gcc  

Messages by Thread

• Re: Status of the PPH implementation Diego Novillo
• gcc-4.5-20120524 is now available gccadmin
• error: call of overloaded ‘foo(int)’ is ambiguous (0 vs null ptr) Peter A. Felvegi
  • Re: error: call of overloaded ‘foo(int)’ is ambiguous (0 vs null ptr) Gabriel Dos Reis
  • Re: error: call of overloaded ‘foo(int)’ is ambiguous (0 vs null ptr) Jonathan Wakely
• [gimplefe] Merge from trunk, preparation for gimple testsuite Diego Novillo
• RMS to present at the Cauldron Diego Novillo
• how to disable __thiscall on MinGW-gcc-4.7.x ? niXman
  • Re: how to disable __thiscall on MinGW-gcc-4.7.x ? Kai Tietz
  • Re: how to disable __thiscall on MinGW-gcc-4.7.x ? niXman
  • Re: how to disable __thiscall on MinGW-gcc-4.7.x ? Kai Tietz
  • Re: how to disable __thiscall on MinGW-gcc-4.7.x ? niXman
• MPC/MPFR/GMP Usage Andrew Burks
  • Re: MPC/MPFR/GMP Usage niXman
• Please Update the Installing GCC: Binaries Page Colin Prior
• mkconfig.sh incrementality? Jay K
  • Re: mkconfig.sh incrementality? Ian Lance Taylor
• Effect of 'register' keyword on debug info Rohit Arul Raj
  • Re: Effect of 'register' keyword on debug info Ian Lance Taylor
• C++98/C++11 ABI compatibility for gcc-4.7 Jeffrey Yasskin
  • Re: C++98/C++11 ABI compatibility for gcc-4.7 Jeffrey Yasskin
• Enabling a function based on Language Iyer, Balaji V
  • Re: Enabling a function based on Language Ian Lance Taylor
  • Re: Enabling a function based on Language Tobias Burnus
  • RE: Enabling a function based on Language Iyer, Balaji V
• cine castiga cramer
• Problem of gfortran compilation with -O option PERRONNET Alain
  • Re: Problem of gfortran compilation with -O option Tobias Burnus
• gcc-4.8-20120520 is now available gccadmin
• Failing bootstraps --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto Toon Moene
• gcc-4.7-20120519 is now available gccadmin
• Proposition Li Hao
• Reusing stack space for variables recorded during gimple lowering Andrew Jenner
  • Re: Reusing stack space for variables recorded during gimple lowering Andrew Pinski
• tree-nomudflap.c dependency on gt-tree-mudflap.h not needed Jay K
  • Re: tree-nomudflap.c dependency on gt-tree-mudflap.h not needed Ian Lance Taylor
• -fno-rtti in configure.ac breaks building go? (older g++, -disable-bootstrap) Jay K
  • Re: -fno-rtti in configure.ac breaks building go? (older g++, -disable-bootstrap) Gabriel Dos Reis
  • Re: -fno-rtti in configure.ac breaks building go? (older g++, -disable-bootstrap) Jonathan Wakely
  • Re: -fno-rtti in configure.ac breaks building go? (older g++, -disable-bootstrap) Ian Lance Taylor
  • Re: -fno-rtti in configure.ac breaks building go? (older g++, -disable-bootstrap) Gabriel Dos Reis
  • Re: -fno-rtti in configure.ac breaks building go? (older g++, -disable-bootstrap) Ian Lance Taylor
  • Re: -fno-rtti in configure.ac breaks building go? (older g++, -disable-bootstrap) Gabriel Dos Reis
  • Re: -fno-rtti in configure.ac breaks building go? (older g++, -disable-bootstrap) Ian Lance Taylor
  • RE: -fno-rtti in configure.ac breaks building go? (older g++, -disable-bootstrap) Jay K
  • Re: -fno-rtti in configure.ac breaks building go? (older g++, -disable-bootstrap) Ian Lance Taylor
  • RE: -fno-rtti in configure.ac breaks building go? (older g++, -disable-bootstrap) Jay K
  • Re: -fno-rtti in configure.ac breaks building go? (older g++, -disable-bootstrap) Ian Lance Taylor
  • Re: -fno-rtti in configure.ac breaks building go? (older g++, -disable-bootstrap) Ian Lance Taylor
• gcc-4.6-20120518 is now available gccadmin
• Re: [RFD+PATCH] ISA bit treatment on the MIPS platform Maciej W. Rozycki
• Use of stack VECs in df-scan.c:df_bb_verify Diego Novillo
  • Re: Use of stack VECs in df-scan.c:df_bb_verify Ian Lance Taylor
  • Re: Use of stack VECs in df-scan.c:df_bb_verify Diego Novillo
• Insufficient access check for private static member in base class Peter A. Felvegi
  • Re: Insufficient access check for private static member in base class Ian Lance Taylor
• Option -pthread in test suite with cross compilers Sebastian Huber
  • Re: Option -pthread in test suite with cross compilers Ralf Corsepius
  • Re: Option -pthread in test suite with cross compilers Ian Lance Taylor
