Re: gcc-in-cxx branch created

>> How can maintainers ensure this does not happen? > > What is your suggestion, stay with C? It doesn't have type safe enums > either. One possibility is to do what we do for Ada: have a style/coding checker built into the compiler (C++ front-end) as a special switch, and enable this switch du

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On 6/23/08, Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think it could also be addressed with the gcc compile farm. I > > thought that there was some place where we could put patches, and they > > would be automatically picked up and tested by some sort of automatic > > scripts am I dream

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

* Ben Elliston wrote on Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 01:58:38AM CEST: > On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 10:58 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > IIRC, then objects in libjava were built from lists of source files as a > > means to avoid per-object overhead of libtool and some other stuff, and > > to produce a bit

Re: gcc-in-cxx branch created

On Jun 22, 2008, at 4:24 PM, Bruno Haible wrote: Dear Ian, A comment regarding the GCC-in-C++ idea. In slide 16 you merely answer "C++ is too complicated!" with "Maintainers will ensure that gcc continues to be maintainable." C++ has, for example, 12 different ways to represent or invoke

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 21:57 -0400, NightStrike wrote: > On 6/22/08, Kaveh R. GHAZI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > IMHO, having more languages and testsuites in the bootstrap process > > enhances the quality of GCC. I sympathize with the problems of regtest > > duration. I believe some of this cou

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On 6/22/08, Kaveh R. GHAZI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IMHO, having more languages and testsuites in the bootstrap process > enhances the quality of GCC. I sympathize with the problems of regtest > duration. I believe some of this could be addressed through making things > run in parallel better

PR 36599

Richard, There is a regression in the induct polyhedron benchmark execution when gfortran compiled with -ffast-math -O3 introduced with gcc 4.3 that isn't present in gcc 4.2.4. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36599 According to the SuSe polyhedron benchmark servers, the bottlenec

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On Sat, 21 Jun 2008, Andrew Haley wrote: > Steven Bosscher wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 12:41 AM, Kaveh R. Ghazi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Fundamentally, our philosophy has been to catch errors *before* they get > >> into the repository. Sure one day of breaking the trunk isn't so bad

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 07:32 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > I think it would only be a few days of work for somebody familiar with > Tcl to add -j support to DejaGNU. I think that would be a very useful > contribution to gcc development. What did you have in mind, Ian? That DejaGnu would run .

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 19:13 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Has anybody ever looked at using threading capabilities of tcl directly? > Parallel DejaGNU could benefit other packages too. There is a thread > pools package (tpool.html, linked from ) but I > have no idea how

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 10:58 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > IIRC, then objects in libjava were built from lists of source files as a > means to avoid per-object overhead of libtool and some other stuff, and > to produce a bit better code[1]. Now, at least libtool compile mode > overhead should be

Re: gcc-in-cxx branch created

Dear Ian, A comment regarding the GCC-in-C++ idea. In slide 16 you merely answer "C++ is too complicated!" with "Maintainers will ensure that gcc continues to be maintainable." C++ has, for example, 12 different ways to represent or invoke a function. It has no buikt-in typesafe "enum"s. S

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 17:05 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 16:56, Kaveh R. GHAZI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > That aside, our current policy already allows e.g. not testing java if > > your change is to a part of the compiler that can't possible affect it. > > I didn't

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Kaveh R. GHAZI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ugh, I think this is a terrible idea. It took me all of zero days to find > an example of libjava breaking when someone didn't test it: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-06/msg01351.html This is a bad example fo

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Kaveh R. GHAZI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ugh, I think this is a terrible idea. It took me all of zero days to find > an example of libjava breaking when someone didn't test it: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-06/msg01351.html Actually that patch caus

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On Sun, 22 Jun 2008, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 07:13:03PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > Has anybody ever looked at using threading capabilities of tcl directly? > > Parallel DejaGNU could benefit other packages too. There is a thread > > pools package (tpool.html, lin

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 07:13:03PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Has anybody ever looked at using threading capabilities of tcl directly? > Parallel DejaGNU could benefit other packages too. There is a thread > pools package (tpool.html, linked from ) but I > have no ide

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

Richard Guenther wrote: On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 12:50 AM, Richard Kenner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Fundamentally, our philosophy has been to catch errors *before* they get into the repository. Sure one day of breaking the trunk isn't so bad, but when it breaks it affects hundreds of developers

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

> "Richard" == Richard Kenner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> IME, bugs found during libjava have been also triggered during >> libstdc++ and/or C. Though several folks at the summit mentioned that >> they had found bugs triggered only by libjava. Richard> To me, as I said, this is the key is

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

> "Ralf" == Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Ralf> Has anybody ever looked at using threading capabilities of tcl directly? At least Fedora compiles the system Tcl without threading enabled. This has been attempted a few times over the years but apparently always reverted due to bu

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

* NightStrike wrote on Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 06:14:22PM CEST: > On 6/22/08, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I think it would only be a few days of work for somebody familiar with > > Tcl to add -j support to DejaGNU. I think that would be a very useful > > contribution to gcc de

Cross-compiler for Alpha architecture

Dear all, I am trying to build a cross-compiler for an alphaev56-unknown-linux-gnu system, using crosstool-ng. The host is a i686-unknown-linux-gnu. After applying several patches (look in [1]), I managed to build a tool-chain using binutils 2.18/gcc 4.2.3/linux kernel 2.6.24.7 and glibc 2.3.6 (w

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

* Ian Lance Taylor wrote on Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 04:42:19PM CEST: > > First I'll note that insn-attrtab.c is particularly slow for > x86/x86_64, presumably due to the many processor varieties and complex > scheduling. It is much faster for other targets. > > Compiling it earlier than it would ot

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On 6/22/08, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jakub Jelinek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 08:58:05PM +0200, Laurent GUERBY wrote: > >> On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 08:10 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote: > >> > On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 05:21, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED

How should I disable vectorization test for AVR?

