gcc archive, date index for November, 2005 (original) (raw)

gcc archive

date index for November, 2005

This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Indexes: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Site Nav: [Browse other archives for this mailing list][Browse other mailing lists at this site]
Search: Limit to:

November 30, 2005

23:04 Re: gcc help Mike Stump
22:55 Re: SVN conversion glitch? Daniel Berlin
22:53 Re: SVN conversion glitch? Mike Stump
22:40 gcc help pati (sent by Nabble.com)
22:32 [C++] cp_token::type and cp_token::keyword Gabriel Dos Reis
22:20 Re: pr14516 and GCC 3.4 Gabriel Dos Reis
21:22 Re: Adding new target OS for GCC Ben Elliston
21:10 Re: pr14516 and GCC 3.4 Mark Mitchell
21:10 Adding new target OS for GCC Leif Ekblad
19:57 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Richard Henderson
17:18 Re: incomplete type return types Jason Merrill
17:14 Re: pr14516 and GCC 3.4 Ian Lance Taylor
16:56 Re: SVN Problem? Jeffrey A Law
16:41 RE: Suggestion Dave Korn
16:32 Re: Suggestion Christian . Iseli
16:23 Re: SVN conversion glitch? Gunther Nikl
15:58 Re: SVN conversion glitch? Daniel Berlin
15:48 Re: SVN conversion glitch? Gunther Nikl
15:41 Re: Suggestion Paul Jarc
15:37 Re: Suggestion Robert Dewar
15:32 Suggestion YaniMan
15:06 pr14516 and GCC 3.4 Gunther Nikl
13:37 Re: SVN Problem? Daniel Berlin
13:12 Re: s390{,x} ABI incompatibility between gcc 4.0 and 4.1 Paolo Bonzini
13:09 Re: s390{,x} ABI incompatibility between gcc 4.0 and 4.1 Joern RENNECKE
12:43 Re: SVN Problem? Paolo Bonzini
10:27 Re: s390{,x} ABI incompatibility between gcc 4.0 and 4.1 Jakub Jelinek
09:01 SVN Problem? Jeffrey A Law
08:37 Re: incomplete type return types Gabriel Dos Reis
07:54 Re: Performance regression testing? René Rebe
01:33 Re: LLVM patch X function lowering Rafael Ávila de Espíndola

November 29, 2005

23:59 Re: Performance regression testing? Ben Elliston
23:53 Re: Performance regression testing? Ben Elliston
23:13 Re: incomplete type return types Gabriel Dos Reis
22:58 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Joseph S. Myers
22:50 Re: [RFH] Restrict support for trees Richard Guenther
22:44 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Hans-Peter Nilsson
22:41 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Daniel Jacobowitz
22:39 gcc-3.4-20051129 is now available gccadmin
22:28 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Paolo Bonzini
22:05 Re: LLVM patch X function lowering Chris Lattner
22:01 Re: s390{,x} ABI incompatibility between gcc 4.0 and 4.1 Joern RENNECKE
21:53 Re: Performance regression testing? Hans-Peter Nilsson
21:49 LLVM patch X function lowering Rafael Espíndola
21:38 Re: [RFH] Restrict support for trees Daniel Berlin
21:12 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Anthony Green
21:12 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Daniel Jacobowitz
21:09 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Mark Mitchell
21:08 [RFH] Restrict support for trees Richard Guenther
21:02 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Richard Henderson
20:54 Re: Performance regression testing? Mike Stump
20:52 Re: incomplete type return types Mark Mitchell
20:50 incomplete type return types Gabriel Dos Reis
20:42 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Mark Mitchell
20:41 Re: Performance regression testing? Mike Stump
20:37 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Anthony Green
20:27 Re: Performance regression testing? Hans-Peter Nilsson
20:12 Re: Performance regression testing? Mike Stump
19:57 Re: Performance regression testing? Laurent GUERBY
19:48 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Daniel Jacobowitz
19:41 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Mark Mitchell
19:21 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Richard Henderson
18:07 updated llvm patch to the apple branch Rafael Espíndola
17:54 Re: GCC-3.4.5 Release Status Joe Buck
17:32 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Joe Buck
17:17 Re: Performance regression testing? Nicholas Nethercote
14:00 Re: s390{,x} ABI incompatibility between gcc 4.0 and 4.1 Jakub Jelinek
13:45 Re: s390{,x} ABI incompatibility between gcc 4.0 and 4.1 Joern RENNECKE
10:53 Re: port of the LLVM patch to the trunk Rafael Ávila de Espíndola
08:18 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Paolo Bonzini
06:26 Re: The actual LLVM integration patch Chris Lattner
06:18 Re: The actual LLVM integration patch Andrew Pinski
04:56 Re: Performance regression testing? Hans-Peter Nilsson
04:48 Re: port of the LLVM patch to the trunk Andrew Pinski
04:41 Re: Performance regression testing? Hans-Peter Nilsson
04:34 Re: Java on uClinux Eric Botcazou
04:20 Re: GCC-3.4.5 Release Status Jim Wilson
04:08 Re: GCC-3.4.5 Release Status Gabriel Dos Reis
03:58 Re: Warning bug with -fPIC? (was Re: Some testsuite cleanups (mostly for -fPIC)) Kean Johnston
03:53 Re: unable to find a register to spill in class Jim Wilson
03:43 Re: GCC-3.4.5 Release Status Jim Wilson
03:38 Re: port of the LLVM patch to the trunk Mike Stump
03:36 Re: Performance regression testing? Mike Stump
03:02 port of the LLVM patch to the trunk Rafael Ávila de Espíndola
02:54 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Mark Mitchell
02:46 Re: m68k exception handling Hans-Peter Nilsson
02:28 Re: Performance regression testing? Richard Kenner
02:26 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c David Edelsohn
02:23 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Mark Mitchell
02:22 Re: Performance regression testing? Hans-Peter Nilsson
02:21 Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Joe Buck
02:06 Re: Performance regression testing? Daniel Jacobowitz
02:05 Torbjorn's ieeelib.c Mark Mitchell
02:03 Re: Performance regression testing? Paul Brook
01:57 Re: Performance regression testing? Mike Stump
01:34 Re: Performance regression testing? Mark Mitchell
01:18 Re: Performance regression testing? Joe Buck
01:15 Re: m68k exception handling Jim Wilson
01:04 Re: __thread and builtin memcpy() bug Jim Wilson
00:42 Re: Java on uClinux Andrew Pinski
00:40 Re: Java on uClinux Bernd Schmidt
00:39 Performance regression testing? Mark Mitchell
00:09 Re: GCC-3.4.5 Release Status Gabriel Dos Reis

November 28, 2005

23:55 Re: GCC-3.4.5 Release Status Joe Buck
22:47 Re: Wiki pages on tests cases Jonathan Wakely
22:26 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Robert Dewar
22:14 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Andrew Pinski
21:57 Re: matching function for out_waiting in gcc 3.4.2 Jonathan Wakely
21:55 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Mike Stump
21:05 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Laurent GUERBY
20:52 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Andrew Haley
20:49 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Tom Tromey
20:48 Re: Warning bug with -fPIC? (was Re: Some testsuite cleanups (mostly for -fPIC)) Mike Stump
20:40 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Andrew Pinski
20:35 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Tom Tromey
20:25 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Mike Stump
20:21 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Robert Dewar
20:18 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Gabriel Dos Reis
20:01 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Robert Dewar
19:56 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Mike Stump
19:53 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Mike Stump
19:22 Re: GCC-3.4.5 Release Status Gabriel Dos Reis
19:12 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Robert Dewar
19:05 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Robert Dewar
18:52 Re: GCC-3.4.5 Release Status Gabriel Dos Reis
18:50 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Richard Kenner
18:42 Warning bug with -fPIC? (was Re: Some testsuite cleanups (mostly for -fPIC)) Kean Johnston
18:28 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Mike Stump
18:14 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Mike Stump
18:08 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Joe Buck
17:53 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Mike Stump
17:44 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Mike Stump
17:41 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Andrew Pinski
17:35 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Mike Stump
17:29 RE: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Dave Korn
17:28 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Richard Kenner
17:22 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Mike Stump
17:20 Re: C++ vague linkage data Joe Buck
17:19 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Andrew Pinski
17:14 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Mike Stump
17:11 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Mike Stump
17:00 Re: GCC-3.4.5 Release Status Mark Mitchell
15:22 Re: C++ vague linkage data Daniel Jacobowitz
15:20 Re: C++ vague linkage data Jakub Jelinek
15:11 C++ vague linkage data Lubos Lunak
14:49 s390{,x} ABI incompatibility between gcc 4.0 and 4.1 Jakub Jelinek
13:09 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Paolo Bonzini
11:13 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Robert Dewar
11:01 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Richard Earnshaw
10:32 GCC-3.4.5 Release Status Gabriel Dos Reis
09:11 Re: How implemented "typeof" Nathan Sidwell
09:03 How implemented "typeof" Alexander
08:45 Re: Wiki pages on tests cases Jim Blandy
08:31 matching function for out_waiting in gcc 3.4.2 anandi.thirunavukkarasu
03:39 Re: ppc-linux and s390-linux compilers requiring 64-bit HWI? Ulrich Weigand
02:54 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Chris Lattner
02:32 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Chris Lattner

November 27, 2005

23:29 Re: LEGITIMIZE_RELOAD_ADDRESS vs address_reloaded Alan Modra
23:23 Re: 20040309-1.c vs overflow being undefined Neil Booth
20:55 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Daniel Berlin
19:58 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Devang Patel
18:50 Re: 20040309-1.c vs overflow being undefined Richard Henderson
17:37 Re: 20040309-1.c vs overflow being undefined Andreas Schwab
17:26 Re: 20040309-1.c vs overflow being undefined Andrew Pinski
17:21 Re: 20040309-1.c vs overflow being undefined Andrew Pinski
17:18 Re: 20040309-1.c vs overflow being undefined Falk Hueffner
17:13 Re: 20040309-1.c vs overflow being undefined Andreas Schwab
17:02 20040309-1.c vs overflow being undefined Andrew Pinski
12:26 Re: Wiki pages on tests cases Giovanni Bajo
11:58 Wiki pages on tests cases Jonathan Wakely
07:59 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Mike Stump
06:34 Re: Would Like to Contribute, Where to Start? Mike Stump
03:18 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Mike Stump
03:14 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Mike Stump

November 26, 2005

22:16 Re: ppc-linux and s390-linux compilers requiring 64-bit HWI? Richard Henderson
16:08 Re: ppc-linux and s390-linux compilers requiring 64-bit HWI? Andrew Pinski
08:38 ppc-linux and s390-linux compilers requiring 64-bit HWI? Jakub Jelinek
02:39 Re: Alias analysis of parameters Daniel Berlin
02:14 Alias analysis of parameters shreyas krishnan