  • Re: Option -pthread in test suite with cross compilers Joel Sherrill
  • Re: Option -pthread in test suite with cross compilers Ian Lance Taylor
  • Re: Option -pthread in test suite with cross compilers Joel Sherrill
  • Re: Option -pthread in test suite with cross compilers Ian Lance Taylor
  • Re: Option -pthread in test suite with cross compilers Joel Sherrill
  • Re: Option -pthread in test suite with cross compilers Ian Lance Taylor
  • Re: Option -pthread in test suite with cross compilers Jonathan Wakely
• gcc-4.5-20120517 is now available gccadmin
• Question about pointer use-def/def-use information operation and maintainance toddy wang
• Vectorizer question Iyer, Balaji V
  • Re: Vectorizer question Tim Prince
  • RE: Vectorizer question Bingfeng Mei
• announce: The C Conference; San Diego, CA; August 28th Brandon Philips
• Probably inaccuracy in GCC 4.7.0 documentation. Роман Саженков
• How do I set SIG_ATOMIC_TYPE to a variant of a C-type? Hans-Peter Nilsson
  • Re: How do I set SIG_ATOMIC_TYPE to a variant of a C-type? Joseph S. Myers
  • Re: How do I set SIG_ATOMIC_TYPE to a variant of a C-type? Hans-Peter Nilsson
• Extension to compare-elim Paulo J. Matos
  • Re: Extension to compare-elim Richard Henderson
  • Re: Extension to compare-elim Paulo J. Matos
  • Re: Extension to compare-elim Paulo J. Matos
• Help with 'ev_sl' PowerPC SPE Intrinsic Rohit Arul Raj
• мой зайчик.)) Руся Эрнет
• A question about loop ivopt Jiangning Liu
  • Re: A question about loop ivopt Richard Guenther
  • Re: A question about loop ivopt Zdenek Dvorak
  • Re: A question about loop ivopt Zdenek Dvorak
  • Re: A question about loop ivopt Richard Guenther
  • RE: A question about loop ivopt Jiangning Liu
  • Re: A question about loop ivopt Richard Guenther
  • RE: A question about loop ivopt Jiangning Liu
  • Re: A question about loop ivopt Andrew Pinski
• How do I disable warnings across gcc versions? Andy Lutomirski
  • Re: How do I disable warnings across gcc versions? Robert Dewar
• confusion about fma description in section 16.9 of gccint doc. Kenneth Zadeck
  • Re: confusion about fma description in section 16.9 of gccint doc. Ian Lance Taylor
  • Re: confusion about fma description in section 16.9 of gccint doc. Kenneth Zadeck
• gcc 4.3.x: Bug in ieee754-{df,sf}.S Sven Köhler
  • Re: gcc 4.3.x: Bug in ieee754-{df,sf}.S James Dennett
  • Re: gcc 4.3.x: Bug in ieee754-{df,sf}.S Joern Rennecke
  • Re: gcc 4.3.x: Bug in ieee754-{df,sf}.S Sven Köhler
• [x86-64 psABI] RFC: Extend x86-64 psABI to support x32 H.J. Lu
  • Re: [x86-64 psABI] RFC: Extend x86-64 psABI to support x32 H. Peter Anvin
  • Re: [x86-64 psABI] RFC: Extend x86-64 psABI to support x32 H.J. Lu
  • Re: [discuss] [x86-64 psABI] RFC: Extend x86-64 psABI to support x32 Michael Matz
  • Re: [discuss] [x86-64 psABI] RFC: Extend x86-64 psABI to support x32 H.J. Lu
  • Re: [discuss] [x86-64 psABI] RFC: Extend x86-64 psABI to support x32 H.J. Lu
• Trying to track down a register allocation issue Paul_Koning
  • Re: Trying to track down a register allocation issue Joern Rennecke
  • Re: Trying to track down a register allocation issue Paul_Koning
• Aukcijski centar Aukcijski centar
• Został przekroczony limit przechowywania w skrzynce pocztowej Helena Mikušová
• About trees and expanded code by macros Alberto Lozano Alelu
  • Re: About trees and expanded code by macros Paulo J. Matos
  • Re: About trees and expanded code by macros Manuel López-Ibáñez
  • Re: About trees and expanded code by macros Paulo J. Matos
  • Re: About trees and expanded code by macros Dodji Seketeli
• gcc-4.8-20120513 is now available gccadmin
• Back end for DCPU-16 architecture Fredrik Rothamel
• Will backend ever see an memory operand with address wrap around? H.J. Lu
  • Re: Will backend ever see an memory operand with address wrap around? Richard Guenther
  • Re: Will backend ever see an memory operand with address wrap around? H.J. Lu
  • Re: Will backend ever see an memory operand with address wrap around? amylaar
  • Re: Will backend ever see an memory operand with address wrap around? H.J. Lu
  • Re: Will backend ever see an memory operand with address wrap around? Joern Rennecke
