Hi,
add missing documentation for the mnemonic attribute.
Ok?
Bye,
-Andreas-
2013-05-24 Andreas Krebbel andreas.kreb...@de.ibm.com
* doc/md.texi: Document the mnemonic attribute.
---
gcc/doc/md.texi | 67 +++!
1 file changed,
Hi,
any comments regarding this patch?
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-04/msg00993.html
Bye,
-Andreas-
*ping*
2013/4/11 Alexander Ivchenko aivch...@gmail.com:
Hi,
The same motivation as for:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2013-03/msg00786.html
Since -fpic option is turned on by default in Android we have certain test
fails. The reason for that is that those tests rely on the
availability of
2013/5/24 Xinyu Qi x...@marvell.com:
Hi,
For this simple case, compiled with option -march=iwmmxt -O,
#define N 64
signed int b[N];
signed long long j[N], d[N];
void foo (void)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i N; i++)
j[i] = d[i] b[i];
}
An internal compiler error occurs,
error:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:54:05PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
Agreed, that seems the best course of action if that's an option.
I just remembered that we aren't there yet even on mainline:
* This snippet
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01255.html
is necessary to avoid
I've found it is good to have also one mode to invalidate a register for
all uses; it seems natural to use VOIDmode for that, and then we can use
BLKmode for all but the first hard register of a multi-hard-reg register.
OK, that sounds sensible.
I have attached the patch that makes the
2013-05-19 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR tree-optimization/57322
* (build_and_add_sum): If a BB is empty, set the UID of the
statement added to the BB to be 1.
Missing filename in the ChangeLog.
--
Eric Botcazou
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
This addresses the case where UID alone is not sufficient to figure
out which statement appears earlier in a BB. Bootstraps and no test
regressions in x86_64 on linux. Ok for trunk?
Why not simply conservatively use
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
Hello,
this is a simple patch to reduce a bit the noise in PR57324 (undefined
behavior flagged by clang). I only handled some of the most obvious ones.
Passes bootstrap+testsuite on x86_64-linux-gnu.
Hm, so ISO C99 says
On 23 May 2013 21:56, Rainer Orth wrote:
Right, it only got enable by defaulting --enable-libstdcxx-time to auto.
I think it would have been enabled previously with
--enable-libstdcxx-time=rt, but it wasn't tested and so didn't make it
into the linker script at the same time as the GNU symbol
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:42 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/23/2013 02:59 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 02:44:48PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
On 05/23/2013 02:31 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
I think we need more weigh in from other maintainers on this, rather
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:23 AM, Alexander Ivchenko aivch...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
The following patch fixes PR57385
(http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57385)
diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLog
index 51e7b9e..cca61e7 100644
--- a/gcc/ChangeLog
+++ b/gcc/ChangeLog
@@
With the attached change, the compiler willl now take into account the subtype
constraints added by renaming discriminants in the derivation of untagged
discriminated types to determine the size of mutable objects of the derived
types, instead of using the same size as for the root type.
On Fri, 24 May 2013, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
Hello,
this is a simple patch to reduce a bit the noise in PR57324 (undefined
behavior flagged by clang). I only handled some of the most obvious ones.
Passes
On Thu, 23 May 2013, Christophe Lyon wrote:
This patch mentions Address Sanitizer on ARM in the gcc-4.9/changes.html
pages. (and re-enables the General Optimizer Improvements section)
Is it OK to commit?
Looks good to me, thanks!
Gerald
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
On Fri, 24 May 2013, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
Hello,
this is a simple patch to reduce a bit the noise in PR57324 (undefined
behavior flagged by
Quoting Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com:
+static bool
+move2add_valid_value_p (int regno, enum machine_mode mode)
[...]
+ for (i = hard_regno_nregs[regno][mode] - 1; i 0; i--)
+if (reg_mode[i] != BLKmode)
+ return false;
I think that a 'regno' is missing in the second hunk.
