Hi,
> Or perhaps this could be another manifestation of the "cse gets confused by
> reg_equal notes on subparts of dimode pseudos if no movdi pattern is defined
> in the backend" bug[*]? Pranav, is there a movdi pattern in your backend?
> There needs to be one, gcc does get it wrong if you rely
Hello,
bootstrapping with GCC 4.3. from today is not successfull on my computer
i686-pc-linux-gnu.
configure flags:
--enable-languages=ada,c,c++,fortran,java,objc,obj-c++,treelang
--with-mpfr=/usr/local
Here is the error message:
make[5]: Leaving directory
`/data/usr_local/xx/gccobj/i686
On 7/27/07 9:58 AM, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
> Hello,
>
>> I liked the idea of 'Reviewers' more than any of the other options.
>> I would like to go with this patch, unless we find a much better
>> option?
>
> to cancel this category of maintainers completely?
An interesting idea, but let's discuss
I noticed while building test gcc43 fink packaging
that the gcj-4.3.0 subdirectory in the gcc installation
directory has been suddenly changed to gcj-4.3.0-9. Is
this intentional or a typo in one of the patches?
Jack
"Andreas Meier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> bootstrapping with GCC 4.3. from today is not successfull on my computer
> i686-pc-linux-gnu.
Does it help to revert this patch?
2007-07-26 Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* dominance.c (dom_computed, n_bbs_in_dom_tree): Removed.
On 7/28/07 5:38 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> Currently I only see the 2003 and 2004 proceedings at
> ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/summit/
Huh. I didn't know those existed. I've always used the links from the
wiki.
> How about moving everything to one consistent place? Any preferences
> on what
Dave Korn escreveu:
Thanks, and do drop a note back with a summary of what you find out over
there when you're done; if there's definitely a bug in gcc's understanding of
the resolution rules, obviously we'd like to open a PR and get it fixed.
I think we have finally a consensus at
http://gr
Hi,
I'm working on GCC 4.1.1 on spu target and get following problem:
After splitting an insn with a note REG_LIBCALL, the insn is replaced by
some other insns, which don't attach REG_LIBCALL note any more, and the
original one is then deleted. While the insn REG_RETVAL still points to
the LIB
Hi all,
I try to develop a tool that get the final CFG of gcc by passing the
-fdump-tree-final_cleanup-lineno option and parsing the file dumped by gcc.
I noticed that this flag does create an output only if at least the
'-O1' (or more) is in the command line.
I just would like to know if it wou
On 7/30/07 11:15 AM, Emmanuel Fleury wrote:
> I just would like to know if it would be possible to get the
> final_cleanup target even though no optimization flag has been given in
> the command line (for now, I'm just forcing '-O1' to be present if no
> other optimization flag has been detected i
Wow, that was quick. :)
Diego Novillo wrote:
> On 7/30/07 11:15 AM, Emmanuel Fleury wrote:
>
>> I just would like to know if it would be possible to get the
>> final_cleanup target even though no optimization flag has been given in
>> the command line (for now, I'm just forcing '-O1' to be presen
On 7/30/07, Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/27/07 9:58 AM, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> >> I liked the idea of 'Reviewers' more than any of the other options.
> >> I would like to go with this patch, unless we find a much better
> >> option?
> >
> > to cancel this category
On 7/30/07 11:34 AM, Emmanuel Fleury wrote:
> Actually, I know that these dumps are here, as you said, just for
> debugging purpose but why not making them 'permanent' and kind-of
> 'standardized' (I mean, not changing it too frequently), so that code
> analysis tools could plug on GCC ? (I know I
On 7/30/07 12:08 PM, Seongbae Park (¹Ú¼º¹è, ÚÓà÷ÛÆ) wrote:
> While reviewers can approve the changes in the parts of the compiler
> they maintain,
> they still need approval of their own patches from other maintainers
> or reviewers.
Sounds good to me. Thanks.
Sa Liu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm working on GCC 4.1.1 on spu target and get following problem:
>
> After splitting an insn with a note REG_LIBCALL, the insn is replaced by
> some other insns, which don't attach REG_LIBCALL note any more, and the
> original one is then deleted. While the
Hello,
this doesn't help.
Andreas
Andreas Schwab schrieb:
"Andreas Meier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
bootstrapping with GCC 4.3. from today is not successfull on my computer
i686-pc-linux-gnu.
Does it help to revert this patch?
2007-07-26 Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* d
H.J. Lu wrote:
> According to gcc/ChangeLog, gcc 4.2.1 was released on 2007-07-19.
> Shouldn't gcc/DEV-PHASE in gcc 4.2 branch be marked as prerelease?
I've now updated BASE-VER and DEV-PHASE.
Good catch, thanks!
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(650) 331-3385 x713
Hi Kai,
so, could you resolve the remaining issues? Or have you kind of
paused the project?
Cheers,
Nicolas
On Jul 12, 2007, at 2:14 , Kai Tietz wrote:
Hi,
I am nearly through :) The remaining macros left to be ported are
REGPARM_MAX and SSE_REGPARM_MAX. The sysv_abi uses 6 regs and 8 ss
Snapshot gcc-4.1-20070730 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.1-20070730/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.1 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
Hi,
I just stumbled over the patch
2007-03-26 Dirk Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* parser.c (cp_parser_member_declaration): Pedwarn
about stray semicolons after member declarations.
which was approved by Gaby here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg01456.html
and made i
test message. delete before reading.
Ben White
21 matches
Mail list logo
