On Apr 27, 2006, at 10:46 AM, Qiuker wrote:
I'm trying to support Shared libraries on mcore. but it doesn't
support PIC. So, need I add PIC first?
Only if your shared library design requires it. Some don't. You
probably will need to.
Is there any info for adding it?
The usual referenc
Is there a remaining purpose for pmode?
From rs6000.c:
void
rs6000_initialize_trampoline (rtx addr, rtx fnaddr, rtx cxt)
{
enum machine_mode pmode = Pmode;
On Apr 17, 2006, at 2:53 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote:
I'd go further: you should not be trusting a compiler (gcc or any
other) to be correct in "mission critical" situations.
Or, to use the option that spits out the proof that the
transformation of the code that the compiler did was indeed va
On Apr 12, 2006, at 10:34 PM, Ching-Hua Chang wrote:
We had ported gcc-3.4.2 to our own RISC, and meet a strange
case in optimization level 3 (-O3).
We don't have the resources to help with very old versions of gcc on
this list. I'd recommend upgrading to gcc-4.2. If it then works,
you ca
On Apr 10, 2006, at 4:30 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
It seems like we're getting consensus around that approach, despite
the
initial sentiment in the other direction from Mike and Joe.
Mike, Joe, do either of you care to argue the point?
I'm fine with the status quo. I think comp.compilers a
On Apr 10, 2006, at 1:29 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
1. What do we do if people do advertise jobs that are not free
software
jobs
Ask them not to, ultimately the same thing we do with spammers. :-)
or not purely free software jobs?
If on the wiki, edit out all the parts that aren't and tell
On Apr 10, 2006, at 11:48 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Thoughts?
We don't want to open the flood gates to random recruiters for random
software, however, I never saw the harm in solicitations from gcc
contributors for people to work on gcc. If we were to relax the
current policy, we can have
On Apr 9, 2006, at 3:39 AM, Aaron W. LaFramboise wrote:
Just as a reminder, even though the Microchip code is covered by
the GPL, code based on it won't be acceptable for inclusion into
FSF GCC unless you can get Microchip to sign a copyright
assignment, which seems unlikely.
Would seem to
On Apr 6, 2006, at 11:52 PM, Ching-Hua Chang wrote:
Is there a flag in gcc that indicate that we are in the inline
assembly ?
inside_cw_asm_block, but only the APPLE branch has a notion of being
`inside'.
I suspect you'll need to use a paragraph to ask your question for us
to be able to
On Apr 5, 2006, at 5:57 AM, Colm O' Flaherty wrote:
Theres an interesting discussion going on as to whether Microchip
Inc is allowed by the GPL
Wrong list. gnu.misc.discuss is the right list.
On Apr 2, 2006, at 3:20 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
The fact is, that the GNU Pascal crew did not want integration with
gcc the last time this was discussed. GCC, the project, can not just
suck in every front end out there if the maintainers of that front end
do not want that.
Actually, it can i
On Apr 3, 2006, at 6:34 AM, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
2) Adjusting gpc development model. In particular, gpc uses rather
short
feedback loop: new features are released (as alphas) when they
are ready.
This is possible because gpc uses stable backend, so that users are
exposed only to fro
On Apr 1, 2006, at 7:26 AM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
3. GPC would get much wider exposure. It would probably eventually
ship
along with the rest of gcc in OS distributions including *ahem*
MacOSX.
The GNU project doesn't set what is or becomes product for Apple.
Or, put another way, we
On Mar 30, 2006, at 7:55 AM, Camm Maguire wrote:
Longer term, it would be nice to have someone from your camp
layout where the time is spent and what changes might be worth
while in gcc to make it more suitable for that type of work.
This would be interesting, how does one benchmark gcc per
On Mar 29, 2006, at 12:15 AM, Tianwei Sheng wrote:
but it's my be too aggressive. as you said, you mean "base,ofst"
rule is enough,
a more safe method is "base,ofst, lenght" rule.
