Hello!
I compiled gcc on i486-pc-linux-gnu for i386-unknown-linux-uclibc and
with the latter I cross-compiled gcc to be run on the target.
For some reason __USE_POSIX is not defined and bits/posix1_lim.h does not
get included by limits.h, not defining SSIZE_MAX used in host-linux.c.
What is the
On 1/24/07, Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paulo J. Matos wrote on 01/24/07 12:44:
> check what kind of gimple code you get with -fdump-tree-gimple and
> -O0 and -O3 have different results,
>
-fdump-tree-gimple is the first dump *before* any optimizations occur.
To see the effect of al
Paulo J. Matos wrote on 01/26/07 06:52:
Is the output of -fdump-tree-optimized a subset of GIMPLE?
Yes. The output is an incomplete textual representation of the GIMPLE
form of the program.
On 1/26/07, Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paulo J. Matos wrote on 01/26/07 06:52:
> Is the output of -fdump-tree-optimized a subset of GIMPLE?
>
Yes. The output is an incomplete textual representation of the GIMPLE
form of the program.
It's after doing TER, so the statements are no
Richard Guenther wrote on 01/26/07 07:28:
It's after doing TER, so the statements are no longer valid GIMPLE statements.
Silly me. Richard's right. You want the output of -fdump-tree-uncprop.
That's the last GIMPLE dump (if my memory doesn't fail me again).
"Manuel López-Ibáñez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 23/01/07, Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 07:52:30PM +, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
| > > * A base class is not initialized in a derived class' copy constructor.
| > >
| > > Proposed: move this warning to -Wu
This really looks like a java problem, CCing java@
It looks like you are missing jack/jack.h
On my FC6/x86_64 system these files are not even built, so I don't get
the missing jack/jack.h error. Instead it builds the midi-alsa files.
That is the only insight I can provide.
David Daney
Geor
On 26 Jan 2007 10:25:30 -0600, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Manuel López-Ibáñez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 23/01/07, Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 07:52:30PM +, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
| > > * A base class is not initialized in a de
George R Goffe writes:
>
> --- David Daney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > This really looks like a java problem, CCing java@
>
> I agree with this assessment. I'd like to get the person responsible for
> this code
> to take a look at my build logs. This is a FC6 x86_64 system by the w
Ok, well that didnt work. First off our game has too many safety
protocols that prevent me from creating a stub and not clearing the
memory, so that goes out the window. I actually found the structure I
needed (luckly) by looking at the map file, howevernow I'm stuck
going through the memory
Mark Mitchell wrote:
> In this specific case, we know there is a significant performance
> impact, and we know that performance is very important to both the
> existing and potential GCC user base, so I think that making the
> compiler more aggressive at -O2 is sensible.
Whether or not that is sen
Andreas Bogk wrote:
Making a call here before knowing this is not sensible. In fact, I'm
tempted to argue that it is generally a bad idea to do optimizations
that lead to the same expression being evaluated to different results
without making the user explicitly request them.
Anything other th
On Jan 26, 2007, at 1:34 PM, Andreas Bogk wrote:
they might get what they deserve. Microsoft has suffered from
security problems for so long that they have put an immense effort
into Vista to fix it. I'm not saying it will be bug-free, but it
will be significantly harder to actually find a
Andrew,
--- Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> George R Goffe writes:
> >
> > --- David Daney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > This really looks like a java problem, CCing java@
> >
> > I agree with this assessment. I'd like to get the person responsible for
> this
> code
>
On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 10:34:06PM +0100, Andreas Bogk wrote:
> But if the gcc user base prefers performance over security, and you are
> willing to go with them, they might get what they deserve.
You continue to confidently assert, without any backup, that loop
unrolling that assumes overflow doe
Snapshot gcc-4.3-20070126 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.3-20070126/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.3 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
Andreas Bogk wrote:
Making a call here before knowing this is not sensible. In fact, I'm
tempted to argue that it is generally a bad idea to do optimizations
that lead to the same expression being evaluated to different results
without making the user explicitly request them.
People always sa
Joe Buck wrote:
>> But if the gcc user base prefers performance over security, and you are
>> willing to go with them, they might get what they deserve.
> You continue to confidently assert, without any backup, that loop
> unrolling that assumes overflow does not occur has a negative security
> imp
> Every leading C compiler has for years done things like this to boost
> performance on scientific codes.
The Sun cc is a counter-example. And even then, authors of scientific
code usually do read the compiler manual, and will discover any
additional optimizer flags.
Errr, actually, Seongbae
> Robert Dewar wrote:
>
> People always say this, but they don't really realize what they are
> saying. This would mean you could not put variables in registers, and
> would essentially totally disable optimization.
- can you provide an example of a single threaded program where the
assignment of
Hi,
I have a code that is compiled in C and I need to link in C++ object
files. I need to know if C++ object files created with a C++ compiler
can be linked with C object files created with the C compiler.
