gcc archive
author index for September, 1999

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: This time period only This mailing list only All mailing lists Entire site (no limit)

+ +

• 1999-09-08 23:27 GCC 2.95.1 static string won't compile on SCO-OSR5
• 1999-09-09 19:48 Re: GCC 2.95.1 static string won't compile on SCO-OSR5

Andre McCurdy

• 1999-09-08 11:33 MIPS16 -mentry pseudo instruction definitions
• 1999-09-09 07:06 Re: MIPS16 -mentry pseudo instruction definitions
• 1999-09-10 08:21 Re: MIPS16 -mentry pseudo instruction definitions
• 1999-09-13 05:53 Re: MIPS16 -mentry pseudo instruction definitions
• 1999-09-14 07:07 Re: MIPS16 -mentry pseudo instruction definitions

Fredrik Öhrström

• 1999-09-14 06:36 Troubles with -fno-vtable-thunks recompilation.... Was: Strange C++ behaviour
• 1999-09-15 09:06 Almost got glibc working with no-vtable-thunks, but ....
• 1999-09-16 03:50 Re: Almost got glibc working with no-vtable-thunks, but ....
• 1999-09-22 04:25 Is this a bug? Dynamic cast error similar to thunk error.
• 1999-09-22 04:40 Is this a bug? Continuation....

Intervel Informática

• 1999-09-24 13:40 GCC for Unix and Xenix

Aaron Holtzman

• 1999-09-01 11:40 global variable store optimization

Adam Kochanek

• 1999-09-01 03:40 template <class T> myList<T>::myList() fails
• 1999-09-02 03:45 cannot find crt1.o after installing gcc-2.95.1

adam prime

• 1999-09-21 17:57 2.95.1

Ahmed El-Mahmoudy

• 1999-09-19 06:19 where did ioperm & iopl functions go ?
• 1999-09-22 10:37 Re: where did ioperm & iopl functions go ?

Alan Lehotsky

• 1999-09-27 08:43 question about constant-folding compares...

Alex Buell

• 1999-09-08 15:21 Re: egcs-ss-19990907 is now available
• 1999-09-12 22:03 Re: Binutils
• 1999-09-15 13:22 Gcc-2.95.1 and LessTif
• 1999-09-16 17:16 Gcc-2.95.1 and LessTif (solved!)
• 1999-09-18 10:51 Re: on vacation till 1999-04-10
• 1999-09-20 14:17 Re: ABI/compatibility details? (egcs -> gcc 2.95 -> future?)
• 1999-09-20 15:03 Left shift operations and the long long int datatype
• 1999-09-20 15:16 Re: ABI/compatibility details? (egcs -> gcc 2.95 -> future?)
• 1999-09-20 15:42 Re: Left shift operations and the long long int datatype
• 1999-09-21 00:00 Re: ABI/compatibility details? (egcs -> gcc 2.95 -> future?)
• 1999-09-21 12:16 Re: ABI/compatibility details? (egcs -> gcc 2.95 -> future?)
• 1999-09-22 15:29 Re: ABI/compatibility details? (egcs -> gcc 2.95 -> future?)

Alex Rosenberg

• 1999-09-09 21:54 Re: type based aliasing again

Alexandre Hoflack

• 1999-09-28 04:06 seekg(long long) vs seekg(long)

Alexandre Mancini

• 1999-09-24 14:48 memory manager

Alexandre Oliva

• 1999-09-01 10:56 Re: template <class T> myList<T>::myList() fails
• 1999-09-02 05:40 Re: help!!!
• 1999-09-02 11:28 Re: wchar_t string functions?
• 1999-09-03 20:33 Re: C++ and static data members...
• 1999-09-05 19:45 Re: g++ inlining problem?
• 1999-09-05 19:52 Re: The treatment of null characters in C source files
• 1999-09-05 22:31 Re: g++ inlining problem?
• 1999-09-05 22:50 Re: g++ inlining problem?
• 1999-09-08 05:17 Re: Problem for make gcc-2.95
• 1999-09-08 05:20 Re: configure failed
• 1999-09-08 05:24 Re: gcc-2.95.1 on sun
• 1999-09-08 05:29 Re: Shared library that needs stuff from another library...
• 1999-09-08 05:43 Re: Shared library that needs stuff from another library...
• 1999-09-08 06:03 Re: egcs-ss-19990907 : bug in gcc/configure ?
• 1999-09-14 02:51 Re: Installing gcc whithout having C compilator
• 1999-09-14 03:04 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 05:45 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 16:55 Re: Which download for a C compiler
• 1999-09-16 02:15 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-16 10:31 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-17 14:58 Re: c++ warning idea
• 1999-09-18 10:38 Re: on vacation till 1999-04-10
• 1999-09-20 08:58 Re: Function return problem
• 1999-09-20 17:34 Re: ABI/compatibility details? (egcs -> gcc 2.95 -> future?)
• 1999-09-20 18:18 Re: Problem compiling Xemacs with -O3
• 1999-09-20 18:19 Re: HP-UX 10.20 trouble
• 1999-09-20 18:20 Re: CVS problem with gcc/cp/ChangeLog
• 1999-09-20 18:50 Re: CVS problem with gcc/cp/ChangeLog
• 1999-09-20 19:06 Re: gcc-ss-19990920 is now available
• 1999-09-20 20:38 gcc/cp/parse.c cannot be checked in
• 1999-09-20 21:10 Re: gcc/cp/parse.c cannot be checked in
• 1999-09-22 04:36 Re: gcc-ss-19990920 is now available
• 1999-09-28 16:21 Re: gcc 2.95.1
• 1999-09-29 16:22 Re: assembler problems with: g++ 2.95.1/Solaris 2.6/ -O3
• 1999-09-30 13:02 Re: About C/getch() errror

Andi Kleen

• 1999-09-07 08:40 Re: Support for C9X in gcc?
• 1999-09-14 09:31 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 10:54 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 22:19 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-28 03:30 Re: -fno-exceptions and bad_alloc
• 1999-09-28 13:29 Re: -fno-exceptions and bad_alloc

Andreas Conz

• 1999-09-03 04:10 Perhaps useful information about optimisation

Andreas Jaeger

• 1999-09-02 00:53 Re: Compilation getting slower
• 1999-09-02 22:36 Re: Compilation getting slower
• 1999-09-07 01:28 Re: Support for C9X in gcc?

Andreas Schwab

• 1999-09-01 08:40 Reload bug
• 1999-09-02 01:45 Re: CVS Update: www.netwinder.org: pub
• 1999-09-02 02:15 Re: Reload bug
• 1999-09-02 02:25 Re: Why we can't have nice discarding const warnings
• 1999-09-06 01:55 Re: Unsuccessful build of a cross PowerPC GCC 2.95.x for an Intel
• 1999-09-08 00:41 Reload problem
• 1999-09-15 01:21 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 02:23 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 03:52 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-17 00:26 gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-20 00:34 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-21 10:14 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-22 03:21 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-22 07:09 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-22 07:37 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-22 08:42 Re: __builtin_return_address why const parameter ?
• 1999-09-23 00:49 Re: vma space for gc
• 1999-09-23 01:27 Re: vma space for gc
• 1999-09-24 00:36 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-28 06:06 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-28 09:58 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-28 10:17 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-28 10:32 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-28 10:43 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-30 03:02 Re: undefined reference to `__setbits'

Andrew Clausen

• 1999-09-23 14:41 What so special about i386's bx?
• 1999-09-24 17:28 Bug? Global offset table register not preserved

Andrew Webber

• 1999-09-16 08:46 I need a GCC porting hint (or two) for an odd architecture...