Right. I didn't mean to exclude length, just that I didn't expound
on the idea, as I wanted to get the simple
On Mar 28, 2006, at 11:03 PM, Tianwei Sheng wrote:
I need the field_info to help in alias analysis. for example:
int *p = &pair.a;
int *q = &pair.b;
then if I can set length of "*p" to 4,ofset is '0' . for "*q" to
"8,4". also I know that p definitly points to pair.a and q points to
pair.b, then
On Mar 28, 2006, at 1:41 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
I do have one other issue to resolve in this legacy c code which I
am unclear on.
Wrong list. This list is for the development of gcc, not other
software.
warning: initialization makes integer from pointer without a cast
Yup.
...for the
On Mar 28, 2006, at 12:59 PM, sean yang wrote:
If we do a search of main function in gcc4..0.2/gcc directory, we
can find several.
I understand collect2.c-->collect2, main.c (wrapper of toplev.c) --
>cc1, gcov.c-->gcov. Can someone give a brief introduction what gen*
() is ued for? For example
On Mar 27, 2006, at 11:39 PM, mohanlal jangir wrote:
Why does gcc put initialized data in .data section and
uninitialized data in bss section? Does it provide any
optimization? Also, normally gcc initializes global data to zero
then what kinds of data go to .bass section? An example would be
On Mar 25, 2006, at 4:08 AM, Gaius Mulley wrote:
What do you folks need me to do? Presumably bring gm2 up to the
latest gcc cvs with its regression test suite working etc?
Yup, basically, submit a patch against mainline that meets our
requirements and ask for approval.
Roughly, all isolat
On Mar 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, Nicolas Roche wrote:
I just saw that I sent this email to the wrong mailing list. So I
reforward to gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Careful; on some systems name it _main. But on others, you don't
want _main.
Well it works even in that case as my test was done on Mingw wich
On Mar 25, 2006, at 9:14 PM, Camm Maguire wrote:
Greetings! GCL is a lisp compiler system which outputs C code normally
compiled by gcc into an object, which is then loaded and relocated
into the running GCL image. In lisp, compiling is a very incremental
process, with many, often thousands of s
On Mar 24, 2006, at 1:49 AM, Piyush Garyali wrote:
I meant other than recompiling the code of course. I have some
binaries without the source code. does 3.2 support the old mangling
algorithm.
Sure, just re-implement the 2.95 abi in 3.2 if you think that is
better than re-implementing code th
On Mar 23, 2006, at 2:02 PM, Laura Tardivo wrote:
Hello, my name is Laura and I need to know where I could find or
download the
oldest version of de "C" compiler. I look forward to hearing from you.
You can find what we have in svn, see our web site. -r1 would be the
oldest bits we have, t
On Mar 18, 2006, at 6:47 AM, jayaraj wrote:
I want to profile an application in linux. I used -pg option and
profiled the data with gprof. Here I am getting the resolution in
seconds only. but I wants in terms of milliseconds and microseconds.
can anybody help me. or any other options and tools a
On Mar 17, 2006, at 2:07 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
So, I think you should remove the dbl-64 code until this is
resolved, or at least prevent it
from being compiled by removing whatever Makefile bits compile it
:-( At the outside, I'd say that in 7 days it should not be in
mainline nor any r
In:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-01/msg02102.html
you add restrap unconditionally, and yet it was already defined
above, thus causing make to say:
mrs $ make
Makefile:13094: warning: overriding commands for target `restrap'
Makefile:12386: warning: ignoring old commands for target
On Mar 13, 2006, at 2:05 PM, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf wrote:
The appropriate place for such stuff is gcc@gcc.gnu.org
No, not really. gcc-help is more appropriate.
Am I the only one who gets those:
DOMElement.m:283: warning: pointer type mismatch in conditional
expression
I doubt it.
F
On Mar 13, 2006, at 12:16 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
PR/21195 is about inlining the SSE builtins. These are special
because, for example, you probably would prefer GDB to not step
into them, but just execute them.
