On 20 April 2010 03:03, Dave Korn wrote:
> precis. So if there's a discussion to be had here, it's about how GCC should
> be "marketed", and the extent to which a release announcement should be part
> of that effort.
Is there any one against advertising GCC to the fullest extent? The
problem, as
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Laurynas Biveinis
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Now that GCC is in the stage1 and gc-improv branch work is finished as
> I see it, I propose to merge it to mainline.
>
> The goal of the branch is to make the type of GC-allocated objects
> known to GC at allocation time, by chan
2010/4/20 Richard Guenther :
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Laurynas Biveinis
[...]
>> from
>> foo *x = (foo *)ggc_alloc (sizeof (x));
>> to
>> foo *x = ggc_alloc_foo ();
[...]
> Sounds good to me. With a typed interface we should know
> the alignment requirements of allocations and so can pac
Hi Steven,
> There is a transformation implemented in GCC's
> value profiling to put the most-frequently taken case-label of a
> switch-expr at the top of the switch
Could you point me to the bit of code that does this?
I'm exploring the idea of implementing source hints much like
__builtin_expe
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 09:35:44AM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
>The annoucement should probably note that targets which lack
> objdump currently can't build plugins. I've had about as much
> luck getting the patch to fix this...
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-04/msg00610.html
>
> .
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20100420 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20100420/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.4 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On 19/04/2010 14:35, Jack Howarth wrote:
>The annoucement should probably note that targets which lack
> objdump currently can't build plugins.
Hey, and non-ELF targets also probably can't, I think.
In the absence of a sudden miraculous flood of volunteers, however, it's
just going to b
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Dave Korn
wrote:
> On 19/04/2010 14:35, Jack Howarth wrote:
>
>> The annoucement should probably note that targets which lack
>> objdump currently can't build plugins.
>
> Hey, and non-ELF targets also probably can't, I think.
Actually non-elf targets work wit
On 21/04/2010 00:43, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Dave Korn
> wrote:
>> On 19/04/2010 14:35, Jack Howarth wrote:
>>
>>>The annoucement should probably note that targets which lack
>>> objdump currently can't build plugins.
>> Hey, and non-ELF targets also probably c
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> combine requires a data dependency, so for this situation, combine isn't
> going to help. The easy solution is to create a peephole. You can also
> create a machine dependent reorg pass to detect more of these opportunities.
> Jeff
>
Hi
10 matches
Mail list logo