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:15:29AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
Hello,
this is a simple patch to reduce a bit the noise in PR57324 (undefined
behavior flagged by clang). I only handled some of the most obvious ones.
Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com writes:
On 23 May 2013 21:56, Rainer Orth wrote:
Right, it only got enable by defaulting --enable-libstdcxx-time to auto.
I think it would have been enabled previously with
--enable-libstdcxx-time=rt, but it wasn't tested and so didn't make it
into the
2013/5/24 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com:
So, let's talk about other options, is constexpr/const on
std::chrono::steady_clock::is_steady
required by the standard (as in, could we export
_ZNSt6chrono12steady_clock9is_steadyE@@GLIBCXX_3.4.19
and let the library say which case it is, it would be
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 09:57:05AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Thus, what about this version (just slightly modified, headers remain the
same, but we export _ZNSt6chrono12steady_clock3nowEv@@GLIBCXX_3.4.19
even if monotonic clock isn't supported, it will just be work the same as
Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com writes:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:54:05PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
Agreed, that seems the best course of action if that's an option.
I just remembered that we aren't there yet even on mainline:
* This snippet
Hi Tobias,
Rainer Orth wrote:
how should we proceed with this patch now, given the questions above?
Install as is, although it doesn't seem really beneficial, or drop it?
I would install it. Actually, did you get a libquadmath dependence on
Solaris or not?
I do, both with Solaris ld and
Adding back community
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Kirill Yukhin kirill.yuk...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok for trunk and 4.8 after 4.8.1 is out.
Checked in to trunk:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2013-05/msg00803.html (+
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2013-05/msg00804.html for missed test).
This is the gigi bits to enable support for pragma No_Inline in the Ada
compiler. Nothing more to say, except that specifying also pragma Inline
yields a warning and specifying also pragma Inline_Always is an error.
Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on the mainline.
2013-05-24 Eric
This (partially) coordinates the floating-point settings of the front-end and
the middle-end for the Ada compiler:
- if Machine_Overflows is set to True, -ftrapping-math is enabled in the
compiler; otherwise, it is disabled (unless overridden by the user).
- if Signed_Zeros is set to True,
On May 22, 2013 23:28Tobias Burnus wrote:
A rather simple patch found while testing the draft finalization patch.
For a class(...), allocatable, intent(out) dummy argument, the
actual argument has to be deallocated. That worked for scalar
polymorphic vars, but not for polymorphic arrays.
Hi,
both issues already fixed. Committed to mainline.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/
2013-05-24 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com
PR c++/26572
* g++.dg/template/error51.C: New.
2013-05-24 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com
PR c++/25503
*
Hi Michael,
- What about define_insn_and_split? Currently, we can define
predicable
for a define_insn_and_split,
Yes, you're right. Currently define_subst cannot be applied to
define_insn_and_split. That's not implemented yet because I didn't
see
a real usages of define_substs with these
Hello,
I'd like to fix this ancient PR.
The attached patch picks up the suggested changes mentioned in comment
#3 to avoid changing the FPSCR.FR bit in the sdivsi3_i4 and udivsi3_i4
library functions. As mentioned in the PR, this makes integer division
a bit slower when using -mdiv=call-fp, but
Unfortunately, that is a strong point against define_subst in my case,
since on arm we have more than 400 predicable patterns, of we which we
might want to modify dozens to perform this cond_exec restriction.
And creating custom subst-attributes for each one would really make
things hard to
Bionic prior to Gingerbread doesn't support sincos*, but upstream GCC
enables sincos optimization for OPTION_BIONIC unconditionally since
4.6. I'd like to propose a new flag -foptimize-sincos for NDK to
maintain backward compatibility.
1. For BIONIC: sincos optimization is disabled by default.
After spending some time to try retaining some abnormal SSA name
uninitialized uses I gave up and just punt like below.
Bootstrap / regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Richard.