:-) We have an APPLE LOCAL patch to remove the debug information
associated
On Mar 13, 2006, at 5:29 AM, Colm O' Flaherty wrote:
I've been thinking a bit more about this (no code yet: I was busy
trying to find and fix a bug in gpsim), and I'm still not sure what
the optimal development mode is.. by this, I mean.. "what should
the proposed PIC port of GCC produce"?
On Mar 10, 2006, at 3:10 PM, Sandro Tolaini wrote:
I have done some work on sysv.S and now libffi compiles fine on OSX/
Intel. Unfortunately, I had to put some #ifdef __APPLE__ this file
because Apple ships an old cctools with as that doesn't understand
some directives. My patch works on the
On Mar 11, 2006, at 10:53 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Creating these separate modules seems somewhat pointless given the
core
is 80% of the total. Why not simplify things a bit and just
package it
all up together?
Just to put another idea on the table, we can require they grab the
full tar
On Mar 10, 2006, at 7:15 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Mar 10, 2006, at 10:13 PM, Toon Moene wrote:
autogen -T ../../trunk/fixincludes/check.tpl ../../trunk/
fixincludes/inclhack.def
make[2]: autogen: Command not found
Maybe we should change this to be
autogen || true
so that we don't ge
On Mar 10, 2006, at 8:09 AM, Nikolaos Kavvadias wrote:
how is it possible to emit regular register names (e.g. for the MIPS
to use $31 and not $ra) when producing assembly output (with
mips-elf-gcc -S)?
I want to just use the arithmetic names ($0 to $31).
Yes, just edit gcc/config/mips/* and pu
On Mar 8, 2006, at 2:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When I try to compile certain downloaded tarballs (especially those
that
use the gtk+ libs) gcc passes "-mt" to cc1, which chokes with an
"illegal
option error" message. The gcc docs say that this option is for
the IA64
on HPUX. What ca
On Mar 6, 2006, at 5:21 AM, Pierre Chatelier wrote:
This is ok to fix the source, but I do not understand why it is
normal behaviour that the foo() in b hides the one from a. They
have different prototypes.
That's just how C++ is designed/defined, any book on C++ should be
able to explain
On Mar 5, 2006, at 11:15 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
The string is a bit trickier, strncpy (newbuf, buf+30, 40); newbuf
[70] = 0;
[40] = 0; I meant of course.
First, let me say this is the wrong list for how to program in C++,
comp.lang.c++ would be better, or even comp.lang.c would be better.
gcc-help would the a second choice.
On Mar 5, 2006, at 8:47 AM, Nieuwenhuizen, JK wrote:
cout << "Done";
This doesn't output anything immediately. E
On Mar 1, 2006, at 3:47 AM, HASSAN AL MOATASSIME wrote:
I have a problem with the compiler gcc 3.4.4.
With the gcc 3.2 compiler, i have no problem with the following
instruction :
creal(U0[i])=PartieReelle;
cimag(U0[i])=PartieImaginaire;
Now with the gcc 3.4.4 i
On Feb 26, 2006, at 11:46 PM, Pratik Mehta wrote:
I am looking for a C++ ABI implementation
This doesn't make any sense.
My need is only to demangle the symbol names that are
produced by gcc.
However, this makes perfect sense.
By searching the web, I came across libiberty and
libcwd, bu
On Feb 24, 2006, at 1:57 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
On 2/24/06, Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Feb 24, 2006, at 1:25 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
That's painful to set up, though (it requires changing the
application's source to be effective, doesn't it?)
No.
:-) On darw
On Feb 24, 2006, at 1:25 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
That's painful to set up, though (it requires changing the
application's
source to be effective, doesn't it?)
No. On darwin, it is a checkbox to turn distributed builds on, no
other change necessary.
distcc already adds -E as I recall, you ju
On Feb 24, 2006, at 2:08 AM, Nemanja Popov wrote:
Is it possible to workaround this problem in my port files.
Sounds like a bug, I'd recommend just finding and fixing the bug.
Can't imagine it is more than a line to fix.
