Hi Nicolas,
Nicolas Alt wrote on 30.07.2007 23:29:32:
> so, could you resolve the remaining issues? Or have you kind of
> paused the project?
I prepared allready a first patch and sent it to Jan. The major problem is
the strong wired target specific definitons for the SSE_REG_MAX, ect. used
i
We are pleased to announce the release of AspeCt-oriented C (ACC) V 0.7.
The ACC 0.7 release includes two main experimental features: The variable
set() and get() pointcut.
For more details and to download, please visit http://www.aspectc.net.
Highlights of ACC V 0.7 include:
1. set() an
Hello,
Kérlek támogass egy rászoruló kislányt. Minden nap ha rákattintasz erre a
linkre 100ft-ott adnak a kislánynak és így megmenthetjük az
életveszélytől.link: http://belepes.puresms.hu
Kérlek kattints teis rá legalább egyszer és lépj be az oldalon. Erre azért van
szükség .h a rensdszer t
Hi,
I'd like to bring up on the list a discussion that a bunch of people (most
of those CC-ed above) started at the GCC Summit:
Lately, there were few efforts, that are not necessarily related to each
other, but are all relevant to if-conversion.
Each of them has its own restriction, like a spec
On 7/31/07, Tehila Meyzels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to bring up on the list a discussion that a bunch of people (most
> of those CC-ed above) started at the GCC Summit:
>
> Lately, there were few efforts, that are not necessarily related to each
> other, but are all relevant
Hi,
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > 2. Store-sinking/load hoisting may have an overhead and may degrade
> > performance unless the relevant conditional branch gets if-converted.
>
> I agree with you for conditional stores/loads.
>
> The unconditional store/load stuff, however, is
On 7/30/07 7:57 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Since I have not heard any strong opposition to changing the category
> name to 'Reviewers', I will go ahead with this patch later this week.
Committed.
2007-07-31 Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* MAINTAINERS (Reviewers): Rename from Non-Autopoies
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
ht
Given the age of paranoia (the version included
with RTEMS is from Cygnus circa 1993), does this
sound familiar or is this a new issue?
What happens if you use -mno-fused-madd option?
Same result for me using RTEMS on psim. Eric N. will
have to give a Mac report.
I tested it (the source fro
Merged with @127100. With this merge we'll start tracking the merge
point in the --version output.
> 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. Th
> > The test there is sort of hack, I would just remove it at this stage and
> > we can work out better fix for that testcase later. I hope that with my
> > plans for declaration merging pass we can get round such weird side
> > effects of in place declaration replacement.
>
> Will do.
>
> How a
On 7/31/07 6:10 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> There are also few other occurences in cgraph.c and ipa-inline. Those
> are used to test whether function body is present. When you have body
> elsewhere now, you can check something else (such as
> DECL_STRUCT_FUNCTION(cfun)->cfg)
Currently, in tuples,
13 matches
Mail list logo