Andy Rysin

• 1999-09-29 10:29 '#pragma pack' on AIX

Anna Winkler

• 1999-09-02 09:19 Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1

Artem Hodyush

• 1999-09-16 06:12 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-18 03:25 Re: type based aliasing again

Artur Skawina

• 1999-09-08 19:21 what's required for builtin_memcpy to be inlined
• 1999-09-09 14:39 Re: what's required for builtin_memcpy to be inlined
• 1999-09-10 15:33 Re: what's required for builtin_memcpy to be inlined

baileyg

• 1999-09-03 05:42 gnu for intel

BDS

• 1999-09-09 15:26 Y2K Update Notification

ben

• 1999-09-14 02:45 Installing gcc whithout having C compilator

Ben Combee

• 1999-09-08 13:42 Re: MMX regs and GCC

Benjamin Kosnik

• 1999-09-28 17:48 re: STL support in gdb

Bernd Schmidt

• 1999-09-07 03:44 Re: Machine-dependent bits for GC
• 1999-09-09 03:45 Re: Peephole2 as a generic RTL rewriter
• 1999-09-14 05:34 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 05:52 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 06:50 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-22 03:09 Autoincrement examples
• 1999-09-22 04:39 Re: Autoincrement examples
• 1999-09-23 01:50 Re: Autoincrement examples
• 1999-09-29 09:40 REGISTER_CONSTRAINTS

Bevan Agard

• 1999-09-02 08:43 Quick question

billinc

• 1999-09-02 09:57 Problem untarring gcc and g++ files.

Billinghurst, David (RTD)

• 1999-09-01 20:41 RE: Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-02 16:10 RE: Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-08 16:23 RE: gcc-2.95.2 rough plan

bizlandt

• 1999-09-06 06:04 LOSE 30 POUNDS IN 30 DAYS NOW!

bkoz

• 1999-09-13 13:16 re: bootstrap with -fnew-abi?

Bogus User

• 1999-09-03 08:19 Problems compiling using crypt and setgrent
• 1999-09-30 14:05 Problems with global variable in shared library

BPalencia

• 1999-09-12 18:30 c++ compiler

Brad Fitzpatrick

• 1999-09-02 14:01 Anonymous unions/structs

Brad Lucier

• 1999-09-03 06:38 Re: Compilation getting slower
• 1999-09-29 12:13 code generation puzzle on alpha
• 1999-09-29 12:30 Re: code generation puzzle on alpha

Brian Ford

• 1999-09-09 10:48 Re: cross-compiler problem with "gcc-2.8.1" :(
• 1999-09-10 08:00 Re: gcc for HP-UX 11.00
• 1999-09-15 13:38 Re: GCC

Brian J. Murrell

• 1999-09-29 02:02 Option to have gcc print full pathnames on error output?

Brian O'Gorman

• 1999-09-28 16:13 gcc 2.95.1

Bruce Korb

• 1999-09-08 09:52 Gateway test (N/T)
• 1999-09-15 14:26 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-23 09:13 Re: Pending Projects

Bruce M Beach

• 1999-09-12 16:10 Binutils

Bruno Haible

• 1999-09-23 11:39 Re: gcc/dynlinker bug on solaris 2.7
• 1999-09-29 09:18 Re: allocation on the stack

Carlo Wood

• 1999-09-19 10:14 Singletons and optimisation

Casey Carter

• 1999-09-21 11:27 Template Specialization

Chris G. Demetriou

• 1999-09-20 11:49 Re: FreeBSD 4.0

Chris McKay

• 1999-09-16 18:00 STL allocators thread safe?

Christian Orsatti

• 1999-09-09 23:57 gcc for sparc64 on sun solaris2.7
• 1999-09-10 08:33 gcc for sparc64 on sun solaris2.7

Christopher R. Jones

• 1999-09-02 06:55 C code help
• 1999-09-20 08:38 libf2c
• 1999-09-21 06:53 Re: libf2c
• 1999-09-21 18:45 Re: libf2c

Claus Fischer

• 1999-09-09 15:40 type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 16:24 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 17:15 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 17:31 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 18:23 Time to shut up (was: Re: type based aliasing)

craig

• 1999-09-01 13:45 Re: egcs/Solaris status
• 1999-09-03 07:27 Re: gnu for intel
• 1999-09-05 17:42 Re: The treatment of null characters in C source files
• 1999-09-07 14:53 Re: gcc-2.95.2 rough plan
• 1999-09-07 16:24 Re: gcc-2.95.2 rough plan
• 1999-09-09 07:58 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 11:44 What's Next for G77
• 1999-09-09 11:51 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-10 08:42 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-10 08:43 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-10 08:43 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 03:50 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 03:51 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 14:58 Netlib f2c and related work
• 1999-09-11 15:14 Re: EGCSTENSIONS PATCH for 2.95.1 for using SUN make with builddir!= srcdir
• 1999-09-12 08:54 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-13 13:22 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 11:01 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 11:11 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 11:14 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 23:41 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 10:01 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 10:02 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 10:08 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 14:32 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 14:32 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 14:37 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-15 15:22 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-15 15:24 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-16 02:18 [mjbedy@mtu.edu: Re: type based aliasing again]
• 1999-09-16 02:18 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 02:19 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 14:28 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-16 14:28 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 14:29 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 14:29 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-17 01:51 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-18 10:22 Re: on vacation till 1999-04-10
• 1999-09-18 13:52 Re: on vacation till 1999-04-10
• 1999-09-21 16:15 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-23 11:06 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-28 02:01 GNU Fortran (g77) Status

Damjan lango

• 1999-09-02 03:42 anonymous unions/structs for gcc 3.0

Dan Nicolaescu

• 1999-09-03 12:15 RISC like operations for ix86
• 1999-09-23 09:23 Re: Processor information

Dan Pascu

• 1999-09-02 16:11 Re: Compilation getting slower

Daniel Heiserer

• 1999-09-04 03:44 khans patch

Daniel Jacobowitz

• 1999-09-08 15:30 Re: egcs-ss-19990907 is now available
• 1999-09-18 10:44 Re: on vacation till 1999-04-10

Dante Profeta

• 1999-09-19 15:08 cannot exec 'mips-tfile': No such file or directory

Dara Hazeghi

• 1999-09-13 20:31 General Optimization questions
• 1999-09-20 16:33 Problem compiling Xemacs with -O3

Dave Brolley

• 1999-09-07 11:37 Re: The treatment of null characters in C source files
• 1999-09-07 12:40 Re: The treatment of null characters in C source files
• 1999-09-07 12:44 Re: The treatment of null characters in C source files

Dave Jasa

• 1999-09-16 09:01 Installed gcc 2.95.1 on HP PA 1.1 system running HP-UX 11.00.

David Abrahams

• 1999-09-01 14:36 Becoming a gcc developer

David Edelsohn

• 1999-09-03 06:54 Re: Unsuccessful build of a cross PowerPC GCC 2.95.x for an Intel box
• 1999-09-08 14:01 Re: Perhaps useful information about optimisation
• 1999-09-08 19:51 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 18:04 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-13 08:43 Re: gnu c compiler
• 1999-09-14 09:56 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 09:57 Re: Installing gcc whithout having C compilator
• 1999-09-14 10:52 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 14:44 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 15:00 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 15:06 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 16:15 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 09:19 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 09:31 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 15:20 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-15 15:33 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 10:17 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-21 10:10 Re: egcs and altivec vector type
• 1999-09-21 20:37 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-23 10:08 Re: Processor information
• 1999-09-28 10:41 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-29 10:59 Re: '#pragma pack' on AIX

David O'Brien

• 1999-09-14 23:14 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 00:56 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 01:17 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 01:40 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 02:25 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 03:11 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 10:24 Re: FreeBSD 4.0

David Ronis

• 1999-09-14 07:29 Big increase in testsuite failures in 19990913
• 1999-09-14 07:36 Can't resolve symbol '__register_frame_info'
• 1999-09-15 07:02 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-23 10:12 Speed under gcc/glibc2 vs gcc/glibc1
• 1999-09-29 08:25 Code much slower. Why?
• 1999-09-29 19:48 Re: Code much slower. Why?

David Starner

• 1999-09-01 17:41 Aliasing problems in GNU Chill?
• 1999-09-02 13:25 Re: Aliasing problems in GNU Chill?
• 1999-09-09 15:57 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 09:48 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-20 09:02 Re: Function return problem
• 1999-09-22 15:54 Resuming a compile
• 1999-09-23 08:56 Re: willing to assist
• 1999-09-30 09:03 Re: Chill vs. Pascal sets (was: undefined reference to `__setbits')

David Young

• 1999-09-14 11:10 is this an objective-c egcs forum?
• 1999-09-20 11:20 egcs and altivec vector type
• 1999-09-22 07:09 Re: egcs and altivec vector type

David_Abrahams

• 1999-09-03 12:37 Re: C++ and static data members...
• 1999-09-16 08:24 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"

Davide Libenzi

• 1999-09-03 05:45 Re: gnu for intel

Dean Wilson

• 1999-09-24 07:56 snapshot problems
• 1999-09-24 08:06 snapshot problems

Deephanphongs, David

• 1999-09-23 10:41 Trouble inlining functions.