Watch for TREE_USED, SYMBOL_REF_USED, mark_referenced,
mark_decl_re
On Feb 23, 2006, at 9:05 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
it seems to be slow at preprocessing C++ source.
This matters quite a bit when running distcc.
One way to mitigate this would be to use a precompiled header, and
use -fpch-preprocess with distcc and ship the .gch across instead.
This saves the
On Feb 23, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Frank Cusack wrote:
#include
int CS;
$ g++ ll.cc
ll.cc:2: error: expected unqualified-id before numeric constant
It works correctly on Solaris/sparc. My system is amd64, using the
Sun gcc. /usr/include/sys/regset.h #define's CS on x86/amd64 only ...
hence the brok
On Feb 23, 2006, at 5:46 AM, Digvijoy Chatterjee wrote:
What is PR323 ,is it some page in the manual /or gcc info ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/PR323
On Feb 22, 2006, at 10:24 AM, Ian S. Nelson wrote:
It looks like there are attributes to help optimize some functions
further but are there any to not optimize at all?
In general, no; however, Dale did up a patch to control this sort of
thing from #pragma if you want to dust it off and adapt
On Feb 22, 2006, at 6:46 AM, Florian Radulescu wrote:
Please I would need some instructions on how to compile and install
gcc for Intel XScale.
You would need to use google to find the gcc documentation that
describes this in detail. If you do that, you should find http://
gcc.gnu.org/inst
On Feb 21, 2006, at 7:40 PM, Amarnath wrote:
I am in need of the following version of Bison tool's installation
package available with CYGWIN.
We are not cygwin. You can go over to the cygwin site and install it
and it will let you grab and install this. Try google, if you can't
find the
On Feb 17, 2006, at 8:04 PM, Serge Dundich wrote:
I need to define the constant memory address/offset in i386 gcc
inline asm,
i.e. immediate value without $ prefix, so I can use it as a
constant offset for
some memory address statement.
Is there any way to do that?
Sure, the manual descr
On Feb 15, 2006, at 7:27 AM, Perry Smith wrote:
I am assuming I am doing something wrong but I am hoping someone can
give me a clue as to where to look.
I'd fire up a debugger and type up a couple of times from a
breakpoint in the dtor. If you want to randomly try things, if you
inserted c
On Feb 13, 2006, at 8:31 PM, Eric Fisher wrote:
Thanks. I'm working to port gcc to our chip. I use mips-elf as the
start.
Most chips have this same issue, you can copy from ppc for example,
or arm, if your chip is more like it (hope not).
we don't have pc-region branch instructions such a
On Feb 13, 2006, at 7:28 PM, Eric Fisher wrote:
Suppose I have only pc-relative branch instructions such as 'b offset'
and don't have pc-region branch instructions such as 'j target'. So
what the function call should be translated? Do I have to always use
two instructions such as 'la reg, fun
On Feb 10, 2006, at 5:22 AM, Sapojnikova T.F. wrote:
Can I use c++ (g++) and fortran (g77) together in one
multilanguage application?
Wrong list, gcc-help is more appropriate, thanks.
On Feb 8, 2006, at 5:51 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the idea of matrix linking is quite different
You could have saved all the space and just said, yeah, but mine can
rebind printf. My response would be, yes, so can we. So, I've yet
to see much of a difference.
On Jan 30, 2006, at 11:50 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
I'm trying to get:
void foo() {
int rowfraclo[2];
rowfraclo[1] = 42;
asm ("movd mm6, %a0" : : "p" (rowfraclo+1));
}
With the below patch (still running the testsuite) I can get the
compiler to generate that code. So, the question is h
When bulk merging trunk to local release branch, svn reports whole
file conflicts as 'A'. :-(
svn status
after the merge is necessary to find the conflicts.
I'm using svn client:
mrs $ svn --version
svn, version 1.3.0 (r17949)
compiled Jan 4 2006, 12:42:53
and the server was either the
On Feb 2, 2006, at 1:04 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
Can someone help Lee with SSH and SVN checking issues?
