--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization, ra
Target Milestone|---
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 13:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=16338)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16338action=view)
gcc44-pr37536.patch
So far untested patch to optimize slightly integer type non-simple do loops.
At least on
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 13:10 ---
ifcombine would be a place to do this CFG re-writing.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 13:11 ---
There is no such target as rpine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from reuben dot kraft at gmail dot com 2008-09-16 13:13
---
My problem looks very similar to this bug report which does not seem to be full
resolved:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36349
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37527
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 13:14 ---
There's a dup for this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37539
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 13:20 ---
./cc1 -quiet -O2 t1.i t2.i
t2.i: In function 'Node_print':
t2.i:2: error: non-trivial conversion at assignment
struct _IO_FILE *
struct _IO_FILE *
# LOADS: { stderr }
stderr.0_3 = stderr;
t2.i:2: error:
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 16, 2008, at 6:20 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16
13:20 ---
./cc1 -quiet -O2 t1.i t2.i
t2.i: In function 'Node_print':
t2.i:2: error: non-trivial conversion
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2008-09-16 13:29 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] ICE using --combine -O2
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 16, 2008, at 6:20 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
Hi Guys,
Sometime during the last month building newlib for any of the MIPS
ports broke with a gimple verification error:
.../newlib/libc/stdio/vfprintf.c:480: error: type mismatch in binary expression
unsigned char
unsigned char
int
D.3477 = D.3438 -8;
[...]
--- Comment #1 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-09-16 14:41 ---
As far as I can tell, all the lines corresponding to ...error: expected...
start with a '-', but the same is true for Darwin8. Does anyone know what has
changed in Darwin9 that can explain the errors?
--
--- Comment #2 from ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de 2008-09-16
15:02 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 regression] All Solaris/x86 eh tests fail
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org writes:
gas 2.15 is helplessly outdated and buggy. Can you retry with
-fno-dwarf2-cfi-asm ?
Unfortunately,
--- Comment #4 from amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 15:12
---
A patch for this bug has been posted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-09/msg01135.html
Running the testcase on similarly configured compiler shows 2.47 seconds spent
in scheduling2, out of 151.27 total
Related to the XFAIL of gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-pre-15.c (PR37145). The general
issue is that PRE doesn't simplify expressions during phi-translation
which can be seen for example for
int foo (int i, int b)
{
int j = 1;
if (b)
j = i;
return j - i;
}
where j - i is partially redundant.
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 15:22 ---
Mine. I have some patches.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 15:29 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Hi Andrew,
Does this do it for you or is this all to rarified for this
Bear-of-little-brain to follow?
D.1359 = *start - *offset;
D.1360 = *end + *offset;
D.1361 = *step;
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 15:34 ---
Hm, actually this is a regression :/ 4.3 produces
foo (i, b)
{
int prephitmp.7;
int pretmp.6;
int j;
int D.1550;
bb 2:
if (b_3(D) != 0)
goto bb 3;
else
goto bb 5;
bb 5:
pretmp.6_8 = 1 -
--- Comment #28 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 15:52 ---
The AIX systems to which I have access also are AIX 5.3.0.0 TL 07.
My GCC configure command only specifies the languages and where to find GMP and
MRPF. I had been using gmp-4.1.4 static archive library, but recently
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 15:55 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
(In reply to comment #2)
Hi Andrew,
Does this do it for you or is this all to rarified for this
Bear-of-little-brain to follow?
D.1359 = *start - *offset;
D.1360 = *end +
bash-2.05b$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-4.4-20080912/configure
--enable-languages=ada,c++,fortran
--with-mpfr=/home/voax/linux/tools/mpfr-2.2.1
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.4.0 20080912 (experimental) (GCC)
when compiling the hello.adb
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 16:12 ---
Did you compile the compiler yourself? If not, do know what version of
binutils they used?
Also what version of as/binutils are you are using?
cfi_personality is only in supported in newer versions of binutils.