Denis Chertykov

• 1999-09-15 12:45 bitmap_debug - prototype without declaration
• 1999-09-19 04:33 Can I get one file through cvs ?
• 1999-09-22 12:31 Re: Autoincrement examples

Dietmar P. Schindler

• 1999-09-09 00:31 misleading documentation for Installing GCC

Dima Volodin

• 1999-09-14 16:19 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-21 06:06 Re: alloca "bug" on x86?

Dimitri PAPADOPOULOS-ORFANOS

• 1999-09-01 10:12 Re: egcs/Solaris status

dmitry milman cis stnt

• 1999-09-15 13:34 GCC

Doug Landauer

• 1999-09-20 14:10 ABI/compatibility details? (egcs -> gcc 2.95 -> future?)
• 1999-09-27 14:48 Questions about cpp, cpplib, and precompiled headers

edA-qa mort-ora-y

• 1999-09-02 10:07 wchar_t string functions?

eddiefaskell

• 1999-09-01 01:52 HOW TO MEET BEAUTIFUL WOMEN

Eli Zaretskii

• 1999-09-08 01:46 Re: Strange strings in GCC compiled code
• 1999-09-08 01:50 Re: Strange strings in GCC compiled code
• 1999-09-08 04:25 Re: Strange strings in GCC compiled code

Emir UNER

• 1999-09-30 01:53 what does it mean "undefined reference to `xxxx virtual table'.
• 1999-09-30 02:48 Re: what does it mean "undefined reference to `xxxx virtualtable'.

Engelbert Staller

• 1999-09-13 07:28 Problems with GNU linker

Erhan Bilgili

• 1999-09-15 03:53 new mirror in Turkey ...

Eric Chow

• 1999-09-28 02:59 Can't install GCC 2.95.1 in Sun Solaris 2.6

Erik Mouw

• 1999-09-03 14:29 RE: Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1

erik.de.smet

• 1999-09-10 02:26 gcc for HP-UX 11.00

Evguenii SMOGAILOV

• 1999-09-03 12:27 Strange output from g++/gcc (S.u.S.E 6.2)
• 1999-09-17 06:21 Re: Strange output from g++/gcc (S.u.S.E 6.2)

FindYourGame

• 1999-09-17 18:50 EBIZ = 1,2,3...4 CASH

Fine Tuning

• 1999-09-07 00:11 CABLE TV...MORE CHANNELS, No extra Charge

Florin Mateoc

• 1999-09-15 21:47 Re: type based aliasing again

Franz Sirl

• 1999-09-22 06:38 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-22 07:02 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless

Gabriel Dos_Reis

• 1999-09-16 23:38 Re: type based aliasing again

Gavin Romig-Koch

• 1999-09-02 06:36 Re: Regarding anonymous unions, etc.
• 1999-09-03 11:44 Support for C9X in gcc?

gdr

• 1999-09-20 15:28 Re: C++ coding standards (was: [C++] PATCH to reduce code replication in error.c)
• 1999-09-21 03:47 Re: C++ coding standards (was: [C++] PATCH to reduce code replication in error.c)

Geoff Keating

• 1999-09-01 22:21 Re: Problem compiling glibc's with gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-05 20:06 Re: Unsuccessful build of a cross PowerPC GCC 2.95.x for an Intel
• 1999-09-07 01:08 Re: Support for C9X in gcc?
• 1999-09-14 23:46 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-23 20:23 Re: danger: Global Null Pointer Test Elimination
• 1999-09-28 21:13 Re: allocation on the stack

George T. Talbot

• 1999-09-13 07:36 Re: type based aliasing again -- a suggestion from a user
• 1999-09-13 09:28 Re: type based aliasing again -- a suggestion from a user
• 1999-09-13 10:12 Re: type based aliasing again -- a suggestion from a user

Gerald Pfeifer

• 1999-09-07 09:15 Re: Support for C9X in gcc?
• 1999-09-08 09:33 Re: GCC 2.95.x: Major problems on Solaris (was: Lost specific.htmlFAQEntry)
• 1999-09-11 14:59 Re: EGCSTENSIONS PATCH for 2.95.1 for using SUN make with builddir!= srcdir
• 1999-09-11 15:29 Re: EGCSTENSIONS PATCH for 2.95.1 for using SUN make with builddir!= srcdir
• 1999-09-13 00:10 Re: c++ compiler
• 1999-09-14 11:58 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-19 06:07 Re: Can I get one file through cvs ?
• 1999-09-19 10:11 re: failed compilation under Solaris 2.6
• 1999-09-20 16:20 Re: CVS problem with gcc/cp/ChangeLog
• 1999-09-22 07:14 Re: egcs and altivec vector type
• 1999-09-22 11:23 Re: where did ioperm & iopl functions go ?
• 1999-09-22 12:40 Re: Processor information
• 1999-09-24 10:33 Re: gcc for Solaris X86 2.5
• 1999-09-24 13:10 Re: ABI/compatibility details? (egcs -> gcc 2.95 -> future?)
• 1999-09-29 10:42 Re: assembler problems with: g++ 2.95.1/Solaris 2.6/ -O3
• 1999-09-29 16:22 Re: assembler problems with: g++ 2.95.1/Solaris 2.6/ -O3

Gerard Flynn

• 1999-09-01 04:36 Problem compiling glibc's with gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-01 08:33 Re: Problem compiling glibc's with gcc-2.95.1

Gil Hauer

• 1999-09-06 10:51 Instrumenting the compiler

Grafe, Christine

• 1999-09-08 00:04 C++ Compiler

Graham Stoney

• 1999-09-05 17:50 Re: Unsuccessful build of a cross PowerPC GCC 2.95.x for an Intel

grahams

• 1999-09-29 04:43 Re: undefined reference to `__setbits'
• 1999-09-30 11:49 Re: genattrtab.c [Am I on drugs?!?]

Greg McGary

• 1999-09-17 18:54 Re: The complex problems
• 1999-09-17 22:29 Re: The complex problems
• 1999-09-17 22:55 Re: The complex problems
• 1999-09-20 03:13 Re: The complex problems

Greg Roberts

• 1999-09-30 01:20 Successful build of gcc

H.J. Lu

• 1999-09-06 16:39 binutils 2.9.5.0.11 is released.
• 1999-09-10 16:07 binutils 2.9.5.0.12 is released.
• 1999-09-11 19:01 Re: g77/686 performance regressions from gcc-2.95.1 to gcc-2.96
• 1999-09-22 18:06 binutils 2.9.5.0.13 is released.
• 1999-09-27 13:32 binutils 2.9.5.0.14 is released.
• 1999-09-29 10:53 Re: egcs19990927

Hartmut Schirmer

• 1999-09-27 09:11 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]

Harvey J. Stein

• 1999-09-17 09:02 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-21 08:48 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-21 08:50 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-22 13:08 Re: type based aliasing again

Haydee Y. Ching

• 1999-09-25 01:00 Re: gcc for Solaris X86 2.5

Heribert Dahms

• 1999-09-21 09:56 gcc/egcs 64bit pointers under HP-UX11 PA-RISC2.0
• 1999-09-21 10:41 RE: gcc/egcs 64bit pointers under HP-UX11 PA-RISC2.0

Himanshu J. Gohel

• 1999-09-08 07:38 gcc 2.95.1 successful build

Horst von Brand

• 1999-09-20 11:39 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-22 14:40 Re: Processor information

HOWARD LEW

• 1999-09-23 01:07 why large program size

I Lee Hetherington

• 1999-09-06 10:27 problem with -fomit-frame-pointer
• 1999-09-16 07:24 -MD behavior does not match documentation
• 1999-09-16 08:16 Re: -MD behavior does not match documentation

Isaac Salsberg

• 1999-09-06 11:42 Troubles instaling GCC

IvO

• 1999-09-05 12:40 C++: How to disable/avoid namespaces.