I'd recommend contacting [EMAIL PROTECTED]
He has a read+write access to GCC sources.
Apparently not.
I was looking through the altivec.md file and found the below. Seems
like either they should all be "", or "i"; my guess, they should all
be "i".
(define_insn "altivec_vspltb"
[(set (match_operand:V16QI 0 "register_operand" "=v")
(vec_duplicate:V16QI
(vec_select:QI (match
I'm trying to get:
void foo() {
int rowfraclo[2];
rowfraclo[1] = 42;
asm ("movd mm6, %a0" : : "p" (rowfraclo+1));
}
to generate:
movd mm6, -4(%ebp)
at -O0. Currently we generate:
leal-8(%ebp), %eax
addl$4, %eax
movd mm6, (%eax)
With the below patch (still running
On Jan 30, 2006, at 9:50 AM, murali wrote:
I am trying to change the number of registers for simplescalar's gcc
(2.7.2.3) compiler.
It is unlikely we're going to help much with 2.7.2.3, we'd recommend
up-porting to gcc 4.2 to start with.
On Jan 28, 2006, at 10:22 AM, Carlos Barros wrote:
anyone can explain me this??
Wrong list, you might try gcc-help, otherwise you can find the
answers in the source code to the compiler, if you wish to dig into
it. In short, gcc has lots of latitude to do just about anything it
wants wit
On Jan 23, 2006, at 11:15 AM, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
Is there an existing script that does such a diff? (In SVN or on
someone favourite test machine :).
Gotta love previously solved problems...
contrib/compare_tests
On Jan 18, 2006, at 10:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought some kind of that, yet moved to matrix approach. Reason?
The clarity.
Clarity is not an in-vogue reason for compiler code generation. Size
is, speed is. Sacrificing these two for clarity in generated code
limits the end res
On Jan 18, 2006, at 9:41 AM, Perry Smith wrote:
In the course of doing my work last week to get exception handling
working in my device driver, I learned that the exception
processing code calls malloc during the exception. This seems weak
to me. It seems like one of the most critical time
On Jan 18, 2006, at 12:22 PM, Eric Lemings wrote:
Right now the infrastructure for it isn't there, but someday
it will be. But how would you indicate to the debugger what
constituted "uninteresting" headers?
I figure the responsibility for this would probably reside more
with the compiler than
On Jan 18, 2006, at 5:26 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
MRS and Eric Botcazou objected strongly against not being able to
build a 1-stage GCC with --disable-bootstrap. And that's never
going to happen.
I tend to like long term stability in who things are done, but I'm
not stuck in the mud, the
On Jan 17, 2006, at 1:19 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Someone's informed Richard Stallman that this (annoying) warning
will not be
enabled by default in GCC 4.1.
But, it currently seems to be. Should it be turned off before the
release?
The SC or Jim Wilson will know more than I.
If
On Jan 9, 2006, at 10:46 AM, David Taylor wrote:
For a variety of reasons, we would like to be able to specify
individual compilation switches *within* individual files.
Dale added this to our gcc compiler, see the apple/trunk branch for
example, near APPLE LOCAL .* optimization pragmas lines
On Jan 13, 2006, at 5:01 PM, Richard Kenner wrote:
Steven Bosscher wrote:
... you can use --disable-bootstrap and do a regular make, or is
there
some reason why you can't do that?
I thought the point was that that option is temporary and will go
away.
Over my dead body. We will al
On Jan 9, 2006, at 7:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I actually want to do coverage analysis on bootloader code from
YAMON (used mostly on MIPS board). Obviously, I cannot invoke
'gcov' on bootloader code and thus the conundrum.
Don't see why not, just arrange to save it out to memory somepl
On Jan 8, 2006, at 3:11 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So can you tell me more about your experience with the Microchip
18F, if
somebody is currently working on this device,
Nope, don't think so.
or if the memory model of the PIC18 is definitively a problem to
gcc porting ?
