> > My suggestions:
> >
> > * When it is appropriate to use a child class with virtual
> functions,
> >the virtual functions should all be declared as protected in the
> >parent class.
> >
> > At first reading, I thought you meant "all virtual functions should
> be
> > protected", but I th
A suggestion about:
"Method bodies may only appear in the class definition if they are very short,
no more than five lines. Otherwise the method body should be defined outside of
the class definition."
To avoid dependency explosions that increase compile times and allow for
link-time substitut
> >> I'm not sure i agree with this, because I don't see anything wrong
> >> with multi-line C++-style comments.
> >
> > I'm with Ian on this one. Is there a reason for this, other than
> one's
> > personal tool preference for editing code may make C-style multi-line
> > comments easier to add/remo
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 6:09 AM, Richard Guenther
> wrote:
>
> > Indeed ;) I'd like us to switch to the C / C++ common soon (thus,
> > use C for stage1 and C++ for stage2 and stage3). That will help
> > us sort out problems on the various host/target combinations that
> > will surely exist.
>
> > In Tom's interesting idea, we would write the mark function by hand
> for
> > each C++ type that we use GTY with.
> >
> > One way to make this approach work for plugins would be to write
> >
> > template
> > void
> > mark(T& t)
> > {
> > t->mark();
> > }
> >
> > Then every plugin which invent
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 01:43:10PM +0100, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> It was a nice optimization - on paper at least. In practice it results in
> branches that may exceed the maximum legal range for a branch. We can
> fight that problem with -ffunction-sections but -ffunction-sections again
> is incomp
, and figured
you all might know best.
The other option, would be to implement such concepts in a research language,
which can still be interesting, but I'm not sure how practical.
-Matt
I just wanted to say thanks for implementing this.
Being able to forward declare enums will make dependency breaking in legacy
code much easier in many real-world cases.
Thanks again!
-Original Message-
From: gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Rodrigo
Ri
On 09/21/2010 07:05 PM, Rodrigo Rivas wrote:
>>> I had to initialize the variable nested_being_defined to get it to compile
>>> (possible uninitialized warning). I initialized it to false.
>>>
>> Ok, actually it is never used uninitialized, but let's get rid of the
>> warning.
>>
> I sa
On Oct 6, 2010, at 6:52 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Joakim Tjernlund writes:
>
>> I really wish mrelocatable is added to all archs. The normal ELF relocs
>> are too big to fit well in u-boot.
>
> Every architecture is different and requires a thoughtful approach to
> determine the best way t
On Oct 6, 2010, at 3:02 PM, Robert Dewar wrote:
> On 10/6/2010 5:43 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 11:34 PM, Phung Nguyen wrote:
>>> How can I turn this optimization off?
>>
>> Use -fno-builtin-printf.
>
> I'm curious, it's obviously a correct optimization, so why
> woul
> The impact is that I may think that after I build my project at
> -O0 or -O1, with various warnings enabled, that there are
> potential surprises that await, when I perform a production build
> at -O2 and higher.
-Warray-bounds warnings can also be triggered only when using the aggressive
inlin
ialize another
global variable, regardless of whether or not it's constant? Is there
some way to convince gcc to accept this syntax? I tried various
values for --std and couldn't seem to find any that worked.
Thanks,
Matt
entire object file each time a small change is made.
Thoughts? Is this even feasible?
-Matt
> I'm planning to add a set of new performance diagnostics to the
> libstdc++ profile mode
> (http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/profile_mode.html) and
> am trying to come up with a list of what diagnostics are most
> meaningful and most wanted.
>
> At this (brainstorming) point I'm lo
> Your first example points to a weakness in the compiler optimization.
> If base_string constructor is inlined, the compiler should be able to
> figure out both 'name' and the heap memory it points to can not be
> modified by the call to notify, and therefore hoist access name.c_str
> () and name.
ster parameter, a
PSYM and RSYM.
Please could you tell me if this assumption is correct and if so, any ideas why
gcc would not be putting this information in the elf file? Is there any
architectural dependant code that needs to be implemented that might be missing
from the port to add this debugging information?
Thanks very much,
Matt
ource, but gcc 4.0.2 20051125 (Red Hat 4.0.2-8)
includes them even when -g is off. Is there a good reason for this?
--
Matt McCutchen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hashproduct.metaesthetics.net/
e GCC with the current available command
line options. While I think that is a great project, I would like to
develop, or tweak, some type of internal aspect of GCC.
Thanks!
-Matt
indexed addressing on stores, while allowing
immediate forms of addressing with loads.
Any help is much appreciated.
thanks,
Matt
I believe your example doesn't take into account that the values can be NaN
which compares false in all situations. If you allow the compiler to
optimize without supporting NaN (-ffast-math), I think it generates the
code you want: https://godbolt.org/z/1ra7zcsnd
--matt
On Sat, Aug 21, 2021
Ok! Thanks; sorry for the misunderstanding on my side.
