Michael Matz writes:
>> > There were other people pointing out issues with the splay tree (but
>> > all w/o copyright assignment and much larger patches).
>> >
>> > I know I did the last re-write of this piece of code but it's been a
>> > long time ... in any case, previous reports were that th
Hi,
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> FWIW, the reason I asked was because I'm using a splay tree in a patch
> that I hope to send soon. The libiberty structures are a bit heavyweight,
> with the hooks stored alongside the root pointer, and with each node
> being a separate structur
This is the last merge from google/main into google/gcc-4_6 (rev
175816).
After this merge, both google/integration and google/main will
resume tracking trunk. From now on, any changes needed from
trunk or any other google branch, will need to be backported to
google/gcc-4_6.
Merges from gcc-4_6
Michael Matz writes:
> On Tue, 5 Jul 2011, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> FWIW, the reason I asked was because I'm using a splay tree in a patch
>> that I hope to send soon. The libiberty structures are a bit heavyweight,
>> with the hooks stored alongside the root pointer, and with each node
>> bei
FYI. I added some more slides and a group picture to
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GCCGathering2011
Diego.
This merge brings the pph branch up to rev 175832. No new
failures nor merge conflicts this time.
Tested on x86_64.
Diego.
Hi Philip,
thanks for writing your experiences, I found it very useful. I certainly
like the idea of having such a thread every once in a while, just to keep
everyone updated about our projects. I'm also curious to learn about the
experiences of other students that are writing code for GCC for
Jon Grant writes:
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote, On 03/07/11 05:27:
>> Jon Grant writes:
> [.]
>>> Another reply for this old thread. I wondered, if collect2 is
>>> possibly not needed in normal use on GNU/Linux, could GCC be
>>> configured to call ld directly in those cases to save launching
>>> an
This brings google/gcc-4_6 up to rev 175849.
Diego.
Hello Philip + Dimitrios
Thanks for your posts. I am another GSOC student. I am working on the
Fortran front-end of GCC (gfortran). Like most GFortran developers, my
background is more in the natural sciences (astrophysics in my case)
rather than computer science.
My project is to help add c
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20110705 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20110705/
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 Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> The implementation of TARGET_SCHED_PROLOG is incompatible with
> some coming changes to how dwarf2 cfi is to be generated.
>
> Some suggested solutions are:
>
> (1) Remove the option. Is it really that interesting
> beyond -mno-sched
Jason,
We are having several issues re-instantiating symbols and
namespaces from a pph image. We are not handling all the cases
and the contortions we are going through are getting increasingly
bizarre. Perhaps you could give us a few pointers?
When we write the contents of a header file into a
On 07/06/2011 12:34 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Is there a canonical way that we should use to rebuild the
elements from scope_chain->bindings? Could we not simply add
them to the current translation unit's scope_chain->bindings
as-is, instead of doing all these pushdecl calls?
That would probabl
14 matches
Mail list logo