Weird chips mak
On Jan 3, 2006, at 11:54 AM, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
To stop the annoying VM randomization you need to turn on
the old style VM layout in the kernel. Grrr.
I believe detailed instructions on the ways to disable VM
randomization
in the GCC wiki would be a welcomed addition by many GCC hackers
On Jan 1, 2006, at 9:57 AM, Paul Schlie wrote:
- x[y] = 0;
if (x[y]) y = y+1;
And how does this differ from the portable code in which x points to
volatile data? If none, what are the advantages in being able to
write non-portable code that leaves the volatile out over standard
conform
On Dec 31, 2005, at 9:26 PM, Paul Schlie wrote:
be able define NULL as being some value other than 0.
Do you have a specific chip in mind you want to do this for? Why
would you want to do this? How many users would benefit from having
done this?
- enable the specification of arithmetic
On Jan 1, 2006, at 9:26 AM, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
I noted that when PIC is enabled (-fpic, Linux Intel) ebx is
reserved to global pointer. However LzmaDecode do not access any
global data and do not call other functions (no relocations at all)
so why not use ebx register?
This is a known
On Dec 31, 2005, at 10:51 AM, Paul Schlie wrote:
As although C/C++ define some expressions as having undefined
semantics;
I'd rather it be called --do-what-i-mean. :-)
Could you give us a hint at what all the semantics you would want to
change with this option? Are their any code bases th
On Dec 29, 2005, at 2:20 PM, Domagoj D wrote:
In the case anybody cares about code verifiability... It's
exteremely hard
to automatically prove the correctness of the code that uses pointer
arithmetic and casts as in the example above.
It is but a couple of trivial rules that one should have
On Dec 29, 2005, at 1:25 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
I was actually referring to this case
This is well defined, save for possibly the fact that 4 is written as
4 and not offsetof () and uncontested.
The case I think you're thinking of was upcasting; - offsetof(). It
was decided. The d
On Dec 29, 2005, at 1:01 PM, Leif Ekblad wrote:
OK, I found unwind-dw2.c in the GCC directory. I also found
the object files in the linux host directory, but not in the RDOS
cross
compilation directory. I cannot run the GCC configuration process
natively on RDOS (yet), so I must somehow build
On Dec 29, 2005, at 12:16 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > I guess we just have to wait till GCC is miscompiled (probably by
| > itself) to see whether the Middle End would cite chapter and
verse :-)
I suspect that humor does not travel well through emails :-) Sorry.
As my 4 year old would
On Dec 29, 2005, at 11:45 AM, Leif Ekblad wrote:
However, now I still get unresolved externals related to C++
exception-handling (_Unwind_resume
and so on).
mrs $ nm libgcc_s.1.dylib | grep Unwind_Re
8c24 T __Unwind_Resume
mrs $ nm libgcc/unwind-dw2.o | grep Unwind_Res
24c0 T __Unwind
On Dec 29, 2005, at 11:32 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
I believe, but I'm not sure, that GCC is using type puning not
guaranteed to work (except "common sense" from "obvious model".)
I think the C family of language standards should think about the
issue and clarify their exact intent... I kn
On Dec 29, 2005, at 10:39 AM, Domagoj D wrote:
Also, not all identifiers in all languages have an ht_identifier,
again, for example, java doesn't.
Hmm... But tree_identifier in tree.h has an ht_identifier struct. So,
is gcc/tree.h C-specific?
Oops, uhm, I mean, just checking to make sure you'
On Dec 29, 2005, at 8:37 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
As far as I can tell the -fobjc-exceptions flag is supposed to
work with the GNU runtime as of GCC 4.0. However, invoke.texi
still states that "Currently, this option is only available in
conjunction with the NeXT runtime on Mac OS X 10.3 and
On Dec 29, 2005, at 12:38 AM, Domagoj D wrote:
Sorry, I didn't see that each identifier *is* a lang_identifier,
that's
a weird way to keep bindings. It's not that easy for someone new to
GCC
to get around the code. What was the design decision behind that hack
(instead of something like:
str
On Dec 28, 2005, at 11:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any options in converting assembly code to c using
gcc as u
convert c code to assmbly.