November 25, 2005

22:41 gcc-4.1-20051125 is now available gccadmin
21:16 Re: [C++] Should the complexity of std::list::size() be O(n) or O(1)? Phil Edwards
20:55 Re: gcc 4.1 release showstopper on darwin Jack Howarth
20:10 Re: gcc 4.1 release showstopper on darwin David Edelsohn
19:32 Re: Would Like to Contribute, Where to Start? Henrik Sorensen
19:28 gcc 4.1 release showstopper on darwin Jack Howarth
19:17 Re: Running testsuite with extra --param argument Kean Johnston
19:15 Re: Running testsuite with extra --param argument Kean Johnston
18:47 Running testsuite with extra --param argument Richard Guenther
18:32 Re: svn speed traversing slow filesystems Daniel Berlin
18:21 Re: LEGITIMIZE_RELOAD_ADDRESS vs address_reloaded Ulrich Weigand
18:17 Re: [C++] Should the complexity of std::list::size() be O(n) or O(1)? Howard Hinnant
18:00 Re: svn speed traversing slow filesystems Kaveh R. Ghazi
17:49 Would Like to Contribute, Where to Start? Michael Garvin
15:29 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Diego Novillo
14:28 Re: [C++] Should the complexity of std::list::size() be O(n) or O(1)? Phil Edwards
13:00 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Rafael Espíndola
10:28 Re: Hallo GCC Gurus.. Karel Gardas
10:11 Hallo GCC Gurus.. FRANCIS MACHOKA
09:45 Re: svn speed traversing slow filesystems Richard Guenther
04:09 LEGITIMIZE_RELOAD_ADDRESS vs address_reloaded Alan Modra
02:17 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Scott Robert Ladd
01:32 Re: svn speed traversing slow filesystems Branko Äibej

November 24, 2005

22:39 gcc-4.0-20051124 is now available gccadmin
20:51 Re: Register Allocation Joern RENNECKE
17:50 Re: should _GNU_SOURCE be used in libiberty if glibc is present? Rafael Espíndola
17:11 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Gabriel Dos Reis
16:59 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Giovanni Bajo
16:50 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Gabriel Dos Reis
16:36 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Giovanni Bajo
16:31 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Gabriel Dos Reis
15:28 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries Paolo Bonzini
14:26 Re: should _GNU_SOURCE be used in libiberty if glibc is present? DJ Delorie
13:42 Re: should _GNU_SOURCE be used in libiberty if glibc is present? Kai Ruottu
13:19 mips-irix6.5 and complex.h François-Xavier Coudert
13:07 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Giovanni Bajo
12:43 Re: overcoming info build failures Joseph S. Myers
12:41 Re: overcoming info build failures Christian Joensson
12:39 should _GNU_SOURCE be used in libiberty if glibc is present? Rafael Ávila de Espíndola
12:39 Re: overcoming info build failures Uros Bizjak
11:00 Re: Creating a partial mirror of the repository with SVK Richard Earnshaw
10:05 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Gabriel Dos Reis
09:37 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Gabriel Dos Reis
09:21 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Giovanni Bajo
09:19 problems bootstrapping gcc-4.0-20051117 on i386-pc-solaris2.10 Peter Zijlstra
08:57 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Gabriel Dos Reis
08:00 Re: Results for 2.16.91 20051124 testsuite on sparc-unknown-linux-gnu Christian Joensson
07:59 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Nathan Sidwell
07:58 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Nathan Sidwell
07:33 __thread and builtin memcpy() bug Frank Cusack
06:48 Successfull build & install of gcc-4.0.2 on MacOS-X 10.3.9-520.19 william . franck
01:31 Re: overcoming info build failures Alan Modra
01:23 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Mark Mitchell
01:09 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Gabriel Dos Reis
00:59 Re: overcoming info build failures Mark Mitchell
00:56 overcoming info build failures Ben Elliston
00:48 Re: Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Mark Mitchell
00:41 Default arguments and FUNCTION_TYPEs Gabriel Dos Reis

November 23, 2005

23:48 Re: [RFC] fixproto and canadian cross builds Mark Mitchell
23:44 Re: [RFC] fixproto and canadian cross builds Ian Lance Taylor
23:11 Re: SVN conversion glitch? Ian Lance Taylor
23:06 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries François-Xavier Coudert
22:54 Re: [RFC] fixproto and canadian cross builds Mark Mitchell
21:11 Creating a partial mirror of the repository with SVK Ludovic Brenta
20:50 Re: Register Allocation Peter Bergner
20:43 Re: Register Allocation Ian Lance Taylor
19:56 Re: Accidentally on the list.... Gerald Pfeifer
19:54 Accidentally on the list.... Eric J. Goforth
18:56 [RFC] fixproto and canadian cross builds Paul Brook
18:56 Re: dfp-branch merge plans Janis Johnson
18:30 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Diego Novillo
18:13 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Chris Lattner
17:46 Re: The actual LLVM integration patch Rafael Espíndola
17:08 Re: Register Allocation Andrew MacLeod
17:08 Re: Register Allocation Andrew MacLeod
17:07 Re: Register Allocation Andrew MacLeod
14:33 SVN conversion glitch? Jakub Jelinek
14:06 Re: Register Allocation Michael Matz
14:05 Re: dfp-branch merge plans Joseph S. Myers
12:32 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Diego Novillo
12:15 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Robert Dewar
12:11 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Diego Novillo
12:07 Re: Compilation of Ada for Arm failed Eric Botcazou
12:04 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Richard Earnshaw
12:03 Compilation of Ada for Arm failed Frédéric PRACA
11:53 Re: [C++] Should the complexity of std::list::size() be O(n) or O(1)? chris jefferson
11:50 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Daniel Berlin
11:41 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Robert Dewar
11:41 [C++] Should the complexity of std::list::size() be O(n) or O(1)? 聂久焘
11:27 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Richard Earnshaw
11:04 Anh vao dia chi nay nhe hoanglanhuong1980
11:02 Anh vao dia chi nay nhe hoanglanhuong1980
11:01 Successfull build & install of GCC 4.0.2 Laban, Marinko
08:40 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Arnaud Charlet
06:48 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Gabriel Dos Reis
05:30 Re: Gcc help pages about __mode__ keyword Jim Wilson
05:21 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Daniel Jacobowitz
05:19 Re: dfp-branch merge plans Daniel Jacobowitz
05:10 Re: trees Mark Mitchell
04:28 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Daniel Berlin
03:27 dfp-branch merge plans Ben Elliston
02:43 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Gabriel Dos Reis
02:28 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Chris Lattner
02:24 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Chris Lattner
00:30 Re: Some GCC 4.1 benchmarks (Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO) Scott Robert Ladd
00:09 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Joe Buck
00:08 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Robert Dewar
00:05 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Gabriel Dos Reis
00:00 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Gabriel Dos Reis

November 22, 2005

23:57 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Diego Novillo
23:52 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Daniel Jacobowitz
23:43 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Russ Allbery
23:42 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO David Edelsohn
23:35 Re: dwarf2 unwinder hacks get my static build going: Bug, or indication of what I'm doing wrong? Scott Gilbertson
23:23 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Diego Novillo
23:05 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Eric Botcazou
23:01 The actual LLVM integration patch Chris Lattner
22:59 trees Gabriel Dos Reis
22:58 Re: Broken link to documentation Joseph S. Myers
22:58 Re: Register Allocation Peter Bergner
22:52 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Chris Lattner
22:51 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Steven Bosscher
22:50 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Chris Lattner
22:44 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Chris Lattner
22:39 Broken link to documentation Simon Wright
22:39 gcc-3.4-20051122 is now available gccadmin
22:31 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Chris Lattner
22:28 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Eric Botcazou
22:27 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Chris Lattner
22:19 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Steven Bosscher
22:15 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Steven Bosscher
22:06 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Steven Bosscher
22:02 Re: Some GCC 4.1 benchmarks (Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO) Steven Bosscher
21:55 Re: Register Allocation Steven Bosscher
21:04 Re: Some GCC 4.1 benchmarks (Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO) Jan Hubicka
20:39 RE: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Dave Korn
20:34 Re: Target processor detection James E Wilson
20:20 RE: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Douglas B. Jones
20:19 Re: Some GCC 4.1 benchmarks (Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO) Scott Robert Ladd
20:17 Re: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Eric Botcazou
20:10 Re: failed to run testsuite for libstdc++ on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu for target unix/-m32 James E Wilson
20:09 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Daniel Berlin
20:04 Some GCC 4.1 benchmarks (Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO) Jan Hubicka
19:58 RE: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Douglas B. Jones
19:55 Re: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Eric Botcazou
19:48 RE: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Douglas B. Jones
19:37 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Gabriel Dos Reis
19:28 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO David Edelsohn
19:26 Re: Register Allocation Peter Bergner
19:21 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Benjamin Kosnik
19:10 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Robert Dewar
19:07 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Benjamin Kosnik
19:06 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Richard Henderson
19:06 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Daniel Berlin
19:02 RE: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Dave Korn
18:59 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Gabriel Dos Reis
18:53 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Daniel Berlin
18:50 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Richard Henderson
18:47 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Daniel Berlin
18:38 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Robert Dewar
18:34 RE: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Douglas B. Jones
18:27 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Gabriel Dos Reis
18:20 Re: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Eric Botcazou
18:17 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Benjamin Kosnik
18:03 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Scott Robert Ladd
17:49 RE: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Douglas B. Jones
17:40 Re: New SVN repo is up Joseph S. Myers
17:37 Re: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Eric Botcazou
17:28 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Daniel Berlin
17:11 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Gabriel Dos Reis
17:08 Re: GCC-3.4.5 pre-release available Joe Buck
16:57 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Steven Bosscher
16:45 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Daniel Berlin
16:37 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Rafael Espíndola
16:37 Re: Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Daniel Jacobowitz
16:30 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Daniel Berlin
16:22 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Paul Brook
16:20 Thoughts on LLVM and LTO Diego Novillo
16:16 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Richard Kenner
16:12 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Daniel Jacobowitz
16:11 Re: New SVN repo is up Gabriel Dos Reis
16:10 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Robert Dewar
16:09 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Gabriel Dos Reis
16:02 Re: New SVN repo is up Daniel Berlin
15:56 RE: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Douglas B. Jones
15:54 Re: New SVN repo is up Gabriel Dos Reis
15:52 RE: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Richard Earnshaw
15:40 Re: GCC-3.4.5 Release status report Gabriel Dos Reis
15:33 RE: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Dave Korn
15:22 m68k exception handling Kövesdi György
14:49 Gcc help pages about __mode__ keyword Anton Soppelsa
14:26 Build results for gcc 4.0.2 on SuSE 9.2 Walter Zimmer
13:44 Re: failed to run testsuite for libstdc++ on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu for target unix/-m32 Rainer Emrich
13:27 RE: typedefs Dave Korn
12:05 unable to find a register to spill in class Nemanja Popov
10:45 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Richard Earnshaw
09:53 Re: Target processor detection Richard Guenther
09:39 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Anthony Shipman
05:46 Re: svn speed traversing slow filesystems Kaveh R. Ghazi
05:06 Re: GCC 4.2 Mark Mitchell
04:53 Re: svn speed traversing slow filesystems Daniel Jacobowitz
03:20 Re: svn speed traversing slow filesystems Kaveh R. Ghazi
02:52 Re: Ada on ARM Ralf Corsepius
01:43 Re: A question about having multiple insns for one operation Jim Wilson
01:24 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Chris Lattner
01:23 Re: typedefs Giovanni Bajo
01:19 Re: Vectorizer in GCC 4.0 Dorit Naishlos
01:01 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Joseph S. Myers
00:34 Re: Target processor detection Jim Wilson
00:27 RE: Vectorizer in GCC 4.0 Balaji V. Iyer