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 16:21 ---
Fixed at least on the trunk.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 16:23 ---
Subject: Bug 37263
Author: pinskia
Date: Tue Sep 16 16:21:35 2008
New Revision: 140395
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=140395
Log:
2008-09-16 Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #2 from anhvofrcaus at gmail dot com 2008-09-16 16:34 ---
Yes, I built the compiler myself. In fact, the configuration for this build is:
bash-2.05b$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-4.4-20080912/configure
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 16:36 ---
It is hanging in vectorizable_load.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
with: ../gcc/configure --enable-checking=release
--prefix=/home/jdemeyer/local CC=gcc-4.1.2
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.4.0 20080916 (experimental) (GCC)
--
Summary: Conversion double - unsigned long long - unsigned -
double gives wrong results
Product: gcc
--- Comment #1 from jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be 2008-09-16 16:40
---
Created an attachment (id=16339)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16339action=view)
Testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37544
--- Comment #6 from vmakarov at redhat dot com 2008-09-16 16:47 ---
John, thanks for detail analysis. IRA uses 25 for p171 because there is no
recorded conflicts for p171 and hard register 25. The problem was introduced
by recent patch
2008-09-04 Richard Sandiford [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 16:52 ---
This works correctly for i386-darwin.
In fact I tried -std=c99 -O1 -mfpmath=387 -march=pentium4 -mno-sse too.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37544
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 03:33:21PM +0100, Nick Clifton wrote:
Hi Guys,
Sometime during the last month building newlib for any of the MIPS
ports broke with a gimple verification error:
../newlib/libc/stdio/vfprintf.c:480: error: type mismatch in binary expression
unsigned char
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 17:09 ---
ICEs in finish_decltype_type.
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 17:12 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
There is no such target as rpine.
More to the point, bug reports submitted against a non supported target is not
the correct thing to do. You should debug the compiler and maybe write an
--- Comment #5 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2008-09-16 17:16
---
Your patch fixes the problem for me, thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37499
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 17:21 ---
Valgrind no longer complains for this testcase, but the I still get the
reported ICE compiling q_matrix.c with -O3 -ftree-loop-linear.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37031
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 17:23 ---
I doubt the FSF GCC has ever supported the AmigaOS as a target.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #29 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 17:40 ---
I bootstrap GCC using GCC 4.1. I assume you use GCC 4.2 distributed by IBM.
I do not understand your comment in the initial report about forward porting
of the 4.2.0 patches.
--
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 17:51 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Hi Andrew,
Does this do it for you or is this all to rarified for this
Bear-of-little-brain to follow?
D.1359 = *start - *offset;
D.1360 = *end + *offset;
D.1361 = *step;
--- Comment #3 from nospamname at web dot de 2008-09-16 18:13 ---
thanks for info, i look and see that in gcc/config.gcc is no amigaos
target.also in gcc3.4 source here is not.
I see 2.95 have this file not.
but on other files 4.3.2 here the target is. Is there somewhere listet if it
triplet: 20080916 (experimental) [trunk revision 140386]
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu Mandriva 2007.1
GCC target triplet: GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37545
--- Comment #30 from jorn dot amundsen at ntnu dot no 2008-09-16 18:23
---
(In reply to comment #29)
I bootstrap GCC using GCC 4.1. I assume you use GCC 4.2 distributed by IBM.
I usually use the currently installed gcc-version, which might be more recent
than 4.2.
I do not
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 18:26 ---
Did you compile gfortran yourself or are you using a prebuilt package?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 18:27 ---
Closing as WONTFIX.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #31 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 18:34 ---
No, I do not use any patches from IBM. The patches seem to be focussed on
packaging and layout, but I would recommend using the standard FSF GCC 4.3.2
release plus the pt.c patch that now is upstream in the FSF GCC
--- Comment #3 from jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be 2008-09-16 18:39
---
In fact, with -mno-sse the problem disappears for me too.
I *do* get the problem with
gcc -std=c99 -O1 -march=i386 -msse2 -mfpmath=387
--
jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be changed:
What
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 18:44 ---
Still works correctly on i386-darwin but that might be because PIC is turned on
by default.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37544
--- Comment #2 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 18:50 ---
Mandriva 2007.1
What's the version of your glibc? If less than 2.6, try upgrading.