Yes, but they are all poor to very poor. see google("decompilers").
Anyway, this is off-topic for this list.
On Dec 28, 2005, at 8:49 PM, Domagoj D wrote:
Can anyone explain me the following gcc/c-decl.c code (4.0.2, seems to
be unchanged in 4.2)?
What part was unclear?
#define I_SYMBOL_BINDING(node) \
(((struct lang_identifier *)
IDENTIFIER_NODE_CHECK(node))->symbol_binding)
Yes, each identifie
On Dec 22, 2005, at 5:28 AM, Piotr Wyderski wrote:
I am trying to compile my low-level library, which contains
several inline assembly functions. It doesn't work, because
the compiler (4.0.1) does not replace local labels from the
assembly code (i.e. "0:", "1:", etc.) with their machine-specific
On Dec 22, 2005, at 1:54 AM, Liu Haibin wrote:
I'd like to add some source and header files into gcc. I think I
probably need to make some change in Makefile.in. But the Makefile.in
looks very complicated. Could anyone give some advice on this?
google("make tutorial"). After that, you can just
On Dec 19, 2005, at 5:34 PM, Jim Blandy wrote:
On 12/19/05, Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But it doesn't do what people really want it to by design. :-(
And that would be?
http://subversion.tigris.org/faq.html#version-value-in-source
I would like something, that
On Dec 18, 2005, at 2:17 PM, Kevin Andrew Kaploe wrote:
are they telling the truth?
Simple answer, Yes. The long answer is off-topic for this list.
A hint at the long answer lies in dependencies. If those are
precisely in sync, then there is no point at recompilation. If they
are out of
On Dec 19, 2005, at 2:56 PM, Jim Blandy wrote:
Subversion provides an "opt-in" version of keyword substitution, and
provides a $Revision$ keyword.
But it doesn't do what people really want it to by design. :-(
On Dec 17, 2005, at 10:27 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Dec 18, 2005, at 1:13 AM, Geoff Keating wrote:
Yes; to do this right, GCC's builtins need to know about the
different names.
If you're interested in fixing this, I can tell you what to do...
I figured out how to fix it and will be posti
On Dec 17, 2005, at 6:08 AM, FX Coudert wrote:
I'm trying to understand the gfortran failure large_real_kind_2.F90
on ppc-darwin7.9, which can be reduced to:
$ cat large_real_kind_2.F90
real(kind=16) :: x
real(8) :: y
x = 1
y = x
x = cos (x)
y = cos (y)
print *, x, y, y-x
end
On Jun 20, 2005, at 2:41 PM, Bradley Lucier wrote:
I can't seem to build any 64-bit shared library on powerpc-apple-
darwin8.1.0, although I can now run the test suite more
effectively; see
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22110
and
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-06/m
On Dec 16, 2005, at 3:05 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
$subject - since a day now.
Thanks, fixed.
On Dec 16, 2005, at 6:23 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
A simple summary would be very helpful in trying to figure out what i
want to do now.
I'm sure most of the functionality exists, i'm just not sure what it's
called anymore :)
A wiki page that has the mapping from the old style to the new style
On Dec 14, 2005, at 3:31 PM, Andrija Radičević wrote:
I'm trying to port gcc and binutils to a new target and I hoped to
find
a brief procedure on that matter on the net, but was unsuccessful. OK,
the GCC internals is quite a resourceful document and one can learn a
lot by examining the source
On Dec 14, 2005, at 12:52 PM, Paul Martinolich wrote:
I have built gcc-4.1-20051209 successfully and while using it to
try to
compile Python-2.4.2, I get this error:
/Users/martinol/auto_v4.0/devel/powerpc-apple-darwin8.3.0/bin/gcc -
c -fno-strict-aliasing -Wno-long-double -no-cpp-precomp -mn
501 - 600 of 928 matches
Mail list logo
