Hi,
gcc emits an error, when compiling this code-snippet:
--- snip ---
extern int x;
void
foo (void)
{
x = sizeof ((long));
}
--- snip ---
# gcc -Wall -o tmp.o -c tmp.c
tmp.c: In function ‘foo’:
tmp.c:6:21: error: expected expression before ‘)’ token
# gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.5.1 20100924
On 31 January 2011 08:59, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> Hi,
>
> gcc emits an error, when compiling this code-snippet:
>
> --- snip ---
> extern int x;
>
> void
> foo (void)
> {
> x = sizeof ((long));
> }
> --- snip ---
>
> # gcc -Wall -o tmp.o -c tmp.c
> tmp.c: In function ‘foo’:
> tmp.c:6:21: error: e
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Currently toplev_main calls
> init_options_once
> init_options_struct
> lang_hooks.init_options_struct
> which all make sense. It then calls
> decode_options
> which calls
> default_options_optimization
> which sets various options based on
On 01/31/2011 10:19 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 31 January 2011 08:59, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Hi,
gcc emits an error, when compiling this code-snippet:
--- snip ---
extern int x;
void
foo (void)
{
x = sizeof ((long));
}
--- snip ---
# gcc -Wall -o tmp.o -c tmp.c
tmp.c: In function ‘foo’:
On 31 January 2011 01:20, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2011, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> Some archealogy turned up this as the reason canonicalization was
>> inserted:
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-02/msg01121.html
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-02/msg01697.html
>>
>> Al
Ralf Corsepius writes:
> ATM, I am not sure, if what autoconf does actually is useful, but this
> is a different matter.
autoconf needs to deliberately trigger errors in a lot of its tests in
order to do the right thing.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@redhat.com
GPG Key fingerprint = D4E8
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:19:07 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> The code is wrong. sizeof expects either an expression, or a
> parenthesized type-id. (long) is not a type-id so ((long)) is not a
> parenthesized type-id, therefore it must be interpreted as an
> expression, but it's not a valid
On 01/31/2011 01:02 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Ralf Corsepius writes:
ATM, I am not sure, if what autoconf does actually is useful, but this
is a different matter.
autoconf needs to deliberately trigger errors in a lot of its tests in
order to do the right thing.
I know, but ...
... the auto
On 31 January 2011 12:16, Hagen Paul Pfeifer wrote:
>
> On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:19:07 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>> The code is wrong. sizeof expects either an expression, or a
>> parenthesized type-id. (long) is not a type-id so ((long)) is not a
>> parenthesized type-id, therefore it must be
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 3:43 AM, Dongsheng Song
wrote:
> It's very simple (only for trunk, although it maybe more useful for
> branches):
Or simply put Last-Changed-Date into DATESTAMP, not the
current date.
Richard.
> Index: update_version_svn
>
Ralf Corsepius writes:
> However, the rationale why autoconf is doing so, so far escapes me.
Read the comments.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@redhat.com
GPG Key fingerprint = D4E8 DBE3 3813 BB5D FA84 5EC7 45C6 250E 6F00 984E
"And now for something completely different."
On 01/28/2011 09:45 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Jean-Marc Saffroy writes:
>
>> On 01/28/2011 06:44 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>> Jean-Marc Saffroy writes:
>>>
error: insn does not satisfy its constraints:
(insn 1424 1423 141 (set (reg:DI 2 r2)
(plus:DI (reg:DI 2 r2)
>>
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 3:43 AM, Dongsheng Song
> wrote:
>> It's very simple (only for trunk, although it maybe more useful for
>> branches):
>
> Or simply put Last-Changed-Date into DATESTAMP, not the
> current date.
This has other bene
Jean-Marc Saffroy writes:
> So it seems I will have to have adddi3 be a define_expand that splits
> the increment by N into smaller increments when called with
> (reload_in_progress||reload_completed). Does that sound reasonable?
Yes.
Ian
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I think that the call to lang_hooks.init_option_struct must be moved
> after the call to default_options_optimization, one way or another.
No, that is wrong; by design this structure initialization should happen
before the options from the command l
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, NightStrike wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Richard Guenther
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 3:43 AM, Dongsheng Song
> > wrote:
> >> It's very simple (only for trunk, although it maybe more useful for
> >> branches):
> >
> > Or simply put Last-Changed-Date int
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 9:52 AM, Joseph S. Myers
wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
>> I think that the call to lang_hooks.init_option_struct must be moved
>> after the call to default_options_optimization, one way or another.
>
> No, that is wrong; by design this structure in
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 9:52 AM, Joseph S. Myers
> wrote:
> > On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> >
> >> I think that the call to lang_hooks.init_option_struct must be moved
> >> after the call to default_options_optimization, one way or
Tony Poppleton writes:
> Thanks, however I am still unable to make the changes in bugzilla,
> specifically;
> - modify "known to fail"/"known to work" fields
> - transition a bug status from UNCONFIRMED to NEW
> - change "Target Milestone"
> - potentially change priority/severity
>
> Could s
Hi and thanks to the contributors of g++ (and the whole gcc suite) ...
what a tremendous value!
If I have to pinpoint my question, I would refer to gcc internals
documentation section 11.10.4 "Functions for C++", macro name
DECL_LINKONCE_P which is said to be "Not yet implemented".
Then the
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> My inclination would be to move the
>
> *-*-freebsd[12] | *-*-freebsd[12].* | *-*-freebsd*aout*)
> # This is the place-holder for the generic a.out configuration
> # of FreeBSD. No actual configuration resides here since
> # there was only ever
On Tue, 1 Feb 2011, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > My inclination would be to move the
> >
> > *-*-freebsd[12] | *-*-freebsd[12].* | *-*-freebsd*aout*)
> > # This is the place-holder for the generic a.out configuration
> > # of FreeBSD. No actual conf
Hi,
There are ~100 failures on each *-rtems* target
in the latest test runs when various lto related
flags are on. The symbols in questions are in the
RTEMS libraries which are picked up via the
-B... argument. Other symbols from the same
library are resolved.
Should LTO work with a target not
23 matches
Mail list logo