November 21, 2005

23:55 Re: failed to run testsuite for libstdc++ on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu for target unix/-m32 Jim Wilson
23:31 Re: SV: Re: MISRA C support for GCC? Gabriel Dos Reis
22:57 Re: SV: Re: MISRA C support for GCC? Robert Dewar
22:52 Re: MISRA C support for GCC? Neil Booth
22:49 Re: SV: Re: MISRA C support for GCC? Joe Buck
22:27 Re: SV: Re: MISRA C support for GCC? Robert Dewar
22:11 Re: SV: Re: MISRA C support for GCC? Gabriel Dos Reis
22:09 Re: SV: Re: MISRA C support for GCC? Gabriel Dos Reis
21:50 Re: SV: Re: MISRA C support for GCC? Robert Dewar
21:46 Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Ian Lance Taylor
21:31 Re: SV: Re: MISRA C support for GCC? Daniel Jacobowitz
21:21 Re: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Eric Botcazou
21:19 Re: can DECL_RESULT be 0? James E Wilson
21:13 Re: SV: Re: MISRA C support for GCC? David Daney
21:09 typedefs Manu Abraham
21:05 RE: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Douglas B. Jones
20:55 Re: GCC-3.4.5 Release status report Gerald Pfeifer
20:53 SV: Re: MISRA C support for GCC? Fredrik Hederstierna
20:16 Re: MISRA C support for GCC? Gabriel Dos Reis
19:43 Re: Ada on ARM Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
19:41 Re: Ada on ARM Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
19:40 Re: MISRA C support for GCC? Daniel Jacobowitz
19:36 GCC-3.4.5 pre-release available Gabriel Dos Reis
19:35 Re: Ada on ARM Frédéric PRACA
19:16 Re: Ada on ARM Laurent GUERBY
19:14 MISRA C support for GCC? Fredrik Hederstierna
18:27 Re: Stupid issue with Bugzilla Gabriel Dos Reis
18:26 Re: Ada on ARM Frédéric PRACA
18:12 Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!) Dave Korn
18:08 Re: Ada on ARM Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
18:06 Re: Stupid issue with Bugzilla Daniel Berlin
17:58 Re: Abnormal behavior of malloc in gcc-3.2.2 Nicholas Nethercote
17:55 Re: dwarf2 unwinder hacks get my static build going: Bug, or indication of what I'm doing wrong? Richard Henderson
17:53 Re: Stupid issue with Bugzilla Sebastian Pop
17:51 Re: Stupid issue with Bugzilla Gabriel Dos Reis
17:34 Re: Stupid issue with Bugzilla Paolo Carlini
17:33 Re: Stupid issue with Bugzilla Daniel Berlin
17:30 Re: Stupid issue with Bugzilla Paolo Carlini
17:26 Re: Ada on ARM Ralf Corsepius
17:22 Re: Stupid issue with Bugzilla Daniel Berlin
17:09 Re: dwarf2 unwinder hacks get my static build going: Bug, or indication of what I'm doing wrong? Scott Gilbertson
17:08 Re: improved ia64 atomic ops Richard Henderson
17:07 Re: Stupid issue with Bugzilla Andreas Schwab
16:58 Re: Stupid issue with Bugzilla Sebastian Pop
16:18 Stupid issue with Bugzilla Paolo Carlini
16:14 Ada on ARM Frédéric PRACA
15:46 Re: Ada Broken with h_errno change Arnaud Charlet
15:45 Re: GCC 4.2 Gabor Loki
15:33 Re: Ada Broken with h_errno change Thomas Quinot
15:27 Re: Ada Broken with h_errno change Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
15:20 improved ia64 atomic ops Jan Beulich
14:30 Re: GCC-3.4.5 Release status report Gabriel Dos Reis
13:22 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Sebastian Pop
12:41 Re: GCC-3.4.5 Release status report Giovanni Bajo
12:12 GCC-3.4.5 Release status report Gabriel Dos Reis
11:19 Re: Abnormal behavior of malloc in gcc-3.2.2 Giovanni Bajo
09:57 Re: ACATS script generation problem Georg Bauhaus
07:14 Re: ACATS script generation problem Arnaud Charlet
06:51 Re: Checksum mismatch Jim Blandy
05:58 Re: Creating temporary variables VIbhav Garg
05:23 Re: Abnormal behavior of malloc in gcc-3.2.2 Sandeep Kumar
05:19 Re: Abnormal behavior of malloc in gcc-3.2.2 Andrew Pinski
05:14 Re: Abnormal behavior of malloc in gcc-3.2.2 Sandeep Kumar
05:02 Re: Abnormal behavior of malloc in gcc-3.2.2 Andrew Pinski
04:58 Abnormal behavior of malloc in gcc-3.2.2 Sandeep Kumar
04:05 A question about having multiple insns for one operation Kazu Hirata
03:36 Re: Creating temporary variables Ian Lance Taylor
01:51 Re: Checksum mismatch Cauchy Song
01:27 Checksum mismatch Cauchy Song
00:04 ACATS script generation problem Georg Bauhaus

November 20, 2005

23:39 Vectorizer in GCC 4.0 Balaji V. Iyer
20:07 Creating temporary variables VIbhav Garg
19:58 Re: can DECL_RESULT be 0? Rafael Ávila de Espíndola
19:40 Re: Overwrite a file with "svn update"? Andreas Schwab
19:31 Re: Overwrite a file with "svn update"? Hans-Peter Nilsson
18:53 Re: Overwrite a file with "svn update"? Andreas Schwab
18:38 Re: Somebody broke bootstrap on trunk for x86_64 Paolo Bonzini
16:27 Re: Overwrite a file with "svn update"? Hans-Peter Nilsson
14:33 Re: Somebody broke bootstrap on trunk for x86_64 Graham Stott
14:16 Re: Working with SVK: how to get it actually work? Gabriel Dos Reis
05:25 Re: Working with SVK: how to get it actually work? Daniel Jacobowitz
05:13 Re: GCC 4.2 Dueway Qi
04:04 Working with SVK: how to get it actually work? Gabriel Dos Reis
03:41 Re: Somebody broke bootstrap on trunk for x86_64 Andrew Pinski
03:28 Re: Somebody broke bootstrap on trunk for x86_64 Andrew Pinski
01:51 Re: Somebody broke bootstrap on trunk for x86_64 Andrew Pinski
01:47 Re: Somebody broke bootstrap on trunk for x86_64 Andrew Pinski
01:03 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Paul Brook
00:57 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Chris Lattner
00:54 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Steven Bosscher
00:49 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Chris Lattner
00:40 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Steven Bosscher
00:37 Re: Register Allocation Steven Bosscher
00:20 Re: Register Allocation Giovanni Bajo

November 19, 2005

22:40 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Devang Patel
22:22 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Chris Lattner
22:10 Somebody broke bootstrap on trunk for x86_64 Richard Guenther
21:33 Re: dwarf2 unwinder hacks get my static build going: Bug, or indication of what I'm doing wrong? Daniel Jacobowitz
21:26 Re: dwarf2 unwinder hacks get my static build going: Bug, or indication of what I'm doing wrong? Richard Henderson
20:24 Re: Overwrite a file with "svn update"? Steve Kargl
20:21 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Kenneth Zadeck
20:20 Re: Register Allocation Denis Chertykov
20:16 Re: Overwrite a file with "svn update"? Steve Kargl
20:11 Re: Can't build 4.1 branch on Linux x86 Panagiotis Papadakos
20:00 Re: Overwrite a file with "svn update"? Giovanni Bajo
19:31 Re: Register Allocation Ian Lance Taylor
19:29 Re: Overwrite a file with "svn update"? Jim Blandy
19:08 Re: svn speed traversing slow filesystems Daniel Berlin
18:23 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Chris Lattner
17:56 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Chris Lattner
17:49 Re: Can't build 4.1 branch on Linux x86 Panagiotis Papadakos
17:48 Re: Can't build 4.1 branch on Linux x86 Richard Guenther
17:44 Can't build 4.1 branch on Linux x86 Panagiotis Papadakos
17:30 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Mike Hearn
15:23 Overwrite a file with "svn update"? Steve Kargl
15:23 svn speed traversing slow filesystems Kaveh R. Ghazi
11:18 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Joseph S. Myers
11:01 Re: GCC 4.1 branch created Joseph S. Myers
10:09 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Richard Guenther
08:46 Re: dwarf2 unwinder hacks get my static build going: Bug, or indication of what I'm doing wrong? Andrew Haley
06:55 Dich vu moi!!! emailquangcao2005
06:47 Dich vu moi!!! emailquangcao2005
06:42 GCC 4.2 Mark Mitchell
05:19 Re: GCC 4.1 branch created Mark Mitchell
05:18 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Daniel Berlin
04:43 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Chris Lattner
04:29 GCC 4.1 branch created Mark Mitchell
04:17 Re: LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Daniel Jacobowitz
03:47 Re: dwarf2 unwinder hacks get my static build going: Bug, or indication of what I'm doing wrong? Daniel Jacobowitz
01:55 Re: Issue with find_tail_calls Richard Henderson
01:51 LLVM/GCC Integration Proposal Chris Lattner
01:48 Re: dwarf2 unwinder hacks get my static build going: Bug, or indication of what I'm doing wrong? Richard Henderson
01:07 Re: Issue with find_tail_calls Richard Kenner
01:03 Re: pruning unused debugging types (enums/PR23336) Mark Mitchell