J. Daniel Powell

• 1999-09-08 12:55 Errors Compiling glibc-2.1.2

James Beyer

• 1999-09-01 11:55 Re: Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-02 07:09 Re: Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-02 08:13 warning to error
• 1999-09-02 10:00 Re: Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1

James Black

• 1999-09-07 13:41 re: configure failed
• 1999-09-14 08:15 re: failed compilation under Solaris 2.6
• 1999-09-29 06:58 re: latest snapshot
• 1999-09-29 10:30 re: egcs19990927

James L. Dein

• 1999-09-22 11:54 Re: Processor information

Jamie Lokier

• 1999-09-10 08:24 Re: MMX regs and GCC
• 1999-09-10 08:45 Re: what's required for builtin_memcpy to be inlined
• 1999-09-10 08:57 An alternative type alias warning
• 1999-09-12 12:29 Re: [dax@gurulabs.com: PATCH: `__norestrict' type qualifier (fwd)]
• 1999-09-14 08:38 Re: [dax@gurulabs.com: PATCH: `__norestrict' type qualifier (fwd)]
• 1999-09-14 08:45 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 13:55 Re: why are these alias sets different?
• 1999-09-16 13:58 Re: -MD behavior does not match documentation
• 1999-09-20 15:37 Re: Left shift operations and the long long int datatype
• 1999-09-21 02:02 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-21 03:15 Re: where did ioperm & iopl functions go ?
• 1999-09-22 11:14 Re: where did ioperm & iopl functions go ?
• 1999-09-23 16:22 Re: Processor information

Jan Reimers

• 1999-09-09 12:18 FW: Template code is 6.4 times slower than hand-written code

Jari Karppinen

• 1999-09-21 03:26 Trouble with templates and gcc-2.95

Jason G. Key

• 1999-09-14 15:23 Which download for a C compiler

Jason Merrill

• 1999-09-03 09:31 Re: GC Merge?
• 1999-09-03 10:41 Re: GC Merge?
• 1999-09-16 11:23 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 11:42 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 14:33 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 18:33 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-20 14:11 C++ coding standards (was: [C++] PATCH to reduce code replication in error.c)
• 1999-09-21 00:06 Re: CVS problem with gcc/cp/ChangeLog
• 1999-09-21 00:31 Re: C++ coding standards (was: [C++] PATCH to reduce code replication in error.c)
• 1999-09-23 15:09 Re: Is this a bug? Dynamic cast error similar to thunk error.
• 1999-09-23 16:05 Re: Is this a bug? Dynamic cast error similar to thunk error.
• 1999-09-27 12:06 Re: STL support in gdb
• 1999-09-27 18:06 Re: Questions about cpp, cpplib, and precompiled headers
• 1999-09-27 18:06 Re: -fno-exceptions and bad_alloc

Jean Magny

• 1999-09-27 16:02 unsuscribe
• 1999-09-30 16:16 unsubsribe

Jean-Pierre Radley

• 1999-09-04 16:57 Non-compile on OSR 5
• 1999-09-15 00:03 Re: About log() in GCC

Jeff Garzik

• 1999-09-05 15:09 gcc -fast
• 1999-09-08 02:03 MMX regs and GCC
• 1999-09-08 13:30 Re: MMX regs and GCC
• 1999-09-08 13:50 Re: MMX regs and GCC
• 1999-09-13 21:34 Re: Optimization for PII
• 1999-09-17 12:59 Location of dsp16xx binutils?

Jeffrey A Law

• 1999-09-01 05:58 Re: Problem compiling glibc's with gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-01 10:42 Re: Problem compiling glibc's with gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-01 20:48 Re: drop support for bootstrap with no <stdarg.h>?
• 1999-09-01 21:09 Re: drop support for bootstrap with no <stdarg.h>?
• 1999-09-01 21:15 Re: RFI
• 1999-09-01 21:20 Re: global variable store optimization
• 1999-09-01 21:25 Re: platforms
• 1999-09-01 22:04 Re: Problem
• 1999-09-01 23:07 Re: Compilation getting slower
• 1999-09-01 23:44 Re: g77 performance on ALPHA
• 1999-09-01 23:53 Re: Aliasing problems in GNU Chill?
• 1999-09-02 00:24 Re: Regarding anonymous unions, etc.
• 1999-09-02 00:32 Re: Reload bug
• 1999-09-02 12:10 Re: Quick question
• 1999-09-02 12:29 Re: Jump optimizations (was Re: g77 performance on ALPHA)
• 1999-09-02 16:19 Re: Compilation getting slower
• 1999-09-02 16:48 Re: Aliasing problems in GNU Chill?
• 1999-09-02 16:58 Re: Aliasing problems in GNU Chill?
• 1999-09-03 02:54 Re: Jump optimizations (was Re: g77 performance on ALPHA)
• 1999-09-03 16:00 Re: RISC like operations for ix86
• 1999-09-04 21:46 Re: g++ inlining problem?
• 1999-09-05 17:01 Re: gcc -fast
• 1999-09-05 17:07 Re: g++ inlining problem?
• 1999-09-05 17:07 Re: The treatment of null characters in C source files
• 1999-09-05 17:26 Re: g++ inlining problem?
• 1999-09-06 01:10 Re: The treatment of null characters in C source files
• 1999-09-06 02:05 Richard Kenner and Mark Mitchell
• 1999-09-06 02:12 gcc2 merge
• 1999-09-06 14:36 Re: Should we create an attribute malloc for supposed alias benefits?
• 1999-09-06 14:37 Re: Instrumenting the compiler
• 1999-09-06 14:47 Re: Definig scratch registers
• 1999-09-07 00:22 Re: Should we create an attribute malloc for supposed alias benefits?
• 1999-09-07 00:23 Re: Troubles instaling GCC
• 1999-09-07 01:10 gcc-2.95.2 rough plan
• 1999-09-07 02:33 Re: gansidecl.h comments on PROTO ?
• 1999-09-07 02:35 Re: Should fixinc be linked with libiberty.a?
• 1999-09-07 02:38 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-07 03:20 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-07 04:21 Re: gcc-2.95.2 rough plan
• 1999-09-07 13:31 Re: som.h (was MPE Port)
• 1999-09-07 15:09 Re: gcc-2.95.2 rough plan
• 1999-09-07 23:19 Re: Should fixinc be linked with libiberty.a?
• 1999-09-08 00:43 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-08 00:45 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-08 01:13 Re: wint_t in stddef.h - why?
• 1999-09-08 01:39 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-08 01:40 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-08 01:41 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-08 01:49 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-08 03:01 Re: libiberty legal status ?
• 1999-09-08 03:21 Re: libiberty legal status ?
• 1999-09-08 14:05 Re: MIPS16 -mentry pseudo instruction definitions
• 1999-09-08 16:59 Re: gcc-2.95.2 rough plan
• 1999-09-09 02:08 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 02:20 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 02:45 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 16:37 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 20:16 Re: Time to shut up (was: Re: type based aliasing)
• 1999-09-09 20:35 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 23:38 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 01:59 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 02:00 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 02:00 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 02:01 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 02:02 Re: [dax@gurulabs.com: PATCH: `__norestrict' type qualifier (fwd)]
• 1999-09-15 02:05 Re: odd things in md files
• 1999-09-15 02:05 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 02:05 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 02:06 Re: Post reload copy propagation?
• 1999-09-15 02:06 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 02:07 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 02:07 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 02:09 Re: EGCSTENSIONS PATCH for 2.95.1 for using SUN make with builddir != srcdir
• 1999-09-15 02:33 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 02:47 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-15 02:52 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-15 09:20 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 17:10 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-16 00:50 Re: obstacks live on?
• 1999-09-16 06:57 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-16 07:55 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-16 13:54 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-16 23:41 Re: I need a GCC porting hint (or two) for an odd architecture...
• 1999-09-17 09:28 Re: RMS's aliasing suggestion appears unimplementable
• 1999-09-17 23:19 Re: The complex problems
• 1999-09-17 23:20 Re: RMS's aliasing suggestion appears unimplementable
• 1999-09-17 23:21 Re: The complex problems
• 1999-09-20 03:58 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-20 04:03 Re: adding iso646.h back
• 1999-09-20 04:20 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-20 04:34 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-20 04:42 Re: bitmap_debug - prototype without declaration
• 1999-09-20 09:55 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-21 02:07 Re: CVS problem with gcc/cp/ChangeLog
• 1999-09-21 02:13 Re: gcc-ss-19990920 is now available
• 1999-09-21 02:15 Re: CVS problem with gcc/cp/ChangeLog
• 1999-09-21 02:33 Re: block merging
• 1999-09-21 03:14 Re: AW: Why are there so many bytes allocated on stack ?
• 1999-09-21 05:54 Re: alloca "bug" on x86?
• 1999-09-21 10:08 Re: gcc/egcs 64bit pointers under HP-UX11 PA-RISC2.0
• 1999-09-21 10:24 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-21 14:03 Re: Processor information document
• 1999-09-22 05:22 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-22 06:54 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-22 07:20 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-22 16:03 Re: Resuming a compile
• 1999-09-23 06:04 Re: Processor information
• 1999-09-23 08:51 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-23 14:07 Re: Forest through the Trees
• 1999-09-25 12:12 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-27 10:20 Re: lazy execution optimization
• 1999-09-27 19:56 Re: gcc-ss-19990927 is now available
• 1999-09-28 01:21 Re: undefined reference to `__setbits'
• 1999-09-28 01:24 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-28 08:07 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-28 10:03 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-28 10:27 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-29 10:09 Re: REGISTER_CONSTRAINTS
• 1999-09-29 20:40 Re: lazy execution optimization
• 1999-09-30 10:50 Re: 64 bit Wide mode support for PA RISC 2.0
• 1999-09-30 10:54 genattrtab.c [Am I on drugs?!?]
• 1999-09-30 11:33 Re: genattrtab.c [Am I on drugs?!?]
• 1999-09-30 11:48 Re: genattrtab.c [Am I on drugs?!?]
• 1999-09-30 12:44 Re: genattrtab.c [Am I on drugs?!?]
• 1999-09-30 14:36 Re: Chill vs. Pascal sets (was: undefined reference to `__setbits')
• 1999-09-30 14:48 Re: Chill vs. Pascal sets