--matt
On Sat, Aug 21, 2021 at 2:53 PM Stefan Kanthak
wrote:
> Matt Godbolt wrote:
>
> > I believe your example doesn't take into account that the values can be
> NaN
> > which compares false in all situatio
y like.
Earlier versions of the compiler did not issue this warning, and the
C++ front end still doesn't. I'd like to see this warning removed, or
at the very least tamed.
--Matt
On Feb 17, 2005, at 4:18 PM, Joe Buck wrote:
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 03:47:03PM -0800, Matt Austern wrote:
I'm sure there are still lots of horrible bugs, which will only be
found with a more complete test suite. But the core functionality
works, and at this point I think it'll improve
On Feb 17, 2005, at 4:03 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Matt Austern wrote:
OK to commit to mainline?
... before going to sleep, two very simple, slighlty less enthusiastic
comments ;)
1- Please add 2005 to the copyrights.
Fixed.
2- I see that the table of primes assumes that unsigned long is
32-bit
On Feb 17, 2005, at 3:57 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi Matt,
I'm sure there are still lots of horrible bugs, which will only be
found with a more complete test suite. But the core functionality
works, and at this point I think it'll improve faster in the CVS
server than sitting
too large to be useful; the prime
number theorem says that the list would have something like 190 million
entries.
--Matt
sorry for the cross-posting but this proposal will
require some synergy between the three projects
> * Project Title
Frameworks for GNU Toolchain
> * Project Contributors
Matt Rice
> * Dependencies
Framework support in libc/bfd/binutils
> * Delivery Date
gcc portion is done, but bl
I have a GIMPLE_CALL gimple object. I want to get the tree node
representing the callsite for this particular instance of a call, how
can I get this information?
-Matt
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Basile Starynkevitch
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 01:51:04PM +1100, Matt Davis wrote:
>> I have a GIMPLE_CALL gimple object. I want to get the tree node
>> representing the callsite for this particular instance of a call, how
>> can I
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Basile Starynkevitch
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 10:54:39PM +1100, Matt Davis wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Basile Starynkevitch
>> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 01:51:04PM +1100, Matt Davis wrote:
>> >>
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 22:54, Matt Davis wrote:
>> I have a particular instance of a
>> function call within a function that I am analyzing (and
>> transforming). I want the address of that function call, for
e in ${BINUTILS_FILES}
do
if [ ! -e "$file" ]
then
ln -sf "../${BINUTILS_DIR}/${file}"
fi
done
popd
Any pointers welcomed, and I'd be happy to supply even more information.
Much appreciated, Matt
shared and see if that works. What
does this flag do: I couldn't find any reference to it on
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/configure.html or in
./configure --help - I must have picked it up from the seed set of
configure options I cribbed from the Ubuntu-built gcc.
Thanks, Ma
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Matt Godbolt wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the quick reply. I definitely have --enable-shared set in
>> the configuration, and had so with 4.7. However I'm not certain that
>&g
suppress installation of the
archive as well as the headers? If so, is the fact that it doesn't a
GCC bug or a binutils bug (if the assumption in 1. above holds, I'd also
assume that the copy of libiberty in GCC's source tree is taken verbatim
from there, and therefore this is a binu
On Fri, 2013-03-29 at 06:13 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Matt Burgess
> wrote:
> >
> > 1) We currently assume that binutils is 'upstream' for libiberty
> > development, and should therefore 'own' the libiberty.a fi
I'm looking into http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58901
and trying to find where the following rtx is being generated:
(subreg:HI (mem/u/c:SI (plus:SI (mult:SI (reg/v:SI 0 %r0 [orig:77 count ] [77])
(const_int 4 [0x4]))
(symbol_ref:SI ("DECPOWERS") [flags 0x
clones. I know
there must be some update routine, (rebuild_cgraph_edges() did not
help) to glue the callee clones in place so that they do not revert
back to the original callee.
I hope I haven't been too confusing, I do appreciate any help if possible.
-Matt
Hi Martin, thanks very much for the information!
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 9:29 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 02:07:17PM +1100, Matt Davis wrote:
>> Hello,
>> In my transformation of an input program, I need to clone functions
>> and the cal
lag set to 'true' Any help or
suggestions would be much appreciated.
Thanks!
-Matt
So, I guess my question is, how can I force this stmt to hang around? I looked
at eliminate_unnecessary_stmts, and do not see any specific flags I can set to
the stmt to make 'em hang around, and I do not know what to do to make LHS
appear not "dead." Even if I set 'ssa' TREE_USED and 'decl' as DECL_PRESERVE_P.
Thanks for any information!
-Matt
I pass to build_decl(). Is
there an example in the code my grep-foo has failed me for this
specific case?