November 18, 2005

23:34 Re: Incompatible behavior -O0, -O3, std::cout Andreas Schwab
23:18 dwarf2 unwinder hacks get my static build going: Bug, or indication of what I'm doing wrong? Scott Gilbertson
23:01 Re: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Eric Botcazou
22:55 Re: dwarf2 unwinder hacks get my static build going: Bug, or indication of what I'm doing wrong? David Daney
22:50 Re: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Joe Buck
22:45 Sta cekate? avalanche
22:05 Re: RTEMS GCC Status Report Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
22:04 Re: Incompatible behavior -O0, -O3, std::cout Pankaj Gupta
21:55 Re: RTEMS GCC Status Report Laurent GUERBY
21:53 Re: Incompatible behavior -O0, -O3, std::cout Andrew Pinski
21:47 Incompatible behavior -O0, -O3, std::cout Pankaj Gupta
21:21 Re: Issue with find_tail_calls Richard Henderson
21:07 RTEMS GCC Status Report Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
20:34 Re: Pragma callback to insert text in input buffer? Richard Henderson
20:31 Re: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Eric Botcazou
20:24 Re: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Joe Buck
20:12 Re: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Eric Botcazou
20:09 Re: pruning unused debugging types (enums/PR23336) Aldy Hernandez
19:34 Re: compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Joe Buck
19:24 GCC 4.0.2 build report on Fedora Core 3 Josef Nygrin
19:23 Re: Code getting optimized away after instrumenation for memory analysis Prateek Saxena
18:52 compiling gcc-4.0.2 on solaris 9 Douglas B. Jones
18:43 Re: Link-time optimzation Mike Stump
18:35 Re: Link-time optimzation Mike Stump
18:30 Re: Link-time optimzation Mike Stump
18:15 Re: GCC 4.1/4.2 Status Report (2005-11-18) Mike Stump
17:47 Re: GCC 4.1/4.2 Status Report (2005-11-18) Mark Mitchell
17:43 Successfull build of gcc-4.1.0 20051112 (experimental) on ia64-unknown-linux-gnu Rainer Emrich
17:41 Re: Directly generating binary code [Was Re: Link-time optimzation] Jim Blandy
17:32 Re: Ada Broken with h_errno change Thomas Quinot
17:29 Re: Link-time optimzation Michael Matz
17:24 Re: Link-time optimzation Nathan Sidwell
17:04 Re: Link-time optimzation Steven Bosscher
16:46 Re: GCC 4.1/4.2 Status Report (2005-11-18) Diego Novillo
16:31 Re: Link-time optimzation Michael Matz
16:24 Re: GCC 4.1/4.2 Status Report (2005-11-18) Mark Mitchell
15:28 Re: Register Allocation Andrew MacLeod
13:54 Re: Issue with find_tail_calls Richard Kenner
13:43 Re: Issue with find_tail_calls Richard Guenther
13:37 Issue with find_tail_calls Richard Kenner
13:22 Pragma callback to insert text in input buffer? Jan Hoogerbrugge
12:51 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries François-Xavier Coudert
12:25 Target processor detection Piotr Wyderski
12:04 Re: Directly generating binary code [Was Re: Link-time optimzation] Laurent GUERBY
11:43 Re: Code getting optimized away after instrumenation for memory analysis Diego Novillo
11:40 Directly generating binary code [Was Re: Link-time optimzation] Andrew Haley
11:29 Re: Link-time optimzation Richard Earnshaw
11:26 Re: GCC 4.1/4.2 Status Report (2005-11-18) Diego Novillo
11:19 Re: Link-time optimzation Robert Dewar
11:01 Re: [RFC] PR/24900: computed but not used cast values Neil Booth
09:53 Re: Register Allocation Giovanni Bajo
09:29 Re: Link-time optimzation Bernd Schmidt
09:13 Code getting optimized away after instrumenation for memory analysis Prateek Saxena
08:59 failed to run testsuite for libstdc++ on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnufor target unix/-m32 Rainer Emrich
08:54 Successfull build of gcc-4.1.0 20051112 (experimental) on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Rainer Emrich
08:53 Successfull build of gcc-4.1.0 20051112 (experimental) on i686-pc-linux-gnu Rainer Emrich
08:51 Successfull build of gcc-4.1.0 20051112 (experimental) on mips-sgi-irix6.5 Rainer Emrich
08:49 Successfull build of gcc-4.1.0 20051112 (experimental) on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00 Rainer Emrich
08:48 GCC 4.1/4.2 Status Report (2005-11-18) Mark Mitchell
08:38 Results for 4.1.0 20051112 (experimental) testsuite on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00 Rainer Emrich
06:24 Re: pruning unused debugging types (enums/PR23336) Mark Mitchell
06:18 Re: [RFC] PR/24900: computed but not used cast values Mark Mitchell
03:27 Re: Register Allocation Daniel Jacobowitz
03:11 Re: Link-time optimzation Geert Bosch
02:55 Re: Register Allocation Mark Mitchell
02:35 Re: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender Jim Wilson
02:33 Re: Link-time optimzation Dale Johannesen
02:13 Re: Link-time optimzation Daniel Jacobowitz
02:06 Re: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender Jim Wilson
01:35 Re: can DECL_RESULT be 0? Jim Wilson
01:07 Re: [rfc] new tree-codes/optabs for vectorization of non-unit-stride accesses Richard Henderson
01:06 Re: [RFC] PR/24900: computed but not used cast values Richard Henderson
00:46 Re: question about gcc Paul Albrecht
00:43 Re: [RFC] PR/24900: computed but not used cast values Aldy Hernandez
00:26 Re: question about gcc Jim Wilson
00:25 Re: question about gcc Paul Albrecht
00:19 Re: [rfc] new tree-codes/optabs for vectorization of non-unit-stride accesses Steven Bosscher

November 17, 2005

23:52 Build failed gcc-4.1.0-20051112 on MacOS-X 10.3.9 william . franck
23:42 Re: Link-time optimzation Ian Lance Taylor
23:25 Re: [RFC] PR/24900: computed but not used cast values Richard Henderson
23:20 Re: question about gcc Robert Dewar
23:20 Re: [RFC] PR/24900: computed but not used cast values Richard Henderson
23:18 Re: [RFC] PR/24900: computed but not used cast values Ian Lance Taylor
23:10 Re: Link-time optimzation Robert Dewar
23:09 Re: pruning unused debugging types (enums/PR23336) Richard Henderson
23:05 question about gcc Paul Albrecht
23:00 Re: [RFC] PR/24900: computed but not used cast values Joe Buck
22:56 Re: [RFC] PR/24900: computed but not used cast values Richard Henderson
22:40 gcc-4.0-20051117 is now available gccadmin
22:39 Re: Ada Broken with h_errno change Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
22:32 Re: Ada Broken with h_errno change Thomas Quinot
22:08 pruning unused debugging types (enums/PR23336) Aldy Hernandez
22:02 Re: [RFC] PR/24900: computed but not used cast values Ian Lance Taylor
21:42 Re: Link-time optimzation Ian Lance Taylor
21:40 Re: Link-time optimzation Ian Lance Taylor
21:36 Successfull build of gcc-4.0.2 on MacOS-X 10.3.9 william . franck
21:34 [RFC] PR/24900: computed but not used cast values Aldy Hernandez
20:37 Re: specific instantiation of static members from template class Jonathan Wakely
19:13 Re: Is there a GIMPLE equivalent of UNSPEC? Richard Henderson
18:59 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Richard Henderson
17:16 Re: Cirrus arm Maverick Crunch fixes Dario Massarin
16:53 Register Allocation Andrew MacLeod
16:41 Re: Link-time optimzation Jan Hubicka
16:25 Re: Link-time optimzation Kenneth Zadeck
16:17 Re: Link-time optimzation Kenneth Zadeck
15:54 Re: [rfc] new tree-codes/optabs for vectorization of non-unit-stride accesses Steven Bosscher
15:54 Re: Link-time optimzation Kenneth Zadeck
15:52 Re: [rfc] new tree-codes/optabs for vectorization of non-unit-strideaccesses Dorit Naishlos
15:47 Re: [rfc] new tree-codes/optabs for vectorization of non-unit-strideaccesses Dorit Naishlos
15:39 specific instantiation of static members from template class cedric
15:32 Re: m68k does not build on head Paul Brook
15:20 Re: m68k does not build on head Hans-Peter Nilsson
15:12 Re: m68k does not build on head Paul Brook
14:48 Re: Link-time optimzation mathieu lacage
14:23 m68k does not build on head Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
14:09 Re: Link-time optimzation Daniel Berlin
13:18 RE: Is there a GIMPLE equivalent of UNSPEC? Unruh, Erwin
13:08 Re: Link-time optimzation Ulrich Weigand
12:54 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Peter S. Mazinger
12:29 Re: Is there a GIMPLE equivalent of UNSPEC? Diego Novillo
12:21 Re: Is there a GIMPLE equivalent of UNSPEC? Steven Bosscher
12:12 Is there a GIMPLE equivalent of UNSPEC? Unruh, Erwin
11:41 Re: Link-time optimzation Richard Earnshaw
11:08 Re: Cirrus arm Maverick Crunch fixes Dario Massarin
10:27 Re: Cirrus arm Maverick Crunch fixes Richard Earnshaw
10:23 Cirrus arm Maverick Crunch fixes Dario Massarin
09:04 Re: Link-time optimzation Giovanni Bajo
08:44 Re: Ada Broken with h_errno change Arnaud Charlet
07:17 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Peter S. Mazinger
05:53 Re: Link-time optimzation Ian Lance Taylor
03:35 Re: Link-time optimzation Jeffrey A Law
02:39 Re: Link-time optimzation Kean Johnston
01:53 Re: Link-time optimzation Andrew Pinski
01:43 Re: Link-time optimzation Gabriel Dos Reis
01:31 Re: Link-time optimzation Daniel Jacobowitz
01:28 Re: Link-time optimzation Mark Mitchell
01:20 Re: Link-time optimzation Richard Henderson
00:52 Re: Link-time optimzation Chris Lattner
00:52 Re: Link-time optimzation Tom Tromey
00:45 Re: New GCC mirror Gerald Pfeifer
00:43 Re: [rfc] new tree-codes/optabs for vectorization of non-unit-stride accesses Devang Patel
00:32 Re: Link-time optimzation Daniel Berlin
00:26 Re: Link-time optimzation Giovanni Bajo
00:25 Re: Link-time optimzation Andrew Pinski
00:02 Re: Link-time optimzation Andrew Pinski