Jim Wilson

• 1999-09-10 11:57 Re: MIPS16 -mentry pseudo instruction definitions
• 1999-09-13 12:32 Re: MIPS16 -mentry pseudo instruction definitions

JN_Lin

• 1999-09-08 02:13 Problem for make gcc-2.95
• 1999-09-14 23:55 About log() in GCC
• 1999-09-30 02:33 About C/getch() errror
• 1999-09-30 18:02 About C/getch()

Joachim Nadler

• 1999-09-23 07:14 willing to assist

Joe Buck

• 1999-09-01 14:50 Re: RFI
• 1999-09-01 21:11 Re: platforms
• 1999-09-02 16:36 Re: C++ and static data members...
• 1999-09-02 16:41 Re: C++ and static data members...
• 1999-09-03 10:25 Re: C++ and static data members...
• 1999-09-08 09:23 Re: C++ Compiler
• 1999-09-08 18:11 type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-08 19:25 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-08 19:31 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-08 19:35 Re: what's required for builtin_memcpy to be inlined
• 1999-09-08 19:44 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-08 20:43 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-08 20:44 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-08 21:33 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-08 22:04 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 10:36 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 10:51 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 10:57 Re: cross-compiler problem with "gcc-2.8.1" :(
• 1999-09-09 12:45 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 16:55 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 17:04 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 17:56 vacation and strict aliasing
• 1999-09-10 00:11 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-10 00:13 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-10 00:23 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-23 17:09 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-24 18:26 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-27 08:32 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-30 16:37 Re: aliasing warnings: help

Joel Klecker

• 1999-09-08 09:02 Re: gcc-2.95.2 rough plan

Joern Rennecke

• 1999-09-02 14:10 Re: Jump optimizations (was Re: g77 performance on ALPHA)
• 1999-09-03 12:29 Re: C++ and static data members...
• 1999-09-06 10:26 Re: The treatment of null characters in C source files
• 1999-09-07 12:03 Re: Machine-dependent bits for GC
• 1999-09-13 10:31 Re: what's required for builtin_memcpy to be inlined
• 1999-09-13 16:43 Re: what's required for builtin_memcpy to be inlined
• 1999-09-16 12:08 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 14:16 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-17 15:33 Re: RMS's aliasing suggestion appears unimplementable
• 1999-09-20 05:54 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-29 07:10 Re: block merging

John Lopez

• 1999-09-24 07:11 gcc for Solaris X86 2.5

John Marshall

• 1999-09-06 13:46 Re: The treatment of null characters in C source files

John Vickers

• 1999-09-07 03:33 Re: gcc-2.95.2 rough plan
• 1999-09-09 16:51 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 17:12 Re: type based aliasing again

John W. Stevens

• 1999-09-20 15:17 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-21 15:47 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-23 09:06 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-23 12:03 HPUX, PA-RISC based __builtins bugs

John Wehle

• 1999-09-01 12:24 Re: g77 performance on ALPHA
• 1999-09-02 12:00 Jump optimizations (was Re: g77 performance on ALPHA)
• 1999-09-02 13:27 Re: Jump optimizations (was Re: g77 performance on ALPHA)

John_W_Cosgrove

• 1999-09-20 12:00 HP-UX 10.20 trouble
• 1999-09-21 05:31 Re: HP-UX 10.20 trouble

Jonathan Larmour

• 1999-09-10 18:25 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-12 09:45 Re: type based aliasing again

Josh Stern

• 1999-09-12 11:20 Re: type based aliasing again

K.A. Scott

• 1999-09-29 16:49 fille errors

kargl

• 1999-09-14 12:01 bootstrap failure, egcs-1990913, OSF/1 version 3.2D

Kaveh R. Ghazi

• 1999-09-04 07:30 Can cppalloc.c be removed?
• 1999-09-04 19:38 Re: Can cppalloc.c be removed?
• 1999-09-06 06:18 Possible gcc source locations which violate strict aliasing
• 1999-09-06 12:40 Should we create an attribute malloc for supposed alias benefits?
• 1999-09-06 13:36 Should fixinc be linked with libiberty.a?
• 1999-09-07 06:40 Re: Should fixinc be linked with libiberty.a?
• 1999-09-07 13:37 Re: Should fixinc be linked with libiberty.a?
• 1999-09-07 14:46 Re: Should fixinc be linked with libiberty.a?
• 1999-09-07 15:43 Re: Should fixinc be linked with libiberty.a?
• 1999-09-08 13:27 Re: Should we create an attribute malloc for supposed alias benefits?
• 1999-09-15 08:27 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-21 11:51 Re: alloca "bug" on x86?

Keith Duthie

• 1999-09-14 07:39 Re: Windows

Kevin Van Horn

• 1999-09-17 09:33 exceptions and shared libraries

Konstantin Baumann

• 1999-09-13 08:10 bootstrap with -fnew-abi?

Lack Mr G M

• 1999-09-01 10:50 Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-01 11:40 Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1 (more of them).
• 1999-09-02 04:33 Re: Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-02 06:58 Re: Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-02 09:41 Re: Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-03 02:29 Re: Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1

lam

• 1999-09-02 05:23 help!!!

Laurent Bonnaud

• 1999-09-17 05:57 Re: Strange output from g++/gcc (S.u.S.E 6.2)

law

• 1999-09-07 09:35 egcs-ss-19990907 is now available
• 1999-09-13 08:26 egcs-ss-19990913 is now available
• 1999-09-20 08:22 gcc-ss-19990920 is now available
• 1999-09-27 19:50 gcc-ss-19990927 is now available
• 1999-09-28 01:09 gcc-ss-1999-09-27 is now available

lopt

• 1999-09-12 16:48 Make 10K A Month, Famous Private-Eye Tells All

Loren James Rittle

• 1999-09-14 22:34 Re: FreeBSD 4.0

Lucas

• 1999-09-14 19:50 GCC C++ 2.95.1

Lynn Winebarger

• 1999-09-15 18:41 Writing a decompiler using RTL

Marat Boshernitsan

• 1999-09-22 20:41 gcc/dynlinker bug on solaris 2.7

Marc Espie

• 1999-09-06 12:38 gansidecl.h comments on PROTO ?
• 1999-09-08 02:29 libiberty legal status ?
• 1999-09-08 03:11 Re: libiberty legal status ?
• 1999-09-09 06:50 Suboptimal code (gcc 2.95.1, i386-unknown-openbsd)
• 1999-09-09 07:12 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 03:51 Re: vacation and strict aliasing
• 1999-09-14 04:01 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 01:59 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 01:32 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-16 01:46 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-16 07:41 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-16 13:36 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-21 06:33 The USER_H issue
• 1999-09-22 06:13 Re: Processor information document
• 1999-09-22 06:17 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-28 08:26 A new check ?
• 1999-09-30 07:28 Stop sitting on cross-compile issues, Re: gcc_tooldir is useless

