Hi,
Suppose it takes me a lot of time to reach the bug code. I don't want
to run the program again and again. Is there any way to dump the
internal information to the disk? And then load it when I need it?
I heard it is possible. Would you help me?
Best wishes,
Peng
Hi,
I'm wondering whether g++ will search the dir (specified with -I
option) recursively? I read the manual. The manual answer this
question. Would you please tell me if you know it?
Thanks,
Peng
___
Help-gplusplus mailing list
Help-gplusplus@gnu.org
h
Hi,
I'm wondering whether g++ will search the dir (specified with -I
option) recursively? I read the manual. The manual answer this
question. Would you please tell me if you know it?
Thanks,
Peng
___
Help-gplusplus mailing list
Help-gplusplus@gnu.org
h
Suppose I have a file "main.cc", if I run the following command "g++
-MM main.cc, I'll end up with following rule "main.o: main.cc".
Is there anyway that "main-o.o: main.cc" can be generated with g++?
Thanks,
Peng
___
Help-gplusplus mailing list
Help-g
Paul Pluzhnikov wrote:
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Is there anyway that "main-o.o: main.cc" can be generated with g++?
>
> Sure:
>
> $ g++ -MM main.cc
> main.o: main.cc
> $ g++ -MM main.cc -MT main-o.o
> main-o.o: main.cc
The problem that I have actually is that, I wan
for(int i = 0; i < f(n); ++ i) {
...
}
If I have the above "for" statement and I compile it with -O3, will the
function "f(n)" be optimized such that f(n) will only be evaluated
once. Or I have to factor "f(n)" outside the loop to make sure that it
only be evaluated once?
Thanks,
Peng
__
Allan Wind wrote:
> On 2006-03-30T12:30:30-0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > for(int i = 0; i < f(n); ++ i) {
> > ...
> > }
>
> Make sure you remove the space between ++ and i.
Why I have to remove the space? Is it well accepted coding convention?
>
> > If I have the above "for" statement and I
I'm using g++-3.4. Is there any compiler flag I can specify to enable
this kind of warning? "-Wall" can't give this kind of warning.
___
help-gplusplus mailing list
help-gplusplus@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gplusplus
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Try using the -pedantic flag. It issues all the warnings demanded by
> strict ISO C and ISO C++, which should cover the type conversion
Is it too restrictive? I only want the warning for bool <-> int
conversion and do not want to turn off any other feature that g++ have
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Try using the -pedantic flag. It issues all the warnings demanded by
> strict ISO C and ISO C++, which should cover the type conversion
Actually this flag can not make g++ generate this kind of warning. Is
there anybody know the correct flag.
__
Hi,
I'm wondering where the definitions of the functions in are
in GCC. I can not find them in GCC source code. Could you help me?
int i
std::istream is;
is >> i; // For example, I want the definition of this function (>>).
Thanks,
Peng
___
help-gpl
Hi,
I have the following test program and compiled it with the -O3 in g++
(. In "one_branch()" function, the two loops run in the same among of
the time, which means the if statement in the first loop is not
tested. In "two_branches" function, the last loop runs a lot faster
than the other three l
12 matches
Mail list logo