November 16, 2005

23:19 Re: Delay branch scheduling vs. the CFG Jeffrey A Law
22:58 Re: Link-time optimzation Andrew Pinski
22:42 Re: Delay branch scheduling vs. the CFG Joern RENNECKE
22:41 Re: Link-time optimzation Andrew Pinski
22:26 Link-time optimzation Mark Mitchell
22:25 Re: Syntax question Joe Buck
22:21 Re: Ada ACATS status Laurent GUERBY
22:09 Re: Syntax question Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
22:05 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Richard Henderson
21:38 Re: Syntax question Andrew Pinski
21:34 Syntax question Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
21:33 svn switch (was: New branch: ia64-improvements-branch) Gerald Pfeifer
21:33 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Peter S. Mazinger
21:05 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Richard Henderson
21:02 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Peter S. Mazinger
20:49 Ada Broken with h_errno change Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
20:39 Re: [rfc] new tree-codes/optabs for vectorization of non-unit-stride accesses Steven Bosscher
20:21 Re: Null pointer check elimination Joe Buck
20:20 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Richard Henderson
20:17 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
20:07 Re: Delay branch scheduling vs. the CFG Richard Henderson
19:59 Re: Null pointer check elimination Richard Henderson
19:40 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Peter S. Mazinger
19:19 Re: dwarf2 basic block start information Richard Henderson
19:07 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Richard Henderson
18:04 Re: Bogus testcase? Jeffrey A Law
18:00 gcc cross-reference Paul Albrecht
17:07 Re: ultrasparc3 optimisation Eric Botcazou
17:05 Re: ultrasparc3 optimisation Eric Botcazou
16:53 Re: ultrasparc3 optimisation Jason . Beech-Brandt
16:26 Re: ultrasparc3 optimisation Richard Guenther
16:04 Successfull build of gcc-4.1.0 20051112 (experimental) on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Rainer Emrich
15:58 ultrasparc3 optimisation Jason . Beech-Brandt
15:03 Re: [rfc] new tree-codes/optabs for vectorization of non-unit-stride accesses Paul Brook
15:01 Re: Extracting destination register from an instruction Ian Lance Taylor
14:47 Re: Question about mudflap Doug Graham
14:46 Re: arm-rtems Ada Aligned_Word compilation error Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
14:37 announcement for our members. jkeon
14:31 [rfc] new tree-codes/optabs for vectorization of non-unit-stride accesses Dorit Naishlos
14:23 Re: Question about mudflap Richard Guenther
14:21 announcement for our members. ephone_guo
14:16 Re: Question about mudflap Frank Ch. Eigler
14:16 Forw: Question about mudflap Frank Ch. Eigler
14:16 announcement for our members. dldovinh
13:46 Re: New branch: ia64-improvements-branch Steven Bosscher
13:46 Re: New branch: ia64-improvements-branch Diego Novillo
13:35 Re: New branch: ia64-improvements-branch Osku Salerma
13:20 Re: New branch: ia64-improvements-branch Diego Novillo
13:17 [ia64-improvements] Rename branch Diego Novillo
11:26 Re: Adding the D programming language Andrew Haley
09:13 Re: arm-rtems Ada Aligned_Word compilation error Arnaud Charlet
07:43 Re: arm-rtems Ada Aligned_Word compilation error Laurent GUERBY
05:33 Extracting destination register from an instruction Balaji V. Iyer
05:01 Re: Adding the D programming language Ed Smith-Rowland
03:47 Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender Gabriel Dos Reis
02:17 Re: New branch: ia64-improvements-branch Branko Äibej
00:37 Re: New branch: ia64-improvements-branch Gerald Pfeifer

November 15, 2005

23:27 Re: arm-rtems Ada Aligned_Word compilation error Geert Bosch
23:11 Re: arm-rtems Ada Aligned_Word compilation error Laurent GUERBY
22:59 Re: arm-rtems Ada Aligned_Word compilation error Geert Bosch
22:39 gcc-3.4-20051115 is now available gccadmin
21:43 Re: [Treelang] flag_signed_char Rafael Ávila de Espíndola
21:31 Re: Bogus testcase? Joe Buck
21:30 Re: can DECL_RESULT be 0? Rafael Ávila de Espíndola
21:28 Re: Bogus testcase? Paolo Bonzini
21:25 Re: dwarf2 basic block start information Daniel Jacobowitz
21:15 Bogus testcase? Jeffrey A Law
21:11 RE: Null pointer check elimination Boehm, Hans
20:55 Re: dwarf2 basic block start information Jim Wilson
20:41 Re: 10 Nov notes from GCC improvement for Itanium conference call Paolo Bonzini
20:21 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault James E Wilson
20:01 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Peter S. Mazinger
20:01 Re: 10 Nov notes from GCC improvement for Itanium conference call Steven Bosscher
19:44 Re: Null pointer check elimination David Daney
19:20 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault James E Wilson
19:17 Re: 10 Nov notes from GCC improvement for Itanium conference call Richard Guenther
19:15 Re: 10 Nov notes from GCC improvement for Itanium conference call Andrew Pinski
19:12 Re: 10 Nov notes from GCC improvement for Itanium conference call Andrew Pinski
18:59 10 Nov notes from GCC improvement for Itanium conference call Mark K. Smith
18:48 Re: Null pointer check elimination Paolo Bonzini
18:40 Re: Null pointer check elimination Mike Stump
18:39 Re: Null pointer check elimination Joe Buck
18:35 subversion trouble (was Re: Incorrect default options for h8300target) James E Wilson
17:32 Successful "make bootstrap" of native gcc-4.0.2 on PowerPC 405 Koen De Vleeschauwer
17:00 Re: cross builds to avr fail Denis Chertykov
16:59 Re: Java on uClinux (was: Null pointer check elimination) Andrew Haley
16:46 Re: Java on uClinux (was: Null pointer check elimination) Tom Tromey
16:41 Re: Null pointer check elimination Tom Tromey
16:12 Re: Adding the D programming language Larry Evans
15:47 Re: 'gcc -whatever' unrecognized option returns 0 Andrew Pinski
15:41 'gcc -whatever' unrecognized option returns 0 Uros Bizjak
14:24 Re: dwarf2 basic block start information Daniel Jacobowitz
11:52 Re: Java on uClinux Andrew Haley
11:49 Re: Java on uClinux Bernd Schmidt
11:27 Re: dwarf2 basic block start information Mathieu Lacage
11:24 Re: Java on uClinux (was: Null pointer check elimination) Andrew Haley
11:18 Java on uClinux (was: Null pointer check elimination) Bernd Schmidt
09:11 Re: Incorrect default options for h8300 target Jim Blandy
07:41 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Peter S. Mazinger
07:39 Re: Null pointer check elimination David Daney
07:20 Re: dwarf2 basic block start information Mathieu Lacage
06:59 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Eric Christopher
06:57 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Peter S. Mazinger
06:45 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Peter S. Mazinger
06:25 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Eric Christopher
06:08 精彩HDTV高清影碟.机等时尚家电尽在www.hdtvshop.org
06:07 ��ü���� ������Ƽ�� ��� ���������� ������ �ĺ��� �Ǹ��մϴ�. �ĺ����Ǹ�
04:02 Re: New branch: ia64-improvements-branch Daniel Berlin
03:48 Re: Incorrect default options for h8300 target Jim Wilson
03:18 Re: New branch: ia64-improvements-branch Andrew Pinski
02:48 Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Jim Wilson
02:47 New branch: ia64-improvements-branch Diego Novillo
02:40 Re: can DECL_RESULT be 0? James E Wilson
02:35 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
02:30 Re: dwarf2 basic block start information Daniel Jacobowitz
02:26 Re: dwarf2 basic block start information Daniel Jacobowitz
02:24 Re: dwarf2 basic block start information Jim Wilson
02:20 Re: Null pointer check elimination Richard Kenner
02:19 Re: Null pointer check elimination Michael N. Moran
02:17 Re: can DECL_RESULT be 0? Gabriel Dos Reis
01:57 Re: fixincludes make check broken? Jim Wilson
01:10 Re: [Treelang] flag_signed_char Jim Wilson
00:59 Re: arm-rtems Ada Aligned_Word compilation error Jim Wilson
00:43 Re: [gfortran] Second try: Problem parsing hexadecimal constants? Jim Wilson
00:40 Re: strange result when compiling w/ -fpreprocessed but w/out -fdumpbase Jim Wilson
00:33 Re: can DECL_RESULT be 0? Jim Wilson
00:28 Re: new operator in gcc-3.4 Jim Wilson
00:17 Re: Null pointer check elimination Janis Johnson

November 14, 2005

22:57 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
22:28 Re: Null pointer check elimination Michael N. Moran
22:24 [c++] stuff proposed for C++0x Pedro LamarÃo
22:17 Re: Null pointer check elimination Michael N. Moran
22:05 Re: Add revision number to gcc version? H. J. Lu
21:56 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
21:53 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
21:27 Re: Null pointer check elimination Michael N. Moran
21:21 Re: Null pointer check elimination Michael N. Moran
21:17 Re: Null pointer check elimination Michael N. Moran
21:17 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
21:14 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
21:09 Re: Null pointer check elimination Michael N. Moran
21:07 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
21:02 Re: Null pointer check elimination Michael N. Moran
20:55 Re: Null pointer check elimination Michael N. Moran
20:52 Re: Add revision number to gcc version? Mike Stump
20:42 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
20:42 Re: should_duplicate_loop_header_p and volatile asm statements Mike Stump
19:04 Re: Null pointer check elimination Joe Buck
18:47 Re: Null pointer check elimination Michael N. Moran
17:58 Re: cross builds to avr fail Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
17:41 Re: Null pointer check elimination Joe Buck
17:37 Re: Null pointer check elimination Joe Buck
17:31 Re: Null pointer check elimination Joe Buck
17:21 Re: arm sof float Richard Earnshaw
17:17 Re: arm sof float Michael Trimarchi
17:14 Add revision number to gcc version? H. J. Lu
17:03 Re: arm sof float Richard Earnshaw
16:52 arm sof float Michael Trimarchi
14:36 Re: cross newlib builds on svn head Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
12:51 Re: cross builds to avr fail Paolo Bonzini
12:14 Re: Mainline bootstrap broken Steven Bosscher
11:53 Re: Change in order of evaluation in 4.0.2 Giovanni Bajo
11:52 Mainline bootstrap broken Martin Reinecke
10:28 Re: Change in order of evaluation in 4.0.2 Richard Guenther
10:15 Change in order of evaluation in 4.0.2 bil
09:54 Re: inline-unit-growth tweek Richard Guenther
09:42 Re: should_duplicate_loop_header_p and volatile asm statements Florian Weimer
09:34 Re: should_duplicate_loop_header_p and volatile asm statements Steven Bosscher
09:32 should_duplicate_loop_header_p and volatile asm statements Florian Weimer
05:36 Re: inline-unit-growth tweek Ian Lance Taylor
04:09 Re: Adding the D programming language Robert Dewar
00:45 Re: Adding the D programming language Romain Failliot
00:28 Re: Adding the D programming language Robert Dewar
00:06 Re: Ada ACATS status Richard Kenner