Marc Lehmann

• 1999-09-10 14:29 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 16:11 Re: MMX regs and GCC
• 1999-09-12 17:59 Re: vacation and strict aliasing
• 1999-09-12 17:59 Re: EGCSTENSIONS PATCH for 2.95.1 for using SUN make with builddir != srcdir
• 1999-09-13 13:00 Re: vacation and strict aliasing
• 1999-09-13 13:00 Re: Optimization for PII
• 1999-09-14 17:22 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 17:23 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 17:35 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 17:39 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 17:44 Re: General Optimization questions
• 1999-09-15 08:28 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 08:28 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-18 10:17 on vacation till 1999-04-10
• 1999-09-18 10:18 type based aliasing - summary
• 1999-09-18 13:27 Re: on vacation till 1999-04-10

Marcel Cox

• 1999-09-08 05:59 egcs-ss-19990907 : bug in gcc/configure ?
• 1999-09-14 02:45 Re: type based aliasing again -- a suggestion from a user
• 1999-09-14 06:46 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 07:14 Re: type based aliasing again

Marco Manfai Yu

• 1999-09-07 14:56 gcc 2.95.1 sparc-sun-sunos4.1.4 bootstrap failed

Mark Crosland

• 1999-09-07 12:49 Shared library that needs stuff from another library...
• 1999-09-07 21:37 Re: Shared library that needs stuff from another library...

Mark Klein

• 1999-09-06 10:39 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-06 10:39 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-06 10:39 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-06 10:39 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-06 10:39 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-06 10:39 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-06 10:40 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-06 10:40 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-06 10:40 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-06 10:40 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-06 10:40 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-06 10:40 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-06 10:40 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-07 06:39 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-07 06:46 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-07 08:42 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-07 09:00 Re: som.h (was MPE Port)
• 1999-09-08 06:35 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-08 06:37 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-08 20:04 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-08 20:31 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-15 08:26 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-15 08:32 Re: MPE Port
• 1999-09-23 13:31 Forest through the Trees
• 1999-09-23 14:07 Re: Forest through the Trees
• 1999-09-23 14:26 Re: Forest through the Trees
• 1999-09-24 06:47 Re: Forest through the Trees

Mark Mitchell

• 1999-09-02 07:35 Re: Why we can't have nice discarding const warnings
• 1999-09-02 11:34 GC Merge?
• 1999-09-02 13:06 Re: GC Merge?
• 1999-09-02 13:07 Re: GC Merge?
• 1999-09-03 10:06 Re: GC Merge?
• 1999-09-03 16:23 PATCH to use xcalloc
• 1999-09-04 20:24 GC change to `code' in RTL
• 1999-09-06 17:49 Machine-dependent bits for GC
• 1999-09-06 22:16 Re: Machine-dependent bits for GC
• 1999-09-07 09:05 Re: Should we create an attribute malloc for supposed aliasbenefits?
• 1999-09-07 17:09 Re: Should we create an attribute malloc for supposed aliasbenefits?
• 1999-09-08 13:44 Re: Should we create an attribute malloc for supposed alias benefits?
• 1999-09-08 18:43 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-08 20:26 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-08 21:45 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-08 21:56 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-08 22:25 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-08 23:41 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-08 23:51 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 10:55 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 14:38 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-10 00:03 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-10 00:06 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 15:20 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 18:20 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-13 08:51 Re: type based aliasing again -- a suggestion from a user
• 1999-09-13 09:51 Re: type based aliasing again -- a suggestion from a user
• 1999-09-14 11:39 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 15:08 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 16:43 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 15:01 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-15 15:45 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-15 16:42 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-15 16:49 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-15 17:16 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-15 19:17 Re: why are these alias sets different?
• 1999-09-15 21:01 Re: why are these alias sets different?
• 1999-09-15 21:36 Re: why are these alias sets different?
• 1999-09-15 23:15 Re: obstacks live on?
• 1999-09-16 08:09 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-16 10:10 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 11:45 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 11:48 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 12:18 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 13:02 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 14:22 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 14:45 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 15:21 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-17 08:32 Re: __typealias qualifier (was Re: type based aliasing again)
• 1999-09-21 00:37 Re: C++ coding standards (was: [C++] PATCH to reduce codereplication in error.c)
• 1999-09-21 00:44 Re: CVS problem with gcc/cp/ChangeLog
• 1999-09-21 00:48 Re: gcc/cp/parse.c cannot be checked in
• 1999-09-21 08:06 Re: CVS problem with gcc/cp/ChangeLog
• 1999-09-23 01:17 Re: vma space for gc
• 1999-09-23 17:32 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-24 01:01 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-24 20:35 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]

Martin Kahlert

• 1999-09-14 22:55 Re: GCC C++ 2.95.1
• 1999-09-15 00:05 Re: About log() in GCC
• 1999-09-20 00:15 __builtin_return_address and stacktraces on Alpha

Martin v. Loewis

• 1999-09-01 16:41 Re: platforms
• 1999-09-01 16:55 Re: Becoming a gcc developer
• 1999-09-01 17:05 Re: RFI
• 1999-09-02 03:01 Re: Why we can't have nice discarding const warnings
• 1999-09-02 15:58 Re: warning to error
• 1999-09-02 16:27 Re: C++ and static data members...
• 1999-09-06 14:40 Re: C++ and static data members...
• 1999-09-06 23:48 Re: Support for C9X in gcc?
• 1999-09-07 15:24 Re: Support for C9X in gcc?
• 1999-09-07 23:14 Re: New vtable ABI (was Re: Strange behaviour in C++...)
• 1999-09-08 00:09 Re: static_cast + virtual table = problems ?
• 1999-09-08 00:39 Re: C++ Compiler
• 1999-09-08 00:49 Re: New vtable ABI (was Re: Strange behaviour in C++...)
• 1999-09-09 01:38 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 01:39 Re: New vtable ABI (was Re: Strange behaviour in C++...)
• 1999-09-09 01:47 Re: what's required for builtin_memcpy to be inlined
• 1999-09-10 13:47 Re: what's required for builtin_memcpy to be inlined
• 1999-09-14 14:08 Re: Troubles with -fno-vtable-thunks recompilation.... Was: Strange C++ behaviour
• 1999-09-15 15:05 Re: Almost got glibc working with no-vtable-thunks, but ....
• 1999-09-16 10:37 Re: Almost got glibc working with no-vtable-thunks, but ....
• 1999-09-18 04:50 Re: Inyone know what inadru is?
• 1999-09-18 04:50 Re: GNU compiler
• 1999-09-18 05:05 Re: exceptions and shared libraries
• 1999-09-19 08:52 Re: Can I get one file through cvs ?
• 1999-09-20 01:10 Re: Singletons and optimisation
• 1999-09-20 15:04 Re: ABI/compatibility details? (egcs -> gcc 2.95 -> future?)
• 1999-09-20 15:23 Re: ABI/compatibility details? (egcs -> gcc 2.95 -> future?)
• 1999-09-20 15:37 Re: Why are there so many bytes allocated on stack ?
• 1999-09-20 15:46 Re: ABI/compatibility details? (egcs -> gcc 2.95 -> future?)
• 1999-09-20 15:59 CVS problem with gcc/cp/ChangeLog
• 1999-09-21 07:33 Re: bitset and CHAR_BIT
• 1999-09-21 13:53 Processor information document
• 1999-09-22 10:39 Processor information
• 1999-09-23 01:28 Re: Processor information
• 1999-09-23 05:01 Re: Processor information
• 1999-09-23 09:05 Re: willing to assist
• 1999-09-23 12:13 Re: Manuals for GCC/G++
• 1999-09-23 14:33 Re: Is this a bug? Dynamic cast error similar to thunk error.
• 1999-09-23 15:58 Re: Is this a bug? Dynamic cast error similar to thunk error.

martin.kahlert

• 1999-09-13 12:47 question about preprocessor directives in macro calls

Marting.Weber

• 1999-09-07 02:14 Optimizing code

Marty Leisner

• 1999-09-29 14:58 I'm a bit confused by the tree...