2013-05-24 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
PR tree-optimization/57287
*
Unfortunately, that is a strong point against define_subst in my
case,
since on arm we have more than 400 predicable patterns, of we
which we
might want to modify dozens to perform this cond_exec
restriction.
And creating custom subst-attributes for each one would really
make
things
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Andrew Hsieh andrewhs...@google.com wrote:
Bionic prior to Gingerbread doesn't support sincos*, but upstream GCC
enables sincos optimization for OPTION_BIONIC unconditionally since
4.6. I'd like to propose a new flag -foptimize-sincos for NDK to
maintain
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:10:18PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
That's a pretty awful option name for one that makes us assume the target
C library has a sincos function.
I'd rather think about a way to specify, for all known builtins, whether GCC
should generate calls to such function where
Richard, the target hook (libc_has_function) for what you described is
waiting for a review:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-03/msg01201.html
However, it doesn't have command line options support.
Alexander
2013/5/24 Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at
Predictive commoning thinks that { a, +, a + 1 } and { 2 * a, +, a + 1 }
are just 1 iteration apart because when verifying if the difference
between a and 2*a is a multiple of a + 1 it falls into the trap
of double_int_constant_multiple_p returning true (but not initializing
a multiplier) for the
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:10:18PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
That's a pretty awful option name for one that makes us assume the target
C library has a sincos function.
I'd rather think about a way to specify, for all
Hi,
I think we can resolve this very old issue too: we don't warn at all for
bitfields of size exceeding the type when it's bool or enum. I have no
idea why historically we decided to not do that, but certainly all the
modern compilers I have at hand do warn, by default, thus it seems safe
This patch (trunk r198547)
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg00061.html
fixes an ICE in gcc 4.8:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56732
Ok to backport to 4.8 branch?
Thanks,
Greta
-Original Message-
From: Richard Earnshaw
Sent: 02 May 2013 15:45
To: Greta Yorsh
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:23:45PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
But for example memset/memcpy always have that set, even if no prototype
is in the source. So, is that decl_implicit_p really supposed to tell us
whether we've seen a compatible prototype?
decl_implicit_p isn't whether we've seen
On 05/24/13 13:26, Greta Yorsh wrote:
This patch (trunk r198547)
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg00061.html
fixes an ICE in gcc 4.8:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56732
Ok to backport to 4.8 branch?
Ok.
regards
Ramana
Thanks,
Greta
gcc/ChangeLog
2013-05-02
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:23:45PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
But for example memset/memcpy always have that set, even if no prototype
is in the source. So, is that decl_implicit_p really supposed to tell us
whether
As things stand now, if predicable is set to no for a particular
alternative, the value of control_attr is irrelevant, that alternative
will never have a cond_exec version. In your scheme, however,
the presence of subst_predicated triggers the creation of cond_exec
variants for all of the
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
Thanks. I wasn't aware of that wiki page. I'll be reading it today :-)
The .odp attachment is actually a bit more informative, you should
take a look at that too, if you have the time.
Comments welcome, so I can include that in the new .texi
Hi!
This patch contains C++ parser changes etc. to handle
#pragma omp {teams,target {,data,update},distribute} parsing
all the way through till omp lowering (it bombs badly in omp expansion,
but already omp lowering will need to be tought out).
Things not handled yet are #pragma omp declare
Hi,
Bootstrap and regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Zdenek, does this look ok? double_int_constant_multiple_p seems to
be only used from aff_combination_constant_multiple_p.
yes,
Zdenek
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 04:50:34PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
This is a simple oversight in the ref-qualifier code.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. Jakub, is this OK for 4.8.1?
Ok, thanks.
commit 0914d39b7335966f5d828c1b4225beb2e5448755
Author: Jason Merrill
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:00:26AM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com writes:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:54:05PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
Agreed, that seems the best course of action if that's an option.
I just remembered that we aren't there yet even on
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
Thanks. I wasn't aware of that wiki page. I'll be reading it today :-)
The .odp attachment is actually a bit more informative, you should
take a look at that too, if you have the time.