November 13, 2005

22:44 Re: Adding the D programming language Romain Failliot
22:43 Re: Runtime Memory Usage Graph Mike Stump
21:26 Re: Delay branch scheduling vs. the CFG Jeffrey A Law
21:20 Re: Delay branch scheduling vs. the CFG Steven Bosscher
21:02 Re: Delay branch scheduling vs. the CFG Jeffrey A Law
20:50 new operator in gcc-3.4 Lars Callenbach
20:20 Delay branch scheduling vs. the CFG Steven Bosscher
20:13 Re: Adding the D programming language Brian Makin
19:23 Re: Where is TARGET_EXPLICIT_RELOCS defined for MIPS? Daniel Jacobowitz
19:19 Re: Where is TARGET_EXPLICIT_RELOCS defined for MIPS? Graham Stott
19:15 Re: Where is TARGET_EXPLICIT_RELOCS defined for MIPS? Daniel Jacobowitz
19:01 The Linux binutils 2.16.91.0.4 os released H. J. Lu
18:20 Where is TARGET_EXPLICIT_RELOCS defined for MIPS? Steven Bosscher
16:56 Ada ACATS status Laurent GUERBY
16:02 Re: Null pointer check elimination Diego Novillo
12:14 Re: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-5.c Eric Botcazou
11:17 Re: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-5.c Razya Ladelsky
11:08 Re: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-5.c Eric Botcazou
09:34 Re: How Can I Get See A Memory Map For An Executable Florian Weimer
09:33 Re: Null pointer check elimination Robert Dewar
09:31 How Can I Get See A Memory Map For An Executable Steven Woody
09:26 Re: Null pointer check elimination Richard Guenther
07:43 Runtime Memory Usage Graph Steven Woody
07:38 How Can I Get See A Memory Map For An Executable Steven Woody
05:44 Re: Adding the D programming language Florian Weimer
05:10 Re: cross builds to avr fail Ian Lance Taylor
02:04 Re: Adding the D programming language Mike Stump
01:06 Adding the D programming language Romain Failliot
01:01 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
00:58 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
00:22 Re: Null pointer check elimination Andrew Pinski
00:18 Re: Null pointer check elimination Paul Brook
00:15 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
00:04 Re: Null pointer check elimination Diego Novillo

November 12, 2005

23:38 Re: Null pointer check elimination Andrew Pinski
23:30 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
22:05 Re: Null pointer check elimination Paul Brook
21:34 Re: cross builds to avr fail Richard Guenther
21:15 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
21:14 Re: Null pointer check elimination Per Bothner
21:11 Re: Null pointer check elimination Per Bothner
21:03 Re: Null pointer check elimination Andrew Pinski
21:00 Re: cross builds to avr fail Eric Botcazou
21:00 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
20:58 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
20:56 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
20:33 Re: Null pointer check elimination Diego Novillo
20:33 Re: Null pointer check elimination Tom Tromey
20:31 cross builds to avr fail Richard Guenther
20:24 Re: cross newlib builds on svn head Laurent GUERBY
19:35 Re: Null pointer check elimination Per Bothner
18:53 Re: Null pointer check elimination Diego Novillo
18:47 Re: Null pointer check elimination Per Bothner
18:44 Re: Null pointer check elimination Paul Brook
18:38 Re: Null pointer check elimination Andrew Pinski
18:37 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
18:34 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
18:33 Re: Null pointer check elimination Gabriel Dos Reis
18:17 Re: Null pointer check elimination Diego Novillo
17:51 gcc-4.1-20051112 is now available gccadmin
17:44 Re: Null pointer check elimination Laurent GUERBY
17:39 Re: Null pointer check elimination Diego Novillo
17:30 Re: Null pointer check elimination Diego Novillo
17:29 Re: Null pointer check elimination Andrew Haley
17:27 Re: Null pointer check elimination Per Bothner
17:25 Re: Null pointer check elimination Diego Novillo
17:24 Re: Null pointer check elimination Laurent GUERBY
17:19 Re: Null pointer check elimination Andrew Haley
17:16 Re: Null pointer check elimination Diego Novillo
17:05 Re: Null pointer check elimination Per Bothner
16:38 Re: Null pointer check elimination Daniel Berlin
15:40 Re: Null pointer check elimination Diego Novillo
12:03 can DECL_RESULT be 0? Rafael Ávila de Espíndola
06:54 Re: Null pointer check elimination Ian Lance Taylor
05:53 Re: Null pointer check elimination David Daney
02:37 Re: [RFC] PR C++/24138 Mark Mitchell
00:28 Re: darwin building ppc64 libjava? Mike Stump
00:20 Re: i686-pc-cygwin crash gcc-4.0 branch Brian Dessent
00:15 Re: darwin building ppc64 libjava? Andrew Pinski
00:08 darwin building ppc64 libjava? Mike Stump

November 11, 2005

23:57 Re: i686-pc-cygwin crash gcc-4.0 branch Bobby McNulty
21:49 Re: [gfortran] Second try: Problem parsing hexadecimal constants? Mike Stump
20:26 Re: non-ambiguous typedefs Mark Mitchell
19:46 Re: Using Alias analysis Daniel Berlin
19:34 strange result when compiling w/ -fpreprocessed but w/out -fdumpbase Joern RENNECKE
19:33 Using Alias analysis drizzle drizzle
17:16 Re: UNITS vs. BYTES Ian Lance Taylor
16:56 Re: CSiBE compile time improvement Andrew Pinski
16:53 CSiBE compile time improvement Steven Bosscher
16:18 [gfortran] Second try: Problem parsing hexadecimal constants? Ioannis E. Venetis
09:10 Re: UNITS vs. BYTES Paolo Bonzini
09:05 Re: UNITS vs. BYTES Hans-Peter Nilsson
08:53 UNITS vs. BYTES Adrian Prantl
00:29 RE: Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry Rui Wang

November 10, 2005

22:50 Re: PR24138 and flexible arrays in C++ Joe Buck
22:39 gcc-4.0-20051110 is now available gccadmin
22:36 Re: PR24138 and flexible arrays in C++ Gabriel Dos Reis
21:28 Re: Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry Mark Wielaard
21:24 Re: PR24138 and flexible arrays in C++ Mark Mitchell
21:05 Re: Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry TJ Laurenzo
21:00 Re: Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry TJ Laurenzo
20:10 [RFC] PR C++/24138 Aldy Hernandez
19:53 Re: r106743 - in /trunk/gcc: ChangeLog Makefile.in ... Daniel Berlin
18:37 Re: r106743 - in /trunk/gcc: ChangeLog Makefile.in ... Hans-Peter Nilsson
17:56 RFC/RFH: My new library call rewriting optimization pass is ICEing David Daney
15:52 arm-rtems Ada Aligned_Word compilation error Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
14:10 RE: Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry Rui Wang
12:43 PR24138 and flexible arrays in C++ Aldy Hernandez
12:22 RE: Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry Rui Wang
11:51 Incorrect default options for h8300 target Mike Lerwill
11:27 fixincludes make check broken? Andreas Jaeger
09:03 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries François-Xavier Coudert
04:55 Re: [RFC] What should be the semantics of a zero-bit bit-field withpragma pack? Hans-Peter Nilsson
01:32 Re: Second Try: Assembly Programmer Contributions Ian Lance Taylor
01:08 Second Try: Assembly Programmer Contributions Redefined Horizons
00:57 Lowering return statements in gimple pass Olatunji Ruwase
00:47 [Treelang] flag_signed_char Rafael Espíndola

November 09, 2005

22:18 Re: Is -fvisibility patch possible on GCC 3.3.x Gabriel Dos Reis
21:38 RE: Is -fvisibility patch possible on GCC 3.3.x Gary M Mann
21:32 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
20:13 Re: Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry Tom Tromey
18:24 RE: Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry Rui Wang
18:19 dwarf2 basic block start information mathieu lacage
17:23 Re: non-ambiguous typedefs Joerg Richter
17:09 Re: Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry Tom Tromey
16:49 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries Paolo Bonzini
16:13 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries François-Xavier Coudert
16:00 Re: i686-pc-cygwin crash gcc-4.0 branch Brian Dessent
14:32 Re: Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry TJ Laurenzo
14:27 Re: Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry Ranjit Mathew
14:21 Re: Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry TJ Laurenzo
12:48 Re: Is "-fdump-tree-original-raw" a stable feature? Florian Weimer
12:43 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Paolo Bonzini
08:54 RE: Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry Rui Wang
08:49 Is "-fdump-tree-original-raw" a stable feature? Hendrik Post
07:39 Re: i686-pc-cygwin crash gcc-4.0 branch Bobby McNulty
07:30 Re: i686-pc-cygwin crash gcc-4.0 branch Brian Dessent
07:18 Re: Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry Ranjit Mathew
06:50 i686-pc-cygwin crash gcc-4.0 branch Bobby McNulty
06:31 Re: [gomp] ./libgomp_f.h:71: error: size of array 'test' is negative Christian Joensson
03:08 Re: non-ambiguous typedefs Gabriel Dos Reis
02:58 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Devang Patel
02:48 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Daniel Jacobowitz
02:41 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Devang Patel
02:21 non-ambiguous typedefs Howard Hinnant
02:11 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Kaveh R. Ghazi
01:49 Re: Does gcc-3.4.3 for HP-UX 11.23/IA-64 work? James E Wilson
01:22 Re: Does gcc-3.4.3 for HP-UX 11.23/IA-64 work? Albert Chin
00:13 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
00:00 Re: Does gcc-3.4.3 for HP-UX 11.23/IA-64 work? Jim Wilson

