Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>Since it is possible to use the 0b prefix to specify a binary
>number in GCC/C++, will there be any resistance to add %b format
>specifier to the printf family format strings?
>
> You can do that yourself by using the hook facility for printf, see
> (libc) Custo
ings. That would make compiling GCC on a naked cygwin
installation *much* easier.
Cheers,
Nils Pipenbrinck
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Nils Pipenbrinck
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Not entirely true:
Those of us who use cygwin and want to use the latest GCC have to first
compile a non MPFR GCC (e.g. 4.1.x) before they can compile the latest GPFR
and link GCC
Diego Novillo wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 12:23, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
David Edelsohn wrote:
It currently is broken on many platforms. Why not remove it now? What is
the purpose of keeping a pass that does not work correctly and developers
cannot use?
As
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Unfortunately we need more than that: we need a signed piece of paper
disclaiming copyright.
This is something I stumbled over some month ago when I studied the
submission rules:
I am now a lawyer, but as far as I know in my country (germany) it is
not possible to
Hi folks.
While optimizing some of my code I replaced powf (x, 1.5f) with x *
sqrt(x). Out of couriosity I checked if GCC does this optimization and
found it in the code. It's in expand_builtin_pow in the file builtin.c
(gcc 4.3.1 source).
However, GCC does not apply this optimization for a
Hi there. I'm a long mailing-list lurker, and I use GCC quite a bit for
embedded software development.
Most of the stuff I write is performance critical, and I always find
myself in the same situation: I spend counter less hours to unswitch
loops by hand because the built-in loop unswitcher is
> If you know of a non-GCC compiler that optimizes away
> the test (so that the function always returns 0), please
> post here, and let me know the name, version number,
> command-line options, etc. you used to demonstrate that.
The lovely TI Code Composer Studio compiler does the same optimiza
be the best place
in gcc to add an automatic byteswap detection?
I don't know if I'll ever finish the experiment and submit a patch. The
code-base *huge* and scary, but I'd at least like to give it a try.
Nils Pipenbrinck
Hi folks.
Maybe the one or another remembers the post I've wrote more than a month
ago. I was (and still am) new to the GCC codebase and had the evil plan
to add an optimization pass to do byte permutations (capturing all
home-brewed bswap things and all the other 23 possible byte-permutations
10 matches
Mail list logo
