Re: Successful build of GCC 4.2.0 RC3 on latest Cygwin snapshot 20070427

Aaron Gray wrote: One issue that might affect many some is that COM doesn't work. has a patch that is pending review I guess, but probably won't go into 4.2. Does this effect XPCOM meaning Mozilla and friends will not compile ? It is trig

Re: Mercurial repository set up for GCC that mirrors SVN

Ollie Wild wrote: Just another data point, my git-svn clone of trunk comes in at 414MB, excluding the size of checked out files. I'm assuming the public svn is the complete history. I'm about 35% through the process of cloning the entire gcc repository via git-svnimport, and the .git directory

Re: 2nd quarter of 2007 and no GPL code of Java from Sun.

J.C. Pizarro writes: > there are any news from JavaOne? Yes, there is. You are *way* off-topic. Please desist from spamming this list with questions about non-GNU code. Go to http://openjdk.java.net/ and pester them instead. Andrew.

Re: live insns deleted by delete_trivially_dead_insns()

On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 10:12:21PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > Can you also check -fno-forward-propagate? With plain -O2, insn 61 disappears in the fwprop1 dump. With -O2 -fno-forward-propagate, insn 61 disappears in the gcse1 dump instead. -- Rask Ingemann Lambertsen

Re: Successful build of GCC 4.2.0 RC3 on latest Cygwin snapshot 20070427

Aaron Gray wrote: One issue that might affect many some is that COM doesn't work. has a patch that is pending review I guess, but probably won't go into 4.2. Does this effect XPCOM meaning Mozilla and friends will not compile ? It is trig

Re: live insns deleted by delete_trivially_dead_insns()

On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 07:41:55AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > The issue here is that we have a libcall without the REG_EQUAL note. > That is sensible for a REG_NO_CONFLICT block. Normally gcc will only > build REG_NO_CONFLICT blocks for code which lower-subreg can't pick > apart anyhow. Y

Re: MinGW, GCC Vista,

Mark Mitchell writes: >(Again, I'm not trying to be critical: I like MinGW, and it's not my >place to say what it ought to be. I'm just giving feedback as a user.) Well, it's no more my place to say what it ought to be. I'm basically just describing what MinGW is, a Win32 compiler like Borland C

RE: MinGW, GCC Vista,

> -Original Message- > From: Brian Dessent [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 3:21 PM > To: Mark Mitchell > Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: MinGW, GCC Vista, > > Mark Mitchell wrote: > > > In my opinion, this is a GCC bug: there's no such thi

Clarification request for ipa/cgraph code

In ipa-type-escape.c we have: /* Return either TYPE if this is first time TYPE has been seen an compatible TYPE that has already been processed. */ I'd fix it, if I knew I knew what it meant. either, an and that are the things that are confusing to me.

Re: Clarification request for ipa/cgraph code

On 5/9/07, Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In ipa-type-escape.c we have: /* Return either TYPE if this is first time TYPE has been seen an compatible TYPE that has already been processed. */ I'd fix it, if I knew I knew what it meant. either, an and that are the things that are c

Re: Clarification request for ipa/cgraph code

On May 9, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote: On 5/9/07, Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In ipa-type-escape.c we have: /* Return either TYPE if this is first time TYPE has been seen an compatible TYPE that has already been processed. */ I'd fix it, if I knew I knew what it mea

Re: Successful build of GCC 4.2.0 RC3 on latest Cygwin snapshot 20070427

Aaron Gray wrote: One issue that might affect many some is that COM doesn't work. has a patch that is pending review I guess, but probably won't go into 4.2. Does this effect XPCOM meaning Mozilla and friends will not compile ? It is trig

Re: Clarification request for ipa/cgraph code

Steven Bosscher wrote: On 5/9/07, Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In ipa-type-escape.c we have: /* Return either TYPE if this is first time TYPE has been seen an compatible TYPE that has already been processed. */ I'd fix it, if I knew I knew what it meant. either, an and that a

Re: Clarification request for ipa/cgraph code

Mike Stump wrote: In ipa-type-escape.c we have: /* Return either TYPE if this is first time TYPE has been seen an compatible TYPE that has already been processed. */ I'd fix it, if I knew I knew what it meant. either, an and that are the things that are confusing to me. Return TYPE i