here's an ignorant, naive, and very likely wrong attempt:
what happens if you mask off the high and low bytes of the
larger number, do two 8,8->16 multiplies, left shift the result
of the result of the higher one, and add, as a macro?
#define _mul8x16(c,s) ( \
(long int) ((c) * (unsigned
On 12/20/06, Marcin Dalecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You are apparently using a different definition of an algebra or ring
than the common one.
Fascinating discussion. Pointers to canonical on-line definitions of
the terms "algebra" and "ring" as used in compiler design please?
On 12/20/06, Marcin Dalecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You better don't. Really! Please just realize for example the impact
of the (in)famous 80 bit internal (over)precision of a
very common IEEE 754 implementation...
volatile float b = 1.;
if (1. / 3. == b / 3.) {
printf("HALLO!\n")
} else
On 1/23/07, Paweł Sikora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
typedef enum { X, Y } E;
int f( E e )
{
switch ( e )
{
case X: return -1;
case Y: return +1;
}
+ throw runtime_error("invalid value got shoehorned into E enum")
}
In this examp
I am using
gcc (GCC) 4.0.2 20051125 (Red Hat 4.0.2-8)
under the Inline::C perl module
and having a very weird situation.
I have a multi-line macro that declares several variables and then does some
work with them, for use in several functions that have similar invocations,
interfacing to an exte
Thank you. Nobody is aware of such a problem.
On 6/6/06, Peter Michael Gerdes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ignore that last email. It was sent to the wrong address.
Thesis, antithesis, synthesis.
--
David L Nicol
"fans of liza minelli should always be
disconnected immediately" -- Matthew Henry
On 6/9/06, Sebastian Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Steven Bosscher wrote:
> 2. Probably GIMPLE, but you can't express all of GIMPLE in ANSI C
> (with GCC extensions you can probably express most of it though).
Theoretically you can express all of GIMPLE in ANSI C,
practically it would require s
Not off topic, in response to thread about Goobles, and the contest to collect
Goobles towards the purely symbolic end of becoming GCC Grand Poobah -- does
this person get their own parking space? E-mail for [EMAIL PROTECTED]
forwarded to
them during thge duration of their reign?
i think if dir
On 6/16/06, Dustin Laurence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm pretty sure this is stepping into deep quicksand, but I'll ask
anyway...I'm interested in writing an FE for a language that has
stackable coroutines (Lua-style, where you can yield and resume
arbitrarily far down the call stack). I'm try
On 6/23/06, Laurynas Biveinis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What do you think?
Is it possible to turn garbage collection totally off for a null-case
run-time comparison or would that cause thrashing except for very
small jobs?
--
David L Nicol
"if life were like Opera, this would probably
have po
On 7/24/06, Laurynas Biveinis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[How is it that setting pointers] to NULL can
actually increase peak GC memory usage?
I'll guess that during collection phases, the list of
collectible structures becomes longer.
GCC is just too huge to try and implement reference count
On 8/8/06, Petr Machata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm trying to make the university to GPL the code and documentation, and
give up their copyright, so that it could be used without restriction,
but won't know the outcome until later this year.
I am not a lawyer, but my understanding from rese
I think we should continue to warn. I can see the arguments on both
sides, but I think warning makes sense. The person compiling the
library should use -Wno-deprecated, and accept that they be calling some
other deprecated function they don't intend to call.
how about suppressing nested warnin
14 matches
Mail list logo