I have never attempted this. I have either written the entire project in
C or C++. I ha
On Jan 26, 2007, at 3:54 PM, Ray Hurst wrote:
I have a code that is compiled in C and I need to link in C++
object files. I need to know if C++ object files created with a C++
compiler can be linked with C object files created with the C
compiler.
Wrong list, you want help gcc-help is clos
Paul Schlie wrote:
Robert Dewar wrote:
People always say this, but they don't really realize what they are
saying. This would mean you could not put variables in registers, and
would essentially totally disable optimization.
- can you provide an example of a single threaded program where the
a
On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 06:57:43PM -0500, Paul Schlie wrote:
> > Robert Dewar wrote:
> >
> > People always say this, but they don't really realize what they are
> > saying. This would mean you could not put variables in registers, and
> > would essentially totally disable optimization.
>
> - can y
Robert Dewar wrote:
>> Making a call here before knowing this is not sensible. In fact,
>> I'm tempted to argue that it is generally a bad idea to do
>> optimizations that lead to the same expression being evaluated to
>> different results without making the user explicitly request them.
> People
Andreas Bogk wrote:
Robert Dewar wrote:
Making a call here before knowing this is not sensible. In fact,
I'm tempted to argue that it is generally a bad idea to do
optimizations that lead to the same expression being evaluated to
different results without making the user explicitly request them
Jason,
I'm not sure what you are asking here.
It appears that you can do system dump of the internal state of the
game. In which case the answer is yes.
A programmer plans his memory space when a program is written. Every
address in RAM space has a specific variable. The heap (stack) is
loca
They told me to go to the compiler writer newsgroup.
This isn't it?
Ray
Mike Stump wrote:
On Jan 26, 2007, at 3:54 PM, Ray Hurst wrote:
I have a code that is compiled in C and I need to link in C++ object
files. I need to know if C++ object files created with a C++ compiler
can be linked with
On 1/26/07, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Every leading C compiler has for years done things like this to boost
> > performance on scientific codes.
>
> The Sun cc is a counter-example. And even then, authors of scientific
> code usually do read the compiler manual, and will dis
On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 04:25:54PM -0800, Ray Hurst wrote:
> They told me to go to the compiler writer newsgroup.
"They" told you wrong. You don't need a compiler writer to answer
basic C++ programming questions.
> "Robert" == Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Robert> Note by the way that formally safety-critical or security-critical
Robert> software is very unlikely to be compiled at -O2 anyway.
I think it is more likely, on Linux at least, that software will be
compiled with whatever autoconf
Seongbae Park wrote:
>> Seongbae, didn't you say that Sun's compiler uses the fact that signed
>> overflow is undefined when performing optimizations?
> Correct.
I stand corrected. I didn't read the fine print in
http://docs.sun.com/source/806-3568/ncg_compliance.html
that said "unless you us
>> On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 06:57:43PM -0500, Paul Schlie wrote:
>> > Robert Dewar wrote:
>> >
>> > People always say this, but they don't really realize what they are
>> > saying. This would mean you could not put variables in registers, and
>> > would essentially totally disable optimization.
>>
Paul Schlie wrote:
On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 06:57:43PM -0500, Paul Schlie wrote:
Robert Dewar wrote:
People always say this, but they don't really realize what they are
saying. This would mean you could not put variables in registers, and
would essentially totally disable optimization.
- can yo
Robert Dewar wrote:
>> I don't see why that demand would prevent register allocation. Maybe
>> you can explain that to me.
> Probably the best thing is to refer you to a good compiler book, such
> as the dragon book. It really is necessary to understand compiler
> technology to understand this kin
On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 02:47:44AM +0100, Andreas Bogk wrote:
> I'm exactly talking about the semantics of "undefined" here. It would
> be immensely reassuring if a compiler would at least interpret this as
> "unspecified, but consistent". Even better would be a defined and
> documented semantics
With hind sight, it would appear that as many of these difficulties
seem rooted in the historical implicit declaration/conversions of
variables/parameters to signed int which has correspondingly tended
to be implemented as having wrapping semantics regardless of overflow
being undefined; and as typ
> David Daney wrote:
>> Paul Schlie wrote:
>> (however as you appear to be describing an algorithm attempting to rely on
>> the implicit addresses of object storage locations resulting from an assumed
>> calling or allocation convention; and as such assumptions are well beyond
>> the scope of most
Several people have asked for an update on the status of the LTO
project, so Kenny and I have put together a summary of what we believe
the status and remaining issues to be.
The short story is that, unfortunately, we have not had as much time as
we would have liked to make progress on LTO. Kenny
Andreas Bogk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Then maybe it shouldn't be the default in autoconf. But wasn't -O3 the
> set of optimizations considered potentially unsafe?
No. -O3 is a set of optimizations which are useful for many program
but which will cause a substantial number of programs to ru
Joe Buck wrote:
Those who are eager to have everything defined and repeatable should
choose a different programming language, say, Java. C and C++ don't
do what you want, and you're not going to convince the developers to
cripple the compiler the way you want no matter how much you post.
Good
41 matches
Mail list logo