Comments welcome, so I can include that in the new
Hi,
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:38:10AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, 23 May 2013, Eric Botcazou wrote:
earlier this week I asked on IRC whether we could have non-top-level
BIT_FIELD_REFs and Richi said that we could. However, when I later
looked at SRA code, quite apparently
Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com writes:
It occured to me that there might be a far less intrusive option to still
allow a Solaris backport: instead of going the libstdc++.spec route
(which I still think is the correct way forward), statically handle -lrt
addition in g++spec.c, controlled by a
Why would we want to pedwarn? As far as I can tell, the standard
doesn't say this is ill-formed. 9.6 says,
The value of the integral constant expression may be larger than the
number of bits in the object representation (3.9) of the bit-field’s
type; in such cases the extra bits are used as
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 03:35:15PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
I've posted today wouldn't work well on Solaris?
It should work on the 4.8 branch (I'll include it in my bootstraps this
weekend), but on mainline the failures due to missing nanosleep/-lrt
will remain.
Thanks. Please make sure
Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com writes:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 03:35:15PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
I've posted today wouldn't work well on Solaris?
It should work on the 4.8 branch (I'll include it in my bootstraps this
weekend), but on mainline the failures due to missing nanosleep/-lrt
On 24 May 2013 14:40, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Note that for 4.8.1 this is kind of urgent, because it is blocking 4.8.1-rc2
and thus also 4.8.1 release, so the sooner this gets resolved, the better.
Sorry about that, I didn't realise the trunk change would affect 4.8.1
Jonathan/Benjamin, could
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:56:24PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Jonathan/Benjamin, could you please review the patch in the mean time,
so that if it works well for Rainer, it can be applied immediately and
4.8.1-rc2 rolled, even during the weekend?
In the fallback for
On Fri, 24 May 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:15:29AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
Hello,
this is a simple patch to reduce a bit the noise in PR57324 (undefined
behavior flagged by clang). I only
On 05/24/2013 01:53 AM, David Edelsohn wrote:
Also, you are not updating testsuite/ChangeLog.
http://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html#ChangeLogs says There is no
established convention on when ChangeLog entries are to be made for
testsuite changes.
I prefer not to mess with
On 24 May 2013 15:07, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:56:24PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Jonathan/Benjamin, could you please review the patch in the mean time,
so that if it works well for Rainer, it can be applied immediately and
4.8.1-rc2 rolled, even
When FMA_EXPR was added to potential_constant_expression_1, it wasn't
added to cxx_eval_constant_expression at the same time...
Regression tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. David, can
you verify that this fixes bootstrap on AIX?
commit a78fee4d0a9c2a353637f239c6ac189227248491
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 04:07:48PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:56:24PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Jonathan/Benjamin, could you please review the patch in the mean time,
so that if it works well for Rainer, it can be applied immediately and
4.8.1-rc2 rolled,
On 24 May 2013 15:16, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 04:07:48PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:56:24PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Jonathan/Benjamin, could you please review the patch in the mean time,
so that if it works well for
Hi,
On 05/24/2013 03:36 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
Why would we want to pedwarn? As far as I can tell, the standard
doesn't say this is ill-formed. 9.6 says,
The value of the integral constant expression may be larger than the
number of bits in the object representation (3.9) of the
On 05/24/2013 04:16 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
When FMA_EXPR was added to potential_constant_expression_1, it wasn't
added to cxx_eval_constant_expression at the same time...
Sorry.
Paolo.
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 03:29:43PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
in the latter). And there is no conversion in between the two.
Perhaps I'd have to do something like:
return time_point(system_clock::now().time_since_epoch());
? Can try that.
Ah, but the duration can be different
2013-05-23 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz
* tree-cfg.c (verify_expr): Verify that BIT_FIELD_REFs, IMAGPART_EXPRs
and REALPART_EXPRs have scalar type.