master

• 1999-09-09 10:25 file://localhost/extr/lang/egcs/releases/index.html

Matthias Urlichs

• 1999-09-21 05:11 Re: CVS problem with gcc/cp/ChangeLog

Mcfall, Troy D

• 1999-09-01 16:22 Problem

Michael Hayes

• 1999-09-09 00:42 Peephole2 as a generic RTL rewriter
• 1999-09-09 01:09 Re: Peephole2 as a generic RTL rewriter
• 1999-09-12 04:02 Post reload copy propagation?
• 1999-09-22 04:32 Re: Autoincrement examples
• 1999-09-22 04:57 Re: Autoincrement examples
• 1999-09-22 05:00 Re: Autoincrement examples
• 1999-09-22 23:23 Re: Autoincrement examples
• 1999-09-23 04:37 Re: Autoincrement examples
• 1999-09-24 04:35 Re: Autoincrement examples

Michael J. Bedy

• 1999-09-15 11:42 re: type based aliasing again

Michael Meissner

• 1999-09-14 17:38 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 16:52 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-17 20:37 Re: The complex problems
• 1999-09-18 10:22 Re: The complex problems
• 1999-09-18 10:24 Re: The complex problems

Michael_K_Collison

• 1999-09-28 20:19 Re: Processor information

Mike Moran

• 1999-09-29 10:34 assembler problems with: g++ 2.95.1/Solaris 2.6/ -O3
• 1999-09-29 10:53 Re: assembler problems with: g++ 2.95.1/Solaris 2.6/ -O3
• 1999-09-30 06:55 Re: assembler problems with: g++ 2.95.1/Solaris 2.6/ -O3

Mike Stump

• 1999-09-01 17:23 Re: platforms
• 1999-09-01 17:41 Re: Becoming a gcc developer
• 1999-09-08 14:17 Re: libiberty legal status ?
• 1999-09-08 19:13 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 14:26 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-13 16:34 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-13 17:21 Re: Optimization for PII
• 1999-09-13 20:47 Re: General Optimization questions
• 1999-09-15 11:45 Re: GCC C++ 2.95.1
• 1999-09-15 19:07 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-16 12:42 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-16 13:13 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-16 13:24 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 15:05 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-17 15:25 Re: RMS's aliasing suggestion appears unimplementable
• 1999-09-17 19:00 Re: RMS's aliasing suggestion appears unimplementable
• 1999-09-18 11:54 Re: RMS's aliasing suggestion appears unimplementable
• 1999-09-20 13:43 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-22 16:29 Re: egcs and altivec vector type
• 1999-09-22 19:48 Re: Processor information
• 1999-09-23 11:48 Re: Resuming a compile
• 1999-09-23 15:57 Re: Is this a bug? Dynamic cast error similar to thunk error.
• 1999-09-23 17:47 Re: Is this a bug? Dynamic cast error similar to thunk error.
• 1999-09-24 15:20 Re: memory manager
• 1999-09-27 17:58 Re: allocation on the stack
• 1999-09-27 18:00 Re: -fno-exceptions and bad_alloc
• 1999-09-27 20:40 Re: allocation on the stack
• 1999-09-28 12:45 Re: -fno-exceptions and bad_alloc
• 1999-09-28 13:48 Re: -fno-exceptions and bad_alloc
• 1999-09-30 14:41 Re: a C routine to optimize GCC for

MontyBloom

• 1999-09-14 06:28 Windows

mstephe93

• 1999-09-11 20:14 #1recipe line

Mumit Khan

• 1999-09-08 14:39 Re: Strange strings in GCC compiled code

N8TM

• 1999-09-01 17:57 Re: Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-02 19:35 Re: Unsuccessful build of gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-07 18:21 Re: configure failed
• 1999-09-11 15:16 g77/686 performance regressions from gcc-2.95.1 to gcc-2.96
• 1999-09-11 21:48 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 21:53 Re: g77/686 performance regressions from gcc-2.95.1 to gcc-2.96
• 1999-09-13 21:45 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 23:15 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-18 08:33 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-21 18:18 Re: libf2c
• 1999-09-29 17:48 Re: Code much slower. Why?
• 1999-09-29 18:12 Re: Code much slower. Why?
• 1999-09-29 19:07 Re: a C routine to optimize GCC for

Nathan Sidwell

• 1999-09-03 05:53 Re: gnu for intel
• 1999-09-15 08:57 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-21 03:25 Re: C++ coding standards (was: [C++] PATCH to reduce code replication in error.c)

Nearby Star Observers

• 1999-09-01 14:21 RFI

Nick Clifton

• 1999-09-23 05:08 Re: Processor information

Nick Ing-Simmons

• 1999-09-01 09:59 Re: g77 performance on ALPHA
• 1999-09-08 02:10 Re: Strange strings in GCC compiled code
• 1999-09-14 10:31 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 07:47 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 07:55 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 08:02 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 09:56 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 09:59 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 10:48 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 00:58 Re: why are these alias sets different?
• 1999-09-16 09:34 Re: I need a GCC porting hint (or two) for an odd architecture...
• 1999-09-20 02:46 Re: Inyone know what inadru is?
• 1999-09-20 03:07 Re: Inyone know what inadru is?
• 1999-09-21 05:24 alloca "bug" on x86?
• 1999-09-21 05:36 Re: alloca "bug" on x86?
• 1999-09-22 00:37 Re: alloca "bug" on x86?
• 1999-09-22 06:44 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless

Nimar Arora

• 1999-09-07 15:52 Strange strings in GCC compiled code
• 1999-09-08 13:32 Re: Strange strings in GCC compiled code

Nix

• 1999-09-08 15:06 Re: egcs-ss-19990907 is now available

Ovidiu Predescu

• 1999-09-14 12:43 Re: is this an objective-c egcs forum?
• 1999-09-29 10:38 Re: egcs19990927
• 1999-09-29 11:36 Re: egcs19990927

P.Willmington

• 1999-09-09 09:13 Access Denied!!!!!

Patrick J. LoPresti

• 1999-09-14 08:34 Re: [dax@gurulabs.com: PATCH: `__norestrict' type qualifier (fwd)]
• 1999-09-17 07:07 __typealias qualifier (was Re: type based aliasing again)

Patrick Lerda

• 1999-09-03 02:31 Unsuccessful build of a cross PowerPC GCC 2.95.x for an Intel box
• 1999-09-03 08:11 RE: Unsuccessful build of a cross PowerPC GCC 2.95.x for an Intel box (Details)
• 1999-09-06 01:22 RE: Unsuccessful build of a cross PowerPC GCC 2.95.x for an Intel

Paul Burchard

• 1999-09-13 01:10 tree types of parser tokens
• 1999-09-15 21:56 obstacks live on?

Paul Stodghill

• 1999-09-08 12:55 Template code is 6.4 times slower than hand-written code

paulf

• 1999-09-17 13:59 c++ warning idea
• 1999-09-17 15:09 RE: c++ warning idea

Pavel Pisa;research student

• 1999-09-13 00:40 GCC and NT DDK - still problems

pavenis

• 1999-09-30 04:13 gcc/config/i386.h

Per Bothner

• 1999-09-02 18:48 bitstrings [Was: Aliasing problems in GNU Chill?]
• 1999-09-04 07:50 Re: Can cppalloc.c be removed?
• 1999-09-05 00:34 Re: Can cppalloc.c be removed?
• 1999-09-07 18:42 Re: New vtable ABI (was Re: Strange behaviour in C++...)
• 1999-09-07 23:53 Re: New vtable ABI (was Re: Strange behaviour in C++...)
• 1999-09-08 06:33 Re: New vtable ABI (was Re: Strange behaviour in C++...)
• 1999-09-09 09:28 Re: New vtable ABI (was Re: Strange behaviour in C++...)
• 1999-09-30 12:07 Re: Chill vs. Pascal sets (was: undefined reference to `__setbits')
• 1999-09-30 12:11 Re: Chill vs. Pascal sets (was: undefined reference to `__setbits')
• 1999-09-30 13:02 Re: Chill vs. Pascal sets (was: undefined reference to `__setbits')
• 1999-09-30 16:11 Re: Chill vs. Pascal sets (was: undefined reference to `__setbits')

Peter Gerwinski

• 1999-09-26 15:24 undefined reference to `__setbits'
• 1999-09-29 04:20 Re: undefined reference to `__setbits'
• 1999-09-29 14:43 Re: undefined reference to `__setbits'
• 1999-09-30 04:14 Chill vs. Pascal sets (was: undefined reference to `__setbits')
• 1999-09-30 14:36 Re: bitstrings (sets in Chill and Pascal)
• 1999-09-30 14:42 Re: Chill vs. Pascal sets
• 1999-09-30 15:05 Re: Chill vs. Pascal sets (was: undefined reference to `__setbits')

Peter Nygren

• 1999-09-09 10:33 cross-compiler problem with "gcc-2.8.1" :(

Peter Osterlund

• 1999-09-30 10:05 Re: a C routine to optimize GCC for

Phil Edwards

• 1999-09-11 18:21 Re: type based aliasing again

Philip Blundell

• 1999-09-01 13:58 Re: CVS Update: www.netwinder.org: pub
• 1999-09-02 01:53 Re: CVS Update: www.netwinder.org: pub

pschen

• 1999-09-08 21:45 m68k-coff cross-compiler support -fPIC?
• 1999-09-14 06:50 The steps of cross compiler, is it right?