Thanks much!
-Matt
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Matt Davis wrote:
> Hello,
> I need to create a global string constant node. In the past, I have
> always been able to add global variables, but I have always left them
> uninitialized. I know the trick is to build_decl() of VAR_DECL and, I
> gue
irely sure. I am not even
sure why BB5 is even created as 0 is the Entry and 1 is the exit
block. I am running gcc 4.7.1 and am a bit lost as to what to do.
-Matt
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Matt Davis wrote:
> Hello,
> I am using cgraph_function_versioning() to create a duplicate
> function, e.g. a clone. This usually has worked well for me in the
> past, but I have run into an interesting case where the
> tree_function_versi
Hello all,
I'm testing out feedback optimization on a sample piece of code. I noticed
that the .gcno file that is output lists 10 blocks, yet the .gcda file that is
produced when I execute only contains 7 counts. I thought these were supposed
to correspond, but perhaps not? Can anyone explai
Usually this works, but in one of my cases it
is failing. I have not been able to pinpoint what is unique about the
failing case. I am just looking for any insight.
Thanks!
-Matt
So no one wastes time looking into this
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Matt Davis wrote:
> Hello,
> In my compiler pass, I am inserting a new gimple call statement, and
> then replacing the next call. This usually works fine, and after I do
> this, the gimple dump looks
gsi_one_before_end_p on that call statement is returning 'false'
(which seems correct since it is no longer the last statement in that
block) and the compiler assert is triggered. Any insight would be
appreciated, thanks.
-Matt
:67 (gcc-4.7.1), as the type is
unreachable. The unreachable being the decl, instance of the member.
Should both the member and members array be DECL nodes that have their
DECL_INITIAL field set to the respected results from calling
build_constructor() for the member instance and members array?
-Matt
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:26 AM, Joseph S. Myers
wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2011, Matt Turner wrote:
>
>> I say this mail http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-01/msg00063.html
>> suggesting the addition of a --multilib= configure option. Has such a
>> thing been added? Is there a
Hello,
I have a GIMPLE pass and would like to make use of the data type
information that the Go frontend produces. Is there a way to access
this information from the middle end without having to query the
frontend?
-Matt
Hi Ian,
Thank you for your reply.
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 4:16 AM, Matt Davis wrote:
>>
>> I have a GIMPLE pass and would like to make use of the data type
>> information that the Go frontend produces. Is there a
expression that
represents my variable, is sometimes 2 words off?
Thanks!
-Matt
rtx. Since these variables are local, the RTL
expression reflects an offset from the stack frame pointer. For
instance, the variable 'matt':
(mem/f/c:DI (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 20 frame)
(const_int -8 [0xfff8])) [0 matt+0 S8 A64])
I interpret this as being -8 bytes awa
Thanks Ian,
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Matt Davis wrote:
>> This question is similar to my last; however, I think it provides a
>> bit more clarity as to how I am obtaining offsets from the frame
>> pointer
decl = create_tmp_var(type, "testarray");
DECL_INITIAL(decl) = build_constructor(type, entries);
return decl;
}
Do I have to explicitly create assignment statements for each element,
since my array is local? As I mention above, if I make my array
global, everything is fine.
-Matt
, Feb 1, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Matt Davis wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I have a routine that creates a local array containing pointers to
>> global data. At runtime, when this array is passed to a function, I
>> do not see the poi
I just wanted to post an update, mainly that I have solved my problem
:-) A bit more on this follows below...
On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Matt Davis wrote:
> Thanks Ian, Richard.
> I have some modified code which seems to be along the same lines as
> what you all suggested. Howe
I NEED A DRIVER FOR MY WIFE
return of a
caller to be stored on the stack, in a temporary variable, instead of
lying around in a register, or being passed to other free registers?
-Matt
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Matt Davis wrote:
>> I have a GIMPLE_CALL statement and I want to mark the left-hand-side
>> value as being addressable (mark_addressable()). I am trying to force
>> the result to be sto
ing is that NetBSD port to the vax is very much alive and
maintained. Thus, I expect that those users (eg Matt Thomas) would
like
to see the GCC port retained.
We would. I have gcc working with gcc4.3 but gcc's use mpfr/gmp has
made
native test impossible since neither work on vax/elf. I
Per http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-10/msg00141.html it is possible to
build GMP/MPFR in the local tree with the current Trunk. This build
method may ease issues with building gcc. Would it be possible to
document this for 4.3?
Thanks,
Matt
mended way?
Thanks in advance, and apologies again for the crosspost.
--
Matt G.