For AVR I get failures of: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-11.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1 FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-11a.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1 FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-2.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1 FAIL: gcc.dg

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I noticed insn-attrtab compilation is about 5mn20s and probably > explain about all of the not so perfect speedup: when I look at top it > takes more than 1 minute per stage finishing alone. I've seen it up to 3 > minutes alone. There's a comment in the

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

Jakub Jelinek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 08:58:05PM +0200, Laurent GUERBY wrote: >> On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 08:10 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote: >> > On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 05:21, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> And for make -k check: >> >> -j1 2h18 >> -j2 1h11 >

RE: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

NightStrike wrote on 22 June 2008 12:57: > On 6/22/08, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Jun 22, 2008, at 2:08, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On Jun 22, 2008, at 0:21, Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 00:04 -0700, David Miller wrote:

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 4:04 AM, Richard Kenner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > An interesting question that I see as relevant here and for which I have no >> > data is: what percentage of the time does a patch cause an error *only* >> > in libjava? I think you have to weigh the cost of the build

Re: "relocation truncated to fit" error using Coldfire target.

Hi List, I think that the problem is the same of this: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-06/msg00094.html Starting form the patch proposed in the post above, I produced (with few changes) the attached patch for gcc.4.3.1. ciao luigi On dom, 2008-06-22 at 12:24 +0200, Luigi 'Comio' Mantel

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 08:58:05PM +0200, Laurent GUERBY wrote: > On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 08:10 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 05:21, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And for make -k check: > > -j1 2h18 > -j2 1h11 > -j4 0h55 > -j6 0h44 For make check, it would perh

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On 6/22/08, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jun 22, 2008, at 2:08, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jun 22, 2008, at 0:21, Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 00:04 -0700, David Miller wrote: > > > > From: Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECT

Re: GCC 4.3.2 Status Report (2008-06-22)

On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 01:30:18PM +0200, Pawe?? Sikora wrote: > On Sunday 22 of June 2008 13:17:38 Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > Quality Data > > > > > > Priority # Change from Last Report > > --- --- > > P18 +- 0 > > P2

Re: GCC 4.3.2 Status Report (2008-06-22)

On Sunday 22 of June 2008 13:17:38 Joseph S. Myers wrote: > Status > == > > The GCC 4.3 branch is open for commits under normal release branch > rules. The 4.3.2 release is expected around 2008-08-06. > > Quality Data > > > Priority# Change from Last Report >

GCC 4.3.2 Status Report (2008-06-22)

Status == The GCC 4.3 branch is open for commits under normal release branch rules. The 4.3.2 release is expected around 2008-08-06. Quality Data Priority # Change from Last Report --- --- P18 +- 0 P2

"relocation truncated to fit" error using Coldfire target.

Dear All, I'm trying to compile the e2fs progs for a coldfire 547x cpu. I'm using the gcc4.3.1 compiler. I have this error and I don't understand what can be wrong: make[5]: Entering directory `/mnt/devel/openwrt/OpenWRT.git/build_dir/m68k/e2fsprogs-1.39' make[6]: Entering directory `/mnt/dev

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

Sent from my iPhone On Jun 22, 2008, at 2:08, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Sent from my iPhone because I no longer have Internet access at home :(. On Jun 22, 2008, at 0:21, Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 00:04 -0700, David Miller wrote: From

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

Sent from my iPhone because I no longer have Internet access at home :(. On Jun 22, 2008, at 0:21, Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 00:04 -0700, David Miller wrote: From: Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 22:12:24 +0200 I'm curious at ho

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

From: Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 10:05:26 +0200 > On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 00:45 -0700, David Miller wrote: > > > How many core does your main development machine have? > > > > 8 cores and 8 cpu threads per core on one, 64 cpus total. > > 16 cores and 8 cpu threads per

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 00:45 -0700, David Miller wrote: > > How many core does your main development machine have? > > 8 cores and 8 cpu threads per core on one, 64 cpus total. > 16 cores and 8 cpu threads per core on another, 128 cpus total. > > It still takes an hour or so to bootstrap on these

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

From: Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 09:21:32 +0200 > On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 00:04 -0700, David Miller wrote: > > From: Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 22:12:24 +0200 > > > > > I'm curious at how many GCC developpers use non x86/_64 as their

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 00:04 -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 22:12:24 +0200 > > > I'm curious at how many GCC developpers use non x86/_64 as their > > main development machine (and how many non x86/_64 core they use). > > I definitely

Re: gcc4.3 configuring problems with mpfr

Please check the symbols in the library existing or not. >>error >>while configuring the mingw cross compiler for m32c-elf, As you are saying you are facing problem with mingw. Make sure you are using the gmp and mpfr libraries build for mingw Please build mingw gmp and mpfr libraries use the co

Re: Should we remove java from the default bootstrap languages?

From: Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 22:12:24 +0200 > I'm curious at how many GCC developpers use non x86/_64 as their > main development machine (and how many non x86/_64 core they use). I definitely am one. Or, maybe you are asking the wrong question, which likely sh