  • Re: Will backend ever see an memory operand with address wrap around? H.J. Lu
  • Re: Will backend ever see an memory operand with address wrap around? amylaar
  • Re: Will backend ever see an memory operand with address wrap around? H.J. Lu
  • Re: Will backend ever see an memory operand with address wrap around? Geert Bosch
  • Re: Will backend ever see an memory operand with address wrap around? Richard Guenther
  • Re: Will backend ever see an memory operand with address wrap around? Richard Guenther
  • Re: Will backend ever see an memory operand with address wrap around? Joern Rennecke
• gcc-4.7-20120512 is now available gccadmin
• R: CLOOG-PPL fails to build (OS X) erotavlas_tu...@libero.it
• Add STB_SECONDARY to gABI H.J. Lu
  • RE: Add STB_SECONDARY to gABI Lowell, Randy
  • RE: Add STB_SECONDARY to gABI Suprateeka R Hegde
  • RE: Add STB_SECONDARY to gABI Lowell, Randy
  • RE: Add STB_SECONDARY to gABI Suprateeka R Hegde
• CLOOG-PPL fails to build (OS X) Sergey Oboguev
• Maybe expand MAX_RECOG_ALTERNATIVES ? Greg McGary
  • Re: Maybe expand MAX_RECOG_ALTERNATIVES ? Greg McGary
• gcc-4.6-20120511 is now available gccadmin
• MULTILIB_OPTIONS and DRIVER_SELF_SPEC Paulo J. Matos
  • Re: MULTILIB_OPTIONS and DRIVER_SELF_SPEC Christian Bruel
  • Re: MULTILIB_OPTIONS and DRIVER_SELF_SPEC Paulo J. Matos
• gimple vs gimple_seq in 4.8 trunk Basile Starynkevitch
  • Re: gimple vs gimple_seq in 4.8 trunk Michael Matz
  • Re: gimple vs gimple_seq in 4.8 trunk Basile Starynkevitch
• Build problem with libgo runtime William J. Schmidt
  • Re: Build problem with libgo runtime Ian Lance Taylor
• gcc-4.5-20120510 is now available gccadmin
• i386-rtems (and elf?) broken Joel Sherrill
• TPF unwinding broken DJ Delorie
  • Re: TPF unwinding broken Richard Henderson
  • Re: TPF unwinding broken DJ Delorie
  • Re: TPF unwinding broken Richard Henderson
  • Re: TPF unwinding broken DJ Delorie
  • Re: TPF unwinding broken Richard Henderson
• Question about bitsizetype William J. Schmidt
  • Re: Question about bitsizetype Andrew Pinski
  • Re: Question about bitsizetype William J. Schmidt
  • Re: Question about bitsizetype Richard Guenther
• Re: G++ could optimize ASM code more Ian Lance Taylor
  • Re: G++ could optimize ASM code more Daniel Marschall
  • Re: G++ could optimize ASM code more Ian Lance Taylor
  • Re: G++ could optimize ASM code more Daniel Marschall
  • Re: G++ could optimize ASM code more Marc Glisse
  • Re: G++ could optimize ASM code more Daniel Marschall
  • Re: G++ could optimize ASM code more Daniel Marschall
  • Re: G++ could optimize ASM code more Marc Glisse
• fwprop not propagating Paulo J. Matos
  • Re: fwprop not propagating Paulo J. Matos
• h8300-elf build broken DJ Delorie
  • Re: h8300-elf build broken Gabriel Dos Reis
  • Re: h8300-elf build broken Richard Guenther
  • Re: h8300-elf build broken Marc Glisse
  • Re: h8300-elf build broken Gabriel Dos Reis
  • Re: h8300-elf build broken Marc Glisse
  • Re: h8300-elf build broken Gabriel Dos Reis
  • Re: h8300-elf build broken DJ Delorie
  • Re: h8300-elf build broken Gabriel Dos Reis
  • Re: h8300-elf build broken DJ Delorie
• i386 define_asm_attributes question Steven Bosscher
  • Re: i386 define_asm_attributes question H.J. Lu
  • Re: i386 define_asm_attributes question Jan Hubicka
  • Re: i386 define_asm_attributes question Andrew Pinski
  • Re: i386 define_asm_attributes question Steven Bosscher
  • Re: i386 define_asm_attributes question Jan Hubicka
• Add microblaze-*-rtems* Joel Sherrill
• The Linux binutils 2.22.52.0.3 is released H.J. Lu
• GCC 4.6.2/Red Hat Linux 6.1 thread cancellation C++ runtime issue Mike Dalpee
• Deprecate 32-bits HP-PA for GCC 4.8? Steven Bosscher
  • Re: Deprecate 32-bits HP-PA for GCC 4.8? Jeff Law
  • Re: Deprecate 32-bits HP-PA for GCC 4.8? Steven Bosscher
  • Re: Deprecate 32-bits HP-PA for GCC 4.8? John David Anglin
  • Re: Deprecate 32-bits HP-PA for GCC 4.8? John David Anglin
  • Re: Deprecate 32-bits HP-PA for GCC 4.8? Jeff Law
  • Re: Deprecate 32-bits HP-PA for GCC 4.8? John David Anglin
  • Re: Deprecate 32-bits HP-PA for GCC 4.8? Steven Bosscher
  • Re: Deprecate 32-bits HP-PA for GCC 4.8? Nick Hudson

• Earlier messages