On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Evgeniya Maenkova
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Evgeniya Maenkova
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:11 PM, Evgeniya Mae
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Evgeniya Maenkova
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:11 PM, Evgeniya Maenkova
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Richard Biener
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Evgeniya Maenkova
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:11 PM, Evgeniya Maenkova
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Evgeniya Maenk
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:11 PM, Evgeniya Maenkova
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Evgeniya Maenkova
>>> wrote:
Hi Richard,
Here is some explanation.
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:11 PM, Evgeniya Maenkova
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Evgeniya Maenkova
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Richard,
>>>
>>> Here is some explanation. I hope you let me know if I need to clarify
>>> something.
>>>
>>
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Evgeniya Maenkova
> wrote:
>> Hi Richard,
>>
>> Here is some explanation. I hope you let me know if I need to clarify
>> something.
>>
>> Also, you asked me about concrete example, to make sure you don’t mis
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Evgeniya Maenkova
wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> Here is some explanation. I hope you let me know if I need to clarify
> something.
>
> Also, you asked me about concrete example, to make sure you don’t miss
> my answer here is the link:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patc
Hi Richard,
Here is some explanation. I hope you let me know if I need to clarify something.
Also, you asked me about concrete example, to make sure you don’t miss
my answer here is the link:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-05/msg02417.html.
Also, I doubt whether it’s convenient for you
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Evgeniya Maenkova
> wrote:
>> Hi, Richard
>>
>> Thanks for review starting.
>>
>> Do you see any major issues with this patch (i.e. algorithms and ideas
>> that should be completely replaced, effectively cau
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Evgeniya Maenkova
wrote:
> Hi, Richard
>
> Thanks for review starting.
>
> Do you see any major issues with this patch (i.e. algorithms and ideas
> that should be completely replaced, effectively causing the re-write
> of most code)?
>
> To decide if there are majo
Hi, Richard
Thanks for review starting.
Do you see any major issues with this patch (i.e. algorithms and ideas
that should be completely replaced, effectively causing the re-write
of most code)?
To decide if there are major issues in the patch, perhaps, you need
additional clarifications from me
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 11:07 PM, Evgeniya Maenkova
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could you please review my patch for predicated lim?
>
> Let me note some details about it:
>
>
>
> 1) Phi statements are still moved only if they have 1 or 2
> arguments. However, phi statements could be move under condition
Evgeniya Maenkova writes:
>
> So, in my opinion it’s ok to generate additional phi node for debug
> case. But I’m not a compiler expert and maybe there is some
> requirement that debug and non-debug versions should differ only by
> debug statements, I don’t know.
gcc has such a requirement.
Othe
13 matches
Mail list logo