I guess this is a downloaded package that meets an (somewhat) outdated system
...
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #9 from chaoyingfu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 18:54
---
Hi,
I tried the following patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-09/msg00195.html
.weak symbol can be emitted, but with two same lines. Thanks!
Ex:
.file 1 152.c
.section
--- Comment #32 from jorn dot amundsen at ntnu dot no 2008-09-16 19:09
---
(In reply to comment #31)
No, I do not use any patches from IBM. The patches seem to be focussed on
packaging and layout, but I would recommend using the standard FSF GCC 4.3.2
release plus the pt.c patch
--- Comment #10 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 19:15 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
Hi,
I tried the following patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-09/msg00195.html
.weak symbol can be emitted, but with two same lines. Thanks!
So that would bring you
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 19:17 ---
Confirmed on i686-linux with -std=c99 -O -msse2 -mfpmath=387 -march=i386.
Fails
since GCC 3.4 at least.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 19:17 ---
unassigning. The BE workaround bypasses it for me, no time to look further.
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
triplet: 20080916 (experimental) [trunk revision 140386]
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu Mandriva 2007.1
GCC target triplet: GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37546
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 19:34 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 37545 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 19:34 ---
*** Bug 37546 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37545
--- Comment #33 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 20:00 ---
I have not tried MPFR as a shared library.
One thing to be careful about with shared libraries on AIX is libpath. libtool
configured for gmp and mpfr decides to hardcode the path and finds all of the
GCC build
--- Comment #5 from schwab at suse dot de 2008-09-16 21:00 ---
Reverting this change in commutative_operand_precedence fixes the testcase:
case RTX_OBJ:
/* Complex expressions should be the first, so decrease priority
- of objects. */
- return -1;
+ of
--- Comment #6 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-09-16 21:02 ---
But that was the meat of fixing PR28690. :-(
The insn should satisfy the constraints of alternative 4.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37053
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:04 ---
Subject: Bug 36889
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 16 22:02:37 2008
New Revision: 140398
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=140398
Log:
PR testsuite/36889
* lib/fortran-torture.exp
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:05 ---
Subject: Bug 37532
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 16 22:03:57 2008
New Revision: 140399
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=140399
Log:
PR c++/37532
* lex.c (init_reswords): Don't
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:06 ---
Subject: Bug 37531
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 16 22:05:15 2008
New Revision: 140400
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=140400
Log:
PR c++/37531
* semantics.c
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:07 ---
Subject: Bug 37530
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 16 22:06:28 2008
New Revision: 140401
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=140401
Log:
PR c++/37530
* gimplify.c (gimplify_expr) case
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:09 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:09 ---
Subject: Bug 37529
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 16 22:08:01 2008
New Revision: 140402
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=140402
Log:
PR c/37529
* gimplify.c (gimplify_expr) case
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:09 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:09 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:10 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:10 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:16 ---
And in fact the patch which fixed this one also fixed PR 37505.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37530
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:17 ---
An ifcombine optimization is certainly desirable, still IMHO it makes sense to
do something about it in the FE too. The vanilla f951 generated code contains
essentially 3 different conditional expressions on step 0,
--- Comment #8 from nemet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:17 ---
Subject: Bug 37483
Author: nemet
Date: Tue Sep 16 22:15:49 2008
New Revision: 140403
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=140403
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/37483
* ifcvt.c
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:17 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:20 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 37530 ***
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:20 ---
*** Bug 37505 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-09-16 22:21 ---
/opt/gcc/i686-darwin/gcc/xgcc -B/opt/gcc/i686-darwin/gcc/
/opt/gcc/gcc-4.4-work/gcc/testsuite/objc/execute/bycopy-1.m -w -O0
-fnext-runtime -lobjc -lm -o
/opt/gcc/i686-darwin/gcc/testsuite/objc/bycopy-1.x1
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-09-16 22:22 ---
Created an attachment (id=16340)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16340action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34310
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:30 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 7098 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:30 ---
*** Bug 34310 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:31 ---
Grrr, looks like Apple's Runtime headers in Mac OS X 10.5 have attributes on
the methods :(.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7098
--- Comment #22 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-16 22:59 ---
Created an attachment (id=16341)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16341action=view)
gcc44-pr36741.patch
Only lightly tested patch that reverts the tree.c change and instead does size
computation in
--- Comment #62 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-17 00:08 ---
Subject: Bug 25241
Author: janis
Date: Wed Sep 17 00:06:57 2008
New Revision: 140405
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=140405
Log:
PR testsuite/25241
*
The following testcase fails (with -std=gnu++0x):
#include utility
#include algorithm
#include vector
using namespace std;
int main()
{
vectorint v{1,2,3,4,5};
auto p = minmax({v});
if (p.first != v) std::abort();
return 0;
}
The value of v is something like [random number, 0, 3, 4,
The C program below prints the full string xyz both times. I am using
GNU C version 4.1.2 20070925 (Red Hat 4.1.2-27) (x86_64-redhat-linux)
compiled by GNU C version 4.1.2 20070925 (Red Hat 4.1.2-27).