November 08, 2005

22:38 gcc-3.4-20051108 is now available gccadmin
20:34 apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault Peter S. Mazinger
20:32 Re: [gomp] ./libgomp_f.h:71: error: size of array 'test' is negative Jakub Jelinek
19:31 Re: Re: Does gcc-3.4.3 for HP-UX 11.23/IA-64 work? Steve Ellcey
19:01 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Daniel Berlin
18:56 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Daniel Jacobowitz
18:47 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Daniel Berlin
18:42 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Daniel Jacobowitz
18:37 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Devang Patel
18:28 Re: [gomp] ./libgomp_f.h:71: error: size of array 'test' is negative Christian Joensson
17:37 Re: [gomp] ./libgomp_f.h:71: error: size of array 'test' is negative Christian Joensson
16:58 Re: Skipping incompatable libaries on a SPARC cross compile Eric Botcazou
16:46 Re: Skipping incompatable libaries on a SPARC cross compile Mark Cuss
16:29 Re: Skipping incompatable libaries on a SPARC cross compile Markus Trippelsdorf
16:17 Re: Skipping incompatable libaries on a SPARC cross compile Mark Cuss
16:12 Re: [gomp] ./libgomp_f.h:71: error: size of array 'test' is negative Jakub Jelinek
16:00 Re: [gomp] ./libgomp_f.h:71: error: size of array 'test' is negative Christian Joensson
15:26 Re: [gomp] ./libgomp_f.h:71: error: size of array 'test' is negative Jakub Jelinek
15:05 [gomp] ./libgomp_f.h:71: error: size of array 'test' is negative Christian Joensson
15:04 Re: BROKEN: pthreads and c++ statically linked Lee Dixon
14:38 Re: BROKEN: pthreads and c++ statically linked Jakub Jelinek
14:33 BROKEN: pthreads and c++ statically linked Dixon, Lee L.
13:50 Cross compile, no grmic/grmiregistry Rui Wang
12:25 Re: __gcc_cpu_feature Paolo Carlini
12:16 Re: __gcc_cpu_feature Richard Guenther
11:16 __gcc_cpu_feature Paolo Carlini
10:41 Re: svn feature request: print URL in diff output Giovanni Bajo
10:22 Re: svn feature request: print URL in diff output Paolo Bonzini
10:20 Re: svn feature request: print URL in diff output Uros Bizjak
09:51 Re: weird installation problem on i686-pc-linux-gnu Martin Reinecke
08:16 svn feature request: print URL in diff output Paolo Bonzini
07:39 Re: copyright assignement Pierre-Matthieu anglade
07:39 Re: Unwinding through signal handlers on IA-64/Linux Eric Botcazou
03:14 Re: Does gcc-3.4.3 for HP-UX 11.23/IA-64 work? Albert Chin
02:27 Re: Does gcc-3.4.3 for HP-UX 11.23/IA-64 work? Jim Wilson
01:17 Re: Copies of the GCC repository Daniel Jacobowitz
00:28 Re: Unwinding through signal handlers on IA-64/Linux Jim Wilson
00:22 Re: Skipping incompatable libaries on a SPARC cross compile Eric Botcazou

November 07, 2005

23:52 Re: Question on target specifications for a SPARC machine Eric Botcazou
23:46 Question on target specifications for a SPARC machine Mark Cuss
23:46 Re: copyright assignement Mike Stump
23:40 Re: Does gcc-3.4.3 for HP-UX 11.23/IA-64 work? Albert Chin
23:19 Re: copyright assignement Jim Wilson
23:13 Re: Does gcc-3.4.3 for HP-UX 11.23/IA-64 work? Jim Wilson
22:43 Re: Skipping incompatable libaries on a SPARC cross compile Mark Cuss
22:25 Skipping incompatable libaries on a SPARC cross compile Mark Cuss
20:16 Anonymous class closures in g++ Joel Dice
20:09 Re: \n to \r\n in stdout Mike Stump
19:53 Re: [RFC] What should be the semantics of a zero-bit bit-field withpragma pack? Mark Mitchell
19:34 [RFC] What should be the semantics of a zero-bit bit-field with pragma pack? Steven Bosscher
16:33 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
16:25 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Ulrich Drepper
16:03 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Andrew Pinski
15:59 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Ulrich Drepper
15:58 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
15:48 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Andrew Pinski
15:45 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Daniel Jacobowitz
15:42 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Ulrich Drepper
15:27 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Daniel Jacobowitz
15:20 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Ulrich Drepper
14:39 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Gabriel Dos Reis
12:04 Subscribing the mailing list thales
11:39 \n to \r\n in stdout thales
11:19 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
11:15 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Guenther
10:45 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
10:41 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
10:40 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Guenther
10:29 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
10:24 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Guenther
10:14 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
10:10 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
10:08 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
10:03 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
09:50 Re: no warning being displayed. Richard Guenther
09:00 Re: no warning being displayed. Inder
08:50 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Henderson
08:47 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Henderson
08:46 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Henderson
08:06 Re: no warning being displayed. Richard Guenther
08:03 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Guenther
06:14 no warning being displayed. Inder
04:01 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Gabriel Dos Reis
02:45 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
01:35 Does gcc-3.4.3 for HP-UX 11.23/IA-64 work? Albert Chin
01:33 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
01:24 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
01:11 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Henderson
00:35 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini

November 06, 2005

23:37 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Henderson
21:17 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Mark Mitchell
21:13 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Ulrich Drepper
21:11 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
21:07 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Florian Weimer
20:47 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Henderson
20:34 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Florian Weimer
20:32 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Peter Dimov
20:32 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Florian Weimer
20:14 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
20:10 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Ian Lance Taylor
19:54 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
19:46 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
19:40 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Mark Mitchell
19:34 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
19:32 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Henderson
19:26 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Mark Mitchell
19:19 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
19:16 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Guenther
19:02 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Mark Mitchell
18:56 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
18:52 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Henderson
18:42 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
18:39 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Mark Mitchell
17:59 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Howard Hinnant
17:58 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? René Rebe
15:32 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Mattias Engdeg�rd
14:20 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Robert Dewar
14:18 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Robert Dewar
14:18 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Robert Dewar
14:16 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Robert Dewar
14:12 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
13:50 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Guenther
12:40 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Jakub Jelinek
12:32 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Giovanni Bajo
12:25 Re: Is -fvisibility patch possible on GCC 3.3.x Gabriel Dos Reis
12:24 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Gabriel Dos Reis
11:43 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
11:03 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
10:52 Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Richard Guenther
10:43 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Richard Guenther
10:34 Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3 Paolo Carlini
08:48 Re: Problem with commas in macro parameters Ralf Wildenhues
06:28 successful 3.3.6 bootstrap on i686-pc-linux-gnu Érsek László
06:22 Problem with commas in macro parameters Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov
02:59 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Robert Dewar
02:57 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Robert Dewar
02:41 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Giovanni Bajo
01:13 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Steven Bosscher
00:25 Re: GCC-generated code and i386 condition codes behavior Robert Dewar
00:12 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Robert Dewar

November 05, 2005

21:26 Is -fvisibility patch possible on GCC 3.3.x Gary M Mann
19:46 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Steven Bosscher
19:27 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Giovanni Bajo
19:11 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Andrew Pinski
19:09 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Giovanni Bajo
19:04 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Richard Guenther
18:49 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Giovanni Bajo
18:41 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Richard Guenther
18:35 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Andrew Pinski
18:30 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Giovanni Bajo
18:29 copyright assignement Pierre-Matthieu anglade
18:28 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Steven Bosscher
18:13 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Robert Dewar
18:11 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Robert Dewar
18:03 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Eric Botcazou
18:02 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Steven Bosscher
17:58 Re: [libgfortran] Patch to handle statically linked libgfortran Eric Botcazou
17:57 Re: [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Robert Dewar
17:54 [RFC] Enabling loop unrolls at -O3? Giovanni Bajo
17:51 gcc-4.1-20051105 is now available gccadmin
13:43 Language and academic programs from around the world International School Guide
13:43 Language and academic programs from around the world International School Guide
01:15 Re: The new gcc_release script hasn't been pushed to production Daniel Berlin
01:07 Re: The new gcc_release script hasn't been pushed to production Joseph S. Myers
00:30 Re: The new gcc_release script hasn't been pushed to production Daniel Berlin

November 04, 2005

23:30 The new gcc_release script hasn't been pushed to production Kelley Cook
19:33 Unwinding through signal handlers on IA-64/Linux Eric Botcazou
19:11 Re: GCC-generated code and i386 condition codes behavior Robert Dewar
19:08 Re: GCC-generated code and i386 condition codes behavior Paolo Bonzini
18:40 Re: GCC-generated code and i386 condition codes behavior Andi Kleen
17:32 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries Vincent Lefevre
17:29 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries Tobias . Schlueter
17:28 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries Vincent Lefevre
17:27 Re: GCC-generated code and i386 condition codes behavior Robert Dewar
17:26 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries Janne Blomqvist
17:22 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries Steve Kargl
17:17 Re: *-rtems status on head was Re: cross newlib builds on svn head Andreas Schwab
17:16 Re: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Diego Novillo
17:10 arm-rtems4.7 Ada update Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
16:43 *-rtems status on head was Re: cross newlib builds on svn head Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
16:37 RE: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Dave Korn
16:34 Re: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Richard Guenther
16:26 RE: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Daniel Berlin
16:23 RE: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Dave Korn
16:06 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Joern RENNECKE
16:01 Re: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Daniel Berlin
15:38 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Daniel Berlin
15:37 Re: F77 code under gcc Richard Guenther
15:24 F77 code under gcc Alex Tzanov
15:21 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries François-Xavier Coudert
15:17 Re: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Diego Novillo
15:16 Re: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Richard Guenther
15:08 RE: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Dave Korn
15:07 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries Steve Kargl
15:05 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Joern RENNECKE
15:03 Re: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Richard Kenner
14:59 Re: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Diego Novillo
14:53 Re: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Daniel Berlin
14:46 Re: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Richard Guenther
14:45 Re: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Richard Guenther
14:29 Re: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Richard Kenner
13:41 Re: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Diego Novillo
13:41 Re: [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Richard Kenner
13:34 [PATCH] Re: ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Richard Guenther
12:46 Re: svn url shortcuts Vincent Lefevre
12:34 Re: timezone of svn server for -r? Vincent Lefevre
12:32 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries François-Xavier Coudert
12:21 Re: Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries Albert Chin
11:31 ref_contains_indirect_ref always false? Richard Guenther
11:15 Re: GCC-generated code and i386 condition codes behavior Bryan Ford
11:11 RE: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Dave Korn
09:10 Build using --with-gmp and shared libraries François-Xavier Coudert
08:20 Re: toplevel Makefile.tpl hacking François-Xavier Coudert
07:52 Re: toplevel Makefile.tpl hacking Paolo Bonzini
03:24 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Daniel Berlin
01:32 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? amylaar
01:29 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Joern Rennecke
00:56 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Branko Äibej
00:38 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Kevin Puetz
00:18 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Daniel Berlin
00:14 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Daniel Berlin
00:12 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Daniel Berlin
00:09 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Daniel Berlin
00:05 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Phil Edwards

