult, plus, and ashift to try together.
> * Combine doesn't put an instruction back to try and combine again,
> so once I get "mac"
> combine doesn't try again
Andrew,
Okay. I do plan on submitting the patch I came up
with for gcc 4.2. Mike had suggested I see if I
could get objc to test against the gnu-runtime rather
than just not test it at all for -m64 on Darwin8.
The only thing remaining that is broken in the -m64
testsuite on Darwin8 is the java t
BTW thanks to the S/390 GCC team for taking the time to identify, report
and sometimes fix Ada-language related bugs on their platform.
Laurent
On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 18:53 +0200, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
> Hello Mark,
>
> sorry for tuning in so late to the GCC 4.3 primary/secondary
> plattform di
Dear GCC Project
Hi, I'm writing from Linux Format magazine (www.linuxformat.co.uk).
GCC recently won the Best Development Tool award in the magazine's
Reader Awards 2006, and we would like to send the project a
certificate. Is there a postal address that I can send it to?
Look forward to
> Most of the testcases that are failing (except for the
> objc.dg-struct-layout-encoding-1/* ones) are failing because they depend
> on the fact the default on darwin is -fnext-runtime. Which means you
> have to modify most of those to include "-fnext-runtime" in the compiler
> flags (via dg-optio
Matteo Fioroni wrote:
Hi,
I need to write a program that can interface itself
with the C preprocessor.
On the Internet I've found a lot of documentation, but
all on the C compiler and other layer of Gcc (SAT
ecc.).
I have to use the preprocessor to retrieve the
inforfations about "#pragmas" in
Rebecca Smalley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi, I'm writing from Linux Format magazine (www.linuxformat.co.uk).
> GCC recently won the Best Development Tool award in the magazine's
> Reader Awards 2006, and we would like to send the project a
> certificate. Is there a postal address that I can s
Ian Lance Taylor wrote on 10/04/06 12:21:
> I propose that you scan in the certificate and send that to this
> e-mail list. The physical certificate you can send to the Free
> Software Foundation.
>
> Free Software Foundation
> 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor
> Boston, MA 02110-1301
> USA
>
> A
Mike Stump wrote:
Wrong list, you should use gcc-help for help.
On Sep 27, 2006, at 6:03 AM, Jeff Blaine wrote:
I'm trying to get around the "Some people have crappy NFS
architectures so we're going to make GCC so braindead it
can't even find its own libraries" problem.
Can anyone tell me wher
On 04 October 2006 17:43, Jeff Blaine wrote:
> "This file can be found in the same directory that
> contains cc1 (run gcc -print-prog-name=cc1 to find it)."
>
> Finding the location of cc1 indicates libexec/blah/blah.
> Putting the specs file there does nothing.
>
> Tracing GCC, I fo
Dave Korn wrote:
On 04 October 2006 17:43, Jeff Blaine wrote:
"This file can be found in the same directory that
contains cc1 (run gcc -print-prog-name=cc1 to find it)."
Finding the location of cc1 indicates libexec/blah/blah.
Putting the specs file there does nothing.
Tracing G
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 06:01:19PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 04 October 2006 17:43, Jeff Blaine wrote:
>
>
> > "This file can be found in the same directory that
> > contains cc1 (run gcc -print-prog-name=cc1 to find it)."
> >
> > Finding the location of cc1 indicates libexec/blah/
On 04 October 2006 18:19, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 06:01:19PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>> On 04 October 2006 17:43, Jeff Blaine wrote:
>>
>>
>>> "This file can be found in the same directory that
>>> contains cc1 (run gcc -print-prog-name=cc1 to find it)."
>>>
On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 10:40:47PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
> however this doesn't manage to detect when '-m64'
> is being used in the compile flags. Does anyone have
> any hints on how to change...
>
> +[regexp ".*-m64.*" "$(options)"] } {
>
> to properly catch the instances when -m64
On Sep 22, 2006, at 9:20 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
Bradley Lucier wrote:
Right now, it seems that one may not be able to build a 64-bit
version of the compiler itself
You may or may not have noticed that there are no 64-bit native
targets for darwin.
I just looked at
http://gcc.gnu.o
On Oct 4, 2006, at 10:53 AM, Bradley Lucier wrote:
On Sep 22, 2006, at 9:20 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
Bradley Lucier wrote:
Right now, it seems that one may not be able to build a 64-bit
version of the compiler itself
You may or may not have noticed that there are no 64-bit native
ta
Hello,
The supported fixed data types are "fixed" in the Embedded-C spec.
Depending on targets, the numbers of integer/fractional
data bits cannot be changed after configuration. Also, there are no
decimal fixed-point types.
Ex:
1. HQ is a signed 16-bit fractional data type, and the MIPS
I think FSF already has my copyright assignment. Thanks!
Regards,
Chao-ying
- Original Message -
From: "Bernd Schmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Fu, Chao-Ying" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: ; "Thekkath, Radhika" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Stephens,
Nigel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, Octobe
> FWIW I think a 64-bit native version might be nice as a separate
> target, but I've been told there's no real advantage there either on
> ppc.
For PPC64-Darwin, there might be an advantage having a better ABI passing around
structs but other than that I don't think there is one unless GCC is
On Oct 4, 2006, at 1:57 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
FWIW I think a 64-bit native version might be nice as a separate
target, but I've been told there's no real advantage there either
on ppc.
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your comment, but with a 64-bit gcc you
can compile machine-generate
Bradley Lucier wrote:
On Oct 4, 2006, at 1:57 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
FWIW I think a 64-bit native version might be nice as a separate
target, but I've been told there's no real advantage there either on ppc.
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your comment, but with a 64-bit gcc you can
compi
On 10/4/06, Richard Kenner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What's happening is that the insn that combine makes from those three is
likely algebraically the same as that insn, but looks different. Use a
debugger to find out what it made when it combined the three insn.
This, plus tuning the costs,
Eric,
I had always thought 90% of the advantage of
x86_64 was the extra registers in EMT64. Actually
the only gripe I have with Apple's transient to
Intel is that they didn't junk the i386 model and
only use chips that could do EMT64 so we would always
have those extra registers.
Hello,
I think there is a bug in mips_pass_by_reference when the mips abi
is EABI to pass TImode parameters.
The following code is from the mainline GCC "mips.c".
-
mips_pass_by_reference (CUMULATIVE_ARGS *cum ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
enum machine_mode mode, tree type
Jack Howarth wrote:
Eric,
I had always thought 90% of the advantage of
x86_64 was the extra registers in EMT64. Actually
the only gripe I have with Apple's transient to
Intel is that they didn't junk the i386 model and
only use chips that could do EMT64 so we would always
have those extra re
On Oct 2, 2006, at 6:47 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
However in the first form with {-m32,-m64} only the -m32 tests get
run with -fgnu-runtime and the -m64 tests don't (and thus fail
because they can't link).
Sounds like a bug, please file a report.
I think this is a bug in objc.exp. I think the
On Oct 3, 2006, at 9:30 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
I think I have this puzzled out now. The correct patch is...
Index: lib/obj-c++.exp
===
--- lib/obj-c++.exp (revision 117423)
+++ lib/obj-c++.exp (working copy)
@@ -282,8 +282,
On Oct 3, 2006, at 7:57 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
I'll double check but I don't think the testcases which
use -fnext-runtime were failing when I had these changes
hardwired in for -m64. The reason is that the -fgnu-runtime
appears on the cflags
skip each test when -fgnu-runtime and darwin9.
32 matches
Mail list logo
