Re: gcc-4.1-20080303 is now available

From: "Mark Mitchell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote: My understanding is that *users* of GCC are not impacted by the license change. Some users certainly are impacted by the license change -- there are in fact quite a few companies that disallow their users using any GPLv3 softw

C++0x rvalue references get clobbered somehow

Hello! (I sent a copy of this mail to gcc-help a few days ago but didn't get a response.) I'm having problems with g++-4.3.0 and C++0x. Disclaimer: I don't understand rvalue references, but since I need (indirect) argument forwarding, I copied and modified an example from the web. (I believe deta

Re: Regression with ltrans-7.f90

Hi Steve, I don't think you should send mail directly to gcc-bugs ("gcc-bugs is a relatively high volume list with mails from our Bugzilla bug- tracking system"). I think, apart from Andrew, noone's subscribed to it :) FAIL: gfortran.dg/ltrans-7.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times ltrans "tran

Re: va_list bug?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 19.03.2008 01:59:04: > hello, > > please try the little program at the end. my naive assumption was that > it will print "hello world" two times. > > if compiled with gcc 3.4, 4.1, 4.2 or 4.3 for i386, it will print "hello > world" two times all right. > > however, if

Re: [trunk] Addition to subreg section of rtl.text.

Richard Sandiford wrote: Hi Joern, Thanks for the answer, Joern Rennecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Thanks very much for replying to this. We were starting to get worried that no one was going to reply and we would be left out in the cold. kenny 1) Is it possible to have a MODE_PARTI

Re: gcj broken on darwin

Jack Howarth wrote: >It appears that gcj in gcc 4.3.0 is broken on Darwin. If > one builds gcc 4.3.0 executing... > > contrib/download_ecj > > before running configure, the build succeeds in creating an > ecj1 but when gcj is used to compile an example like testme.java... > > public class te

Re: C++0x rvalue references get clobbered somehow

Hello, On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 4:23 AM, Lukas Mai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm having problems with g++-4.3.0 and C++0x. Disclaimer: I don't > understand rvalue references, but since I need (indirect) argument > forwarding, I copied and modified an example from the web. > (I believe detail

Re: gcc-4.1-20080303 is now available

On 3/19/08, Kaveh R. Ghazi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I haven't heard anything that changes my opinion, I still think we should > relicense the 4.1 branch and do one last release before closing it. > > Am I alone here, or does anyone else agree with me? :-/ FWIW, I vote on releasing another vers

Re: gcj broken on darwin

Andrew Haley schrieb: > Jack Howarth wrote: >>It appears that gcj in gcc 4.3.0 is broken on Darwin. If >> one builds gcc 4.3.0 executing... >> >> contrib/download_ecj >> >> before running configure, the build succeeds in creating an >> ecj1 but when gcj is used to compile an example like testme

Re: Basic block infrastructure after dbr pass

Am 18.03.2008 um 18:47 schrieb Richard Guenther: On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 6:40 PM, Boris Boesler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Am 18.03.2008 um 16:21 schrieb Jim Wilson: Boris Boesler wrote: The following code generators use FOR_EACH_BB[_REVERSE] in the target machine dependent reorg pass:

Re: gcj broken on darwin

Matthias, My mistake. I see the same issue with gcc-4.2.2 on darwin which is indeed resolved with --main=testme. I am puzzled why this isn't automatically handled (as it seems to be with javac)? Jack On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 02:56:40PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > Andrew Haley sc

GNU linker ld

Hi I am in the process of verifying that the GNU linker (gcc 3.3.2 VxWorks AE653) does not introduce untraceable object code when creating an executable image. This involves verifying the affects of code relocation, copying of code from ROM to RAM etc. the documentation for which I can locate.

Re: gcj broken on darwin

Jack Howarth wrote: Matthias, My mistake. I see the same issue with gcc-4.2.2 on darwin which is indeed resolved with --main=testme. I am puzzled why this isn't automatically handled (as it seems to be with javac)? We give you the flexibility to write your own main. As a side benefit, you

Re: gcj broken on darwin

Jack Howarth wrote: > Matthias, >My mistake. I see the same issue with gcc-4.2.2 on darwin > which is indeed resolved with --main=testme. I am puzzled why > this isn't automatically handled (as it seems to be with > javac)? It's isn't automatically handled, you have to provide it at runtime:

Re: GNU linker ld

Hi Duncan, I am in the process of verifying that the GNU linker (gcc 3.3.2 VxWorks AE653) The GNU linker is not part of the GCC project. It is part of the Binutils project, so this question really should be asked on the binutils mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] However, does ld include a

GCC 4.3 license in manual still under GPLv2

Hi, I have the impression that GCC 4.3.0 has updated to GPLv3. But http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/Copying.html still using GPLv2. Does it need to be updated?

push_secondary_reload: give me a break...