November 03, 2005

23:58 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Giovanni Bajo
23:55 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Joern RENNECKE
23:53 Re: svn repository incorrectly converted or corrupted Daniel Berlin
23:49 Re: svn repository incorrectly converted or corrupted Joern RENNECKE
23:47 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Joern RENNECKE
23:44 Re: svn url shortcuts DJ Delorie
23:29 Re: svn repository incorrectly converted or corrupted Daniel Berlin
23:28 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Branko Äibej
23:15 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Andreas Schwab
23:09 Re: toplevel Makefile.tpl hacking Andreas Schwab
22:55 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Andreas Schwab
22:45 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Branko Äibej
22:32 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Branko Äibej
22:15 Re: toplevel Makefile.tpl hacking François-Xavier Coudert
22:02 Re: weird installation problem on i686-pc-linux-gnu Martin Reinecke
21:58 Re: timezone of svn server for -r? Andreas Schwab
21:33 Re: weird installation problem on i686-pc-linux-gnu James E Wilson
21:27 svn repository incorrectly converted or corrupted Joern RENNECKE
20:37 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Joern RENNECKE
20:18 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Joern RENNECKE
20:13 Re: bug 24599 Doug Evans
20:11 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Daniel Jacobowitz
20:08 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Joern RENNECKE
20:04 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Daniel Jacobowitz
20:03 Re: diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Mike Stump
20:01 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Daniel Berlin
19:59 Re: -Wuninitialized issues David Taylor
19:24 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Mike Stump
19:15 diffing directories with merged-as-deleted files? Joern RENNECKE
19:10 timezone of svn server for -r? Joern RENNECKE
18:53 GCC mainline now open for bug fixes under normal Stage 3 rules Mark Mitchell
18:37 Re: bug 24599 Doug Evans
17:53 Re: interesting anecdote on gcc speed Karel Gardas
17:43 interesting anecdote on gcc speed Joe Buck
16:52 [gfortran] Problem parsing hexadecimal constants? Ioannis E. Venetis
16:42 Re: cross newlib builds on svn head Paolo Bonzini
16:31 Re: Howto Cross Compile GCC to run on PPC Platform Kai Ruottu
16:30 cross newlib builds on svn head Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp
16:09 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Joern RENNECKE
15:16 Re: Howto Cross Compile GCC to run on PPC Platform Jeff Stevens
14:38 Re: Howto Cross Compile GCC to run on PPC Platform Kai Ruottu
13:13 Re: Howto Cross Compile GCC to run on PPC Platform Jeff Stevens
12:14 Re: Patch reviews for 4.1 Paolo Bonzini
12:09 Re: toplevel Makefile.tpl hacking Paolo Bonzini
12:00 RE: Patch reviews for 4.1 Dave Korn
10:55 toplevel Makefile.tpl hacking FX Coudert
10:44 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Paolo Bonzini
08:11 Re: Patch reviews for 4.1 Ian Lance Taylor
07:28 Re: Patch reviews for 4.1 Per Bothner
07:14 Patch reviews for 4.1 Mark Mitchell
05:22 Re: SH: PR target/24445 Kaz Kojima
04:49 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? DJ Delorie
04:28 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Daniel Jacobowitz
04:20 Re: SH: PR target/24445 Ian Lance Taylor
03:56 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Richard Kenner
03:43 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Branko Äibej
03:27 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Daniel Jacobowitz
03:26 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Daniel Jacobowitz
03:22 Successful build of gcc 3.3.4 Craig N. Scott
02:18 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
02:10 Re: SH: PR target/24445 Kaz Kojima
02:02 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Mark Mitchell
01:55 Re: SH: PR target/24445 Andrew Pinski
01:54 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
01:53 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Joe Buck
01:52 Re: SH: PR target/24445 Ian Lance Taylor
01:48 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
01:46 Re: [cft] aligning main's stack frame Richard Henderson
01:45 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Daniel Jacobowitz
01:39 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Ian Lance Taylor
01:35 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Kaveh R. Ghazi
01:32 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Joe Buck
01:31 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Kaveh R. Ghazi
01:13 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Gabriel Dos Reis
00:58 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Joe Buck
00:54 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Andrew Pinski
00:43 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Mark Mitchell
00:40 Re: SH: PR target/24445 Kaz Kojima
00:30 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Diego Novillo
00:27 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? DJ Delorie
00:26 Re: [libgfortran] Patch to handle statically linked libgfortran Janis Johnson
00:24 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Paul Brook
00:21 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
00:09 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Richard Henderson
00:04 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Kaveh R. Ghazi

November 02, 2005

23:56 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Joern RENNECKE
23:47 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Joern RENNECKE
23:39 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Daniel Berlin
23:32 Re: SH: PR target/24445 Joern RENNECKE
23:28 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Daniel Berlin
23:26 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Neil Booth
23:20 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Bobby McNulty
23:17 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Joern RENNECKE
23:10 SH: PR target/24445 Kaz Kojima
23:10 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? DJ Delorie
22:33 Re: svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Mike Stump
22:19 svn diff branch woprking copy against mainline? Joern RENNECKE
22:11 Re: [libgfortran] Patch to handle statically linked libgfortran FX Coudert
21:59 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Chris Lattner
20:47 RE: What are the differences between 2.95.3 and 3.2.3? Ryan Mansfield
20:44 What are the differences between 2.95.3 and 3.2.3? Pascal Aschwanden
20:41 Re: weird installation problem on i686-pc-linux-gnu Mike Stump
19:44 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Chris Lattner
19:31 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
19:31 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
19:29 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Bernhard R. Link
19:21 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Andrew Pinski
19:10 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
18:55 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Chris Lattner
18:50 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
18:01 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Chris Lattner
17:58 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Mark Mitchell
17:46 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
17:42 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
17:42 Re: [RFC] c++ template instantiation generates zero-sized array (pr19989) Josh Conner
17:40 Re: [gfortran] fortran preprocessing, round 2 Richard Henderson
17:40 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
17:11 Re: [RFC] c++ template instantiation generates zero-sized array (pr19989) Mark Mitchell
17:07 Re: [RFC] c++ template instantiation generates zero-sized array (pr19989) Josh Conner
16:24 Re: Library commits vs Bugzilla Daniel Berlin
16:20 Re: Library commits vs Bugzilla Paolo Carlini
16:17 Re: Library commits vs Bugzilla Daniel Berlin
15:57 Library commits vs Bugzilla Paolo Carlini
11:20 Re: [gfortran] fortran preprocessing, round 2 François-Xavier Coudert
10:35 Re: weird installation problem on i686-pc-linux-gnu Martin Reinecke
09:56 RE: GCC 4.0.2 Canadian Cross Compile Mark Fortescue
09:40 Re: weird installation problem on i686-pc-linux-gnu Martin Reinecke
09:13 Re: Shared libraries Hagen Paul Pfeifer
08:55 Re: A question about memcpy Mike Stump
08:46 Re: Shared libraries Mike Stump
08:31 Shared libraries Softish soft
06:38 A question about memcpy Eric Fisher
03:10 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Kaveh R. Ghazi
02:38 Re: powerpc/rs6000 implicit FPU usage David Edelsohn
01:12 Re: [RFC] c++ template instantiation generates zero-sized array (pr19989) Mark Mitchell
00:49 powerpc/rs6000 implicit FPU usage Till Straumann
00:29 Re: GCC 4.0.2 Canadian Cross Compile Nathanael Nerode

November 01, 2005

22:49 Re: [gfortran] fortran preprocessing, round 2 Richard Henderson
22:41 Re: [gfortran] fortran preprocessing, round 2 Andrew Pinski
22:23 [gfortran] fortran preprocessing, round 2 FX Coudert
21:47 [G++] Implementing a C++0x standard proprosal (Design by Contract) nesotto
21:08 Re: Bug in install of gfortran for gcc-4.0.2 Andreas Schwab
21:07 Re: non coding contributions Janis Johnson
20:56 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Mark Mitchell
20:43 non coding contributions Benj FitzPatrick
19:54 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Joe Buck
19:52 Re: Bug in install of gfortran for gcc-4.0.2 James E Wilson
19:39 Re: Bug in install of gfortran for gcc-4.0.2 Steven Bosscher
19:27 Re: weird installation problem on i686-pc-linux-gnu Jim Wilson
19:22 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
19:19 Re: dump CFG and callgraph Jim Wilson
19:07 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
18:59 Re: Bug in install of gfortran for gcc-4.0.2 Jim Wilson
18:49 Re: resolving backslash newline whisky tango foxtrot: a proposal Joe Buck
18:32 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Joe Buck
18:28 RE: resolving backslash newline whisky tango foxtrot: a proposal Dave Korn
18:27 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Diego Novillo
18:20 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Diego Novillo
18:19 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
18:03 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
17:48 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
16:50 [RFC] c++ template instantiation generates zero-sized array (pr 19989) Josh Conner
16:41 Re: resolving backslash newline whisky tango foxtrot: a proposal Per Bothner
16:08 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Diego Novillo
15:48 SVK Tarball for complete trunk history Daniel Berlin
14:37 Re: Vectorizing HIRLAM 4: complicated access patterns examined. Tobias . Schlueter
14:27 Re: Vectorizing HIRLAM 4: complicated access patterns examined. Jakub Jelinek
14:25 Re: insufficient inline optimisation? Andrew Pinski
13:49 Re: insufficient inline optimisation? Steven Bosscher
13:15 RE: resolving backslash newline whisky tango foxtrot: a proposal Dave Korn
13:08 Re: insufficient inline optimisation? Florian Weimer
13:02 Re: Vectorizing HIRLAM 4: complicated access patterns examined. Tobias . Schlueter
12:44 Re: possible problem with long double Andrew Haley
12:37 Re: Vectorizing HIRLAM 4: complicated access patterns examined. Toon Moene
12:21 Re: GCC 4.0.2 Canadian Cross Compile Mark Fortescue
12:20 possible problem with long double Vivaldo
12:15 Re: insufficient inline optimisation? Steven Bosscher
12:07 insufficient inline optimisation? Anthony Shipman
11:59 Re: Vectorizing HIRLAM 4: complicated access patterns examined. Paul Thomas
11:49 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Neil Booth
11:06 weird installation problem on i686-pc-linux-gnu Martin Reinecke
05:23 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
04:52 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Mark Mitchell
04:51 Re: A question about unable to generate reloads Ian Lance Taylor
04:46 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Ian Lance Taylor
01:53 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Mark Mitchell
01:40 A question about unable to generate reloads Eric Fisher
01:38 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
01:36 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Jeffrey A Law
01:11 Re: -Wuninitialized issues Mark Mitchell
01:08 dump CFG and callgraph sean yang
00:13 Re: GccPowerpc eabi HowTo - probem with stido functions ( sprintf) Jim Wilson
Indexes: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Site Nav: [Browse other archives for this mailing list][Browse other mailing lists at this site]
Search: Limit to:

Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.3