I cannot formally approve, but this looks the right test to me.
--
Eric Botcazou
On Fri, 24 May 2013, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
Hello,
this is a simple patch to reduce a bit the noise in PR57324 (undefined
behavior flagged by clang). I only handled some of the most obvious ones.
Passes
Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com writes:
So, adjusted patches attached, ok for trunk/4.8 if they pass
bootstrap/regtest? Guess Rainer will need to on top of that adjust
Solaris baseline_symbols.txt files.
I meant to look into that, but usually I only update the baselines for
x.y.0 releases,
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 05:05:52PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
2013-05-23 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz
* tree-cfg.c (verify_expr): Verify that BIT_FIELD_REFs, IMAGPART_EXPRs
and REALPART_EXPRs have scalar type.
I cannot formally approve, but this looks the right test to me.
Hi,
when modifying an indirectly recursively called function, IPA-SRA may
remove a statement for which we have already gathered references in
the symbol table and replace it with new statement(s), making the
symbol table information stale which can lead to problems like PR
57294.
The patch below
2013-05-24 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz
* cgraph.h (ipa_record_stmt_references): Declare.
* cgraphbuild.c (ipa_record_stmt_references): New function.
(build_cgraph_edges): Use ipa_record_stmt_references.
(rebuild_cgraph_edges): Likewise.
As things stand now, if predicable is set to no for a
particular
alternative, the value of control_attr is irrelevant, that
alternative
will never have a cond_exec version. In your scheme, however,
the presence of subst_predicated triggers the creation of
cond_exec
variants for all of
On 24 May 2013 16:03, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
So, adjusted patches attached, ok for trunk/4.8 if they pass
bootstrap/regtest?
Yes, they're OK - thanks for sorting it out.
On 24 May 2013 16:20, Gedare Bloom wrote:
Updated patch attached to address the comments. I was not able to
figure out how to build the libstdc++ documentation to verify my doc
changes although I did run xmllint successfully.
Did you see
2013/5/23 Chung-Ju Wu jasonw...@gmail.com:
The patch is revised accordingly as follows:
- The tar files, including gmp/mpfr/mpc/isl/cloog, are left under directory.
- In the shell script, we should use '=' as equality comparison operator.
Thanks for the review comments and Paolo's
The following patch contains some changes needed for porting LRA to
rs6000 and s390.
The patch was successfully bootstrapped on x86/x86-64.
Committed as rev. 199298.
2013-05-24 Vladimir Makarov vmaka...@redhat.com
* lra-constraints.c (emit_spill_move): Use smaller mode for
I agree it is desirable, but is it enough to ensure that they will be only
toplevel? Can't you e.g. do a VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR from an integer type or
floating/vector type etc. to struct type, then the verifier wouldn't
discover there is VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR struct S, BIT_FIELD_REFwhatever, 0,
32?
On 13-05-23 4:51 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
Ping**2
Steven, sorry for the delay. The patch is ok. Thanks for better
documentation too. We need it as the scheduler is becoming more and
more complicated.
2013/5/23 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com:
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 08:30:35PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
The arrays of thresholds in gcc/bb-reorder.c appear not to have changed
since 2004 (in r80564).
As part of my hope of quashing global state in gcc, I'd like to mark
them as const.
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com wrote:
When FMA_EXPR was added to potential_constant_expression_1, it wasn't added
to cxx_eval_constant_expression at the same time...
Regression tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. David, can you
verify that this
On 05/24/2013 10:50 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
+ || ((TREE_CODE (type) == ENUMERAL_TYPE
+(tree_int_cst_lt
+ (TYPE_SIZE (ENUM_UNDERLYING_TYPE (type)), w)))
+ || (TREE_CODE (type) == BOOLEAN_TYPE
+
On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 23:51 +0800, Chung-Ju Wu wrote:
2013/5/23 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com:
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 08:30:35PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
The arrays of thresholds in gcc/bb-reorder.c appear not to have changed
since 2004 (in r80564).