---
#include
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-17 01:00 ---
The field width is not taken into account if there is more than that width.
You also need to specify the precision.
printf(\n the 4 leftmost characters of xyz are: \%.4s\\n\n,xyz);
Will work. Note the . there.
--- Comment #7 from vmakarov at redhat dot com 2008-09-17 01:10 ---
The patch I mentioned contains the following code at the end of
ira-lives.c::process_bb_node_lives
for all uses: mark uses as live
for all clobbers: mark them as live
for all clobbers: mark them dead
The r25 are in
The docs for preprocessor -dD flag states
`D'
Like `M' except in two respects: it does _not_ include the
predefined macros
So one would expect -dD and -dM to differ substantially.
But
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ~ $ gcc -E -dM -x c /dev/null | sort /tmp/t1
([EMAIL
The preprocessor symbol __MMX__ indicates whether this gcc
includes mmx support. This is extremely useful, but undocumented.
I only found out by finding the symbol in other peoples' code.
The particular symbol __MMX__ should be documented in
the obvious place, namely where the -mmmx flag is
How do I find out whether a particular gcc supports a
particular subarchitecture, e.g. MMX instructions, by default?
If the gcc has been configured --with-arch=,
I can get that value using:
gcc -v --help 21 | grep 'Configured with'
but if the arch has defaulted based on the target triplet,
it
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 16, 2008, at 7:44 PM, martinrb at google dot com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
How do I find out whether a particular gcc supports a
particular subarchitecture, e.g. MMX instructions, by default?
If the gcc has been configured --with-arch=,
I can get that value
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2008-09-17 03:09 ---
Subject: Re: New: gcc help should provide subarchitecture details
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 16, 2008, at 7:44 PM, martinrb at google dot com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
How do I find out whether a particular gcc
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 16, 2008, at 7:35 PM, martinrb at google dot com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The preprocessor symbol __MMX__ indicates whether this gcc
includes mmx support. This is extremely useful, but undocumented.
I only found out by finding the symbol in other peoples' code.
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 16, 2008, at 7:25 PM, martinrb at google dot com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The docs for preprocessor -dD flag states
`D'
Like `M' except in two respects: it does _not_ include the
predefined macros
I think what it means by predefines are
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2008-09-17 03:12 ---
Subject: Re: New: Please document predefined sub-architecture support macros
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 16, 2008, at 7:35 PM, martinrb at google dot com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The preprocessor symbol __MMX__
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2008-09-17 03:13 ---
Subject: Re: New: gcc -E -dD prints predefined macros, contrary to docs
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 16, 2008, at 7:25 PM, martinrb at google dot com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The docs for preprocessor -dD flag
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-17 04:13
---
Created an attachment (id=16342)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16342action=view)
Partial patch - reordering of st_parameter_dt structure
I think I may know why the attached patch does not
--- Comment #2 from martinrb at google dot com 2008-09-17 04:27 ---
I tried to check how -dM and -dD treats macros defined on the command line
and in the source file:
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ~/src/toy $ cat foo.c
#define FOO 1
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ~/src/toy $ gcc -E -dM -x c -DBAR=1 foo.c |
97 matches
Mail list logo