Bellow the comment "\ /* See if we can reuse an existing secondary reload. */", there is a loop with an if inside - the idea is that when the if triggers, we have found a secondary reload to reuse. However, it won't stop then. It will just continue to loop, so it might reuse multiple previous

Re: Different *CFLAGS in gcc/Makefile.in

* Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote on Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 09:06:33PM CET: > in gcc/Makefile.in there are many different *CFLAGS, notablye > > ALL_CFLAGS = $(X_CFLAGS) $(T_CFLAGS) \ > $(CFLAGS) $(INTERNAL_CFLAGS) $(COVERAGE_FLAGS) $(WARN_CFLAGS) > $(XCFLAGS) @DEFS@ > > Do anyone have a precise idea o

Re: Different *CFLAGS in gcc/Makefile.in

Ralf Wildenhues wrote: * Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote on Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 09:06:33PM CET: in gcc/Makefile.in there are many different *CFLAGS, notablye ALL_CFLAGS = $(X_CFLAGS) $(T_CFLAGS) \ $(CFLAGS) $(INTERNAL_CFLAGS) $(COVERAGE_FLAGS) $(WARN_CFLAGS) $(XCFLAGS) @DEFS@ Do anyone have a

Re: GCC 4.3 license in manual still under GPLv2

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008, qunying wrote: > Hi, > > I have the impression that GCC 4.3.0 has updated to GPLv3. But > http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/Copying.html still using GPLv2. > Does it need to be updated? I pointed out that t

Re: [trunk] Addition to subreg section of rtl.text.

On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 09:40:49PM +, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > The most natural layout would be 0x45??0123 . > > But you could also have 0x345?012? , or even more exotic mappings. > > Do we actually support the second mapping though? Surely the > target-independent code needs to know how

gcc-4.2-20080319 is now available

Snapshot gcc-4.2-20080319 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.2-20080319/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.2 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches

Re: [trunk] Addition to subreg section of rtl.text.

Joern Rennecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 09:40:49PM +, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> > The most natural layout would be 0x45??0123 . >> > But you could also have 0x345?012? , or even more exotic mappings. >> >> Do we actually support the second mapping though? Surely

Re: [trunk] Addition to subreg section of rtl.text.

Richard Sandiford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think one reason is that allowing zero_extracts of multi-word modes is > (like this subreg thing) a little hard to pin down. What happens when > WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN && !BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN on a 32-bit target, and you have: > > (zero_extract (reg:DI .

Come join me on ssbbw4u...

Come join me on ssbbw4u. Click here to join: http://ssbbw4u.ning.com/?xgi=g2fNo2Y Thanks, P Alb

Re: [trunk] Addition to subreg section of rtl.text.

On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 10:56:29PM +, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > I don't see why the target-independent code would need to know what the bits > > inside a partial integer mode mean. > > Consider: > >(set (subreg:HI (reg:PDI ...) ...) ...) >(set (zero_extract (subreg:SI (reg:PDI ...)

Re: C++ FE question: When is CLASSTYPE_VBASECLASSES valid?

Doug Kwan (關振德) wrote: I have a question about the validity of CLASSTYPE_VBASECLASSES. Due to templates, it is not possible to know if a class has virtual bases or not until the class is fully instantiated. Is checking processing_template_decl sufficient to guarantee that CLASSTYPE_VBASECLA

Re: Different *CFLAGS in gcc/Makefile.in

Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: It is indeed the easiest. But for X_CFLAGS & T_CFLAGS I only found the comment # These exists to be overridden by the x-* and t-* files, respectively. t-* files are target makefile fragments. x-* files are (cross)-host makefile fragments. See config.gcc and confi

Re: Basic block infrastructure after dbr pass

Boris Boesler wrote: I haven't specified my problem properly? If I traverse basic blocks via FOR_EACH_BB (used in compute_bb_for_insn, too) I get insns which are not in the insn-stream for(insn = get_insns(), insn; insn = NEXT_INSN(insn)) .. As Ian mentioned, the delay-slot filling pass does