As part of my hope of quashing
On 05/23/2013 06:42 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
I got all your responses and, if I remove the compile, execute and
errors directories but keep cilk-plus and array notation, maybe even
abbreviate array notation to an, (in future cilk keywords to ck,
pragma simd to ps and elemental function to
Trying to send again; gcc_patches list bounced original message.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Caroline Tice cmt...@google.com
Date: Fri, May 24, 2013 at 9:15 AM
Subject: Re: [PATCH, updated] Vtable pointer verification, C++ front
end changes (patch 1 of 3)
To: Jason Merrill
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com wrote:
On 24 May 2013 16:20, Gedare Bloom wrote:
Updated patch attached to address the comments. I was not able to
figure out how to build the libstdc++ documentation to verify my doc
changes although I did run xmllint
Please find attached the updated patch.
bootstrapped / regtested for i686-pc-linux-gnu
regtested for i686-pc-linux-gnu X sh-elf
regtested in gcc 4.8 branch for i686-pc-linux-gnu X avr
(--target-board atmega128-sim)
2013-05-24 Joern Rennecke joern.renne...@embecosm.com
PR
On 05/21/2013 02:23 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 5:51 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
As I believe I pointed out in a follow-up message, 254.gap is depending on
signed overflow semantics.
This patch avoids eliminating a cast feeding a conditional when the
SSA_NAME's
OK.
Jason
In that case, if my insert_stmt immediately follows dep_stmt and both
have the same UID, not_dominated_by would return true and I will end
up updating insert_stmt to dep_stmt which is wrong.
- Easwaran
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May
Hello Richard, et al.,
Attached please find a patch with the following changes:
1. Test-suite codes were moved to the appropriate location as suggested below
And the following modifications that RTH mentioned in
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01400.html)
2.
I'm ok inasmuch as the relevant tests are shared between c/c++.
Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com wrote:
[I included Jeff Law also in this conversation]
-Original Message-
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Aldy Hernandez
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 05:52:11PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
* gcc.dg/cilk-plus/AN/array_test1.c: New test.
...
* gcc.dg/cilk-plus/AN/cilkplus_AN_c.exp: New script.
Ok, I guess I can live with /AN/ extra level, but can you please
move it still to c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/ for
On 2013-05-23 11:51 , Paul Pluzhnikov wrote:
Greetings,
This patch adds (relatively) cheap bounds and dangling checks to
vectorbool, similar to the checks I added to vectorT in r195373,
r195356, etc.
Ok for google branches (gcc-4_7, gcc-4_8, integration) ?
OK.
Diego.
Hi,
a couple of tiny tweaks that should reduce a bit the risk of confusions
and subtle bugs (mostly suggested by Daniel, thanks!)
Thanks,
Paolo.
2013-05-24 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com
* include/ext/type_traits.h (__is_null_pointer): Add std::nullptr_t
Jonathan,
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Paul Pluzhnikov
ppluzhni...@google.com wrote:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com
wrote:
I was wondering the other day whether we should put these checks on
trunk and enable them automatically when
-Original Message-
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jakub Jelinek
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 2:03 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: Jeff Law; r...@redhat.com; Aldy Hernandez; 'Joseph S. Myers';
'gcc-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE:
On May 24, 2013, at 12:02 AM, Alexander Ivchenko aivch...@gmail.com wrote:
*ping*
2013/4/11 Alexander Ivchenko aivch...@gmail.com:
Hi,
The same motivation as for:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2013-03/msg00786.html
Since -fpic option is turned on by default in Android we have certain
We do in fact set TYPE_STRUCTURAL_EQUALITY_P on TEMPLATE_TEMPLATE_PARM,
so we can't assume it isn't set.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit affd3dcbcfeeda70db2413f19948dfd039ce0a0a
Author: Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com
Date: Fri May 24 13:52:31 2013 -0400
PR
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