In trying to make gcc for VAX pass test suites, one of the problems is
gcc.c-torture/compile/pr34029-2.c in that the function foo is emitted
before .rodata. This mean s & t are undefined and vax--netbsdelf-as
doesn't like that. Moving .rodata before .text solves this but I can't
see how to forc
In handle_aligned_attributes in c-common.c, at line 5146, it does
type = &TREE_TYPE (decl);
Then at 5179 it does
TREE_TYPE (decl) = *type;
In between, type doesn't change so that's really
TREE_TYPE (decl) = * &TREE_TYPE (decl);
or
TREE_TYPE (decl) = TREE_TYPE
sider
using gets_s instead. To disable deprecation, use
_CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS. See online help for details.
- Matt
Hi,
I'll be teaching a class this week on code analysis and I wanted to
demonstrate GCC 4.3's new array bounds analysis capabilities.
Unfortunately, I can't seem to get the new array bounds warnings to appear in
gcc-4.3-20070720 using the commandline of '-O2 -Warray-bounds' with either of
the f
Diego,
Thanks so much for the quick reponse! Some more questions below :)
On Monday 23 July 07 11:54:58 Diego Novillo wrote:
> On 7/23/07 2:44 PM, Matt Hargett wrote:
> > #include
> >
> > int main(int argc, char **argv)
> > {
> > size_t size = 16;
> &
uce the
optimal schedule?
I appreciate any help as I have run into a similiar scheduling
situation with other architectures in the past (GCC seems to choose
not to pipeline things as much as it can) and this time I would like
to understand it a bit more.
Compile flags used are basically, -O3.
--
thanks,
Matt
forwarding paths within the
pipeline that make integer results available sooner.
thanks,
Matt
On 9/3/07, Ye, Joey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt,
>
> I just started working on pipeline description and I'm confused one thing in
> your description.
>
> For "
On 8/31/07, Adam Nemet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Matt Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I am seeing poor scheduling in Dhrystone where a memcpy call is
> > expanded inline.
> >
> > memcpy (&dst, &src, 16) ==>
> >
> &
instead of new volatiles.
Is this a problem with some poor cost model in my backend? How do I
get more information about why the register allocator didn't pick the
other volatiles?
--
thanks,
Matt
func.lreg
Description: Binary data
On 9/6/07, David Edelsohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>> Matt Lee writes:
>
> Matt> The problem is, that though the loads can be optimized by pipelining
> Matt> them. The register allocator has created a dependency by using only r3
> Matt>
On 9/6/07, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 05 September 2007 23:47, Matt Lee wrote:
>
> > Registers r3 to r12 are volatiles. However, for the C code below,
> >
> > struct foo {
> > int a[4];
> > } ;
> >
> > struct foo p, q;
>
On 9/6/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>> Matt Lee writes:
> Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 15:02:52 -0400
> From: David Edelsohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Matt> There is no point trying to minimize usage of volatile hard registers,
> Mat
On 9/6/07, Segher Boessenkool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > load r3, q + 0
> > load r4, q + 4
> > store r3, p + 0
> > store r4, p + 4
> > load r3, q + 4
> > load r4, q + 8
> > store r3, p + 4
> > store r4, p + 8
>
> These last four lines should be
>
> load r3, q + 8
> load r4, q +
ht to be
a pop-up warning you against doing this (I'm not sure why it didn't show
up).
Please use a specific architecture e.g. `-march=skylake-avx512` -
https://godbolt.org/z/GvTcqasqK
Thanks, Matt :)
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 10:47 AM Qwert Nerdish via Gcc
wrote:
> Correct link i
ate_operand" "=r,d ,q,r")
(match_operand:ALL1 1 "nox_general_operand" "r,n Ynn,r,q"))
(clobber (const_int 0))]
"(register_operand (operands[0], mode)
|| reg_or_0_operand (operands[1], mode))
&& reload_completed"
{
return output_movqi (insn, operands, NULL);
}
[(set_attr "length" "1,1,1,1")
(set_attr "adjust_len" "mov8")])
Regards
Senthil
Happy to see someone working this. Are you starting with one CC mode?
I noticed that the current CC0 implementation seems to effectively use
several modes. For example, one for use of the t flag. I'm sure it
will be easier
to start with one mode.
Matt
Hi,
I Just want to confirm that did you got my last email or not.
If you find this interesting and want to know more about it , share your
details with us our experts will get in touch and share further details
with you.
I look forward to your response.
Regards,
Matt Prater
On Thu, Jul 8
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 5:38 PM Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>
> Hi -
>
> > [...] I suggest that a basic principle for such a system is that it
> > should be *easy* to obtain and maintain a local copy of the history
> > of all pull requests. That includes all versions of a pull request,
> > if it get
On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 3:52 PM Joseph Myers via Gdb
wrote:
>
> 1. Introduction
>
> This message expands on my remarks at the Cauldron (especially the
> patch review and maintenance BoF, and the Sourceware infrastructure
> BoF) regarding desired features for a system providing pull request
> func
101 - 184 of 184 matches
Mail list logo