R. Kelley Cook

• 1999-09-13 10:55 Re: type based aliasing again

Rainer Dorsch

• 1999-09-13 02:35 Optimization for PII
• 1999-09-20 05:43 redefinition of `class exception'
• 1999-09-20 05:57 Re: redefinition of `class exception'
• 1999-09-21 03:26 bitset and CHAR_BIT
• 1999-09-27 06:53 STL support in gdb

Rask Ingemann Lambertsen

• 1999-09-13 08:52 Re: MIPS16 -mentry pseudo instruction definitions
• 1999-09-13 08:52 Re: GCC and NT DDK - still problems
• 1999-09-14 14:29 re: failed compilation under Solaris 2.6
• 1999-09-18 05:14 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-21 01:16 Re: Why are there so many bytes allocated on stack ?
• 1999-09-21 01:16 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-21 01:16 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-21 02:16 Re: where did ioperm & iopl functions go ?
• 1999-09-27 06:56 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-28 13:35 Re: Processor information
• 1999-09-29 06:15 Re: Autoincrement examples
• 1999-09-29 06:16 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-29 06:16 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless
• 1999-09-29 06:16 Re: gcc_tooldir is useless

Richard Earnshaw

• 1999-09-02 03:52 Re: CVS Update: www.netwinder.org: pub
• 1999-09-07 03:35 Re: Machine-dependent bits for GC
• 1999-09-13 04:05 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 10:10 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-20 10:38 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-23 02:53 Re: Processor information
• 1999-09-23 05:22 Re: Processor information
• 1999-09-23 05:44 Re: Processor information
• 1999-09-23 06:15 Re: Processor information
• 1999-09-23 13:39 Re: Forest through the Trees
• 1999-09-24 02:59 Re: Forest through the Trees

Richard Hadsell

• 1999-09-16 08:03 Re: -MD behavior does not match documentation

Richard Henderson

• 1999-09-02 11:54 Re: ASM_GENERATE_INTERNAL_LABEL synopsis ?
• 1999-09-02 12:15 Re: Jump optimizations (was Re: g77 performance on ALPHA)
• 1999-09-02 12:54 Re: GC Merge?
• 1999-09-02 13:16 Re: GC Merge?
• 1999-09-02 13:46 Re: Jump optimizations (was Re: g77 performance on ALPHA)
• 1999-09-07 17:30 Re: gcc-2.95.2 rough plan
• 1999-09-08 23:20 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-08 23:44 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 00:57 Re: Peephole2 as a generic RTL rewriter
• 1999-09-09 14:42 Re: MIPS16 -mentry pseudo instruction definitions
• 1999-09-10 12:20 Re: what's required for builtin_memcpy to be inlined
• 1999-09-10 16:12 Re: what's required for builtin_memcpy to be inlined
• 1999-09-11 17:43 Re: g77/686 performance regressions from gcc-2.95.1 to gcc-2.96
• 1999-09-11 23:19 Re: odd things in md files
• 1999-09-12 00:56 Re: odd things in md files
• 1999-09-13 12:01 Re: what's required for builtin_memcpy to be inlined
• 1999-09-13 14:46 Re: odd things in md files
• 1999-09-13 15:36 Re: odd things in md files
• 1999-09-13 21:02 Re: Optimization for PII
• 1999-09-14 20:08 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-16 13:59 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 14:17 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 14:48 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-19 02:16 Re: RMS's aliasing suggestion appears unimplementable
• 1999-09-20 18:12 Re: CVS problem with gcc/cp/ChangeLog
• 1999-09-20 18:23 Re: CVS problem with gcc/cp/ChangeLog
• 1999-09-22 19:33 vma space for gc
• 1999-09-23 00:54 Re: vma space for gc
• 1999-09-26 14:13 Re: i386: symbolic_operand args unused?
• 1999-09-27 16:46 Re: question about constant-folding compares...
• 1999-09-28 11:53 Re: A new check ?

Richard Kenner

• 1999-09-30 11:15 Re: genattrtab.c [Am I on drugs?!?]
• 1999-09-30 11:38 Re: genattrtab.c [Am I on drugs?!?]
• 1999-09-30 11:52 Re: genattrtab.c [Am I on drugs?!?]

Richard Stallman

• 1999-09-01 22:51 Compilation getting slower
• 1999-09-02 20:08 Re: Compilation getting slower
• 1999-09-09 23:25 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 23:25 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 23:25 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 23:25 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 23:25 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 23:25 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-09 23:26 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 00:14 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 00:15 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 00:15 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 00:16 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 00:16 Re: vacation and strict aliasing
• 1999-09-11 00:17 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 00:17 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 00:17 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-12 00:49 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-12 00:51 [dax@gurulabs.com: PATCH: `__norestrict' type qualifier (fwd)]
• 1999-09-12 00:51 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-12 00:52 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-13 00:47 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-13 00:47 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-13 00:47 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 22:20 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 22:22 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 23:14 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-15 23:14 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 23:13 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 23:13 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 23:14 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-16 23:15 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-17 22:16 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-17 22:16 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-19 13:54 Re: RMS's aliasing suggestion appears unimplementable
• 1999-09-19 13:54 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-20 15:13 Re: type based aliasing - summary
• 1999-09-22 12:15 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-24 23:37 Re: type based aliasing again

Robert Lipe

• 1999-09-06 15:03 Re: Should we create an attribute malloc for supposed alias benefits?
• 1999-09-09 08:12 Re: GCC 2.95.1 static string won't compile on SCO-OSR5
• 1999-09-10 22:08 Re: GCC 2.95.1 static string won't compile on SCO-OSR5
• 1999-09-12 08:16 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-24 13:51 Re: GCC for Unix and Xenix
• 1999-09-26 08:06 i386: symbolic_operand args unused?
• 1999-09-26 14:45 Re: i386: symbolic_operand args unused?

Roberto Zegarra Dorado

• 1999-09-23 08:56 Manuals for GCC/G++

Roman Belenov

• 1999-09-22 11:03 Re[2]: where did ioperm & iopl functions go ?
• 1999-09-23 08:47 Re: danger: Global Null Pointer Test Elimination

Ross Morgan-Linial

• 1999-09-15 14:07 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-15 14:58 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-15 15:11 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-15 15:58 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-15 16:17 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"
• 1999-09-18 02:51 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-18 22:18 Re: type based aliasing again

Ross Smith

• 1999-09-15 17:32 Re: type based aliasing again - meaning of "undefined"

Rotter Klaus

• 1999-09-06 07:22 Definig scratch registers
• 1999-09-13 04:40 AW: GCC and NT DDK - still problems
• 1999-09-20 07:48 Why are there so many bytes allocated on stack ?
• 1999-09-21 00:56 AW: Why are there so many bytes allocated on stack ?
• 1999-09-21 03:49 AW: AW: Why are there so many bytes allocated on stack ?

Russ Allbery

• 1999-09-01 09:44 Re: Problem compiling glibc's with gcc-2.95.1
• 1999-09-07 16:21 Re: Strange strings in GCC compiled code
• 1999-09-13 03:29 Re: vacation and strict aliasing
• 1999-09-18 11:29 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-28 08:51 Re: Can't install GCC 2.95.1 in Sun Solaris 2.6

Scott Ladd

• 1999-09-03 10:37 Support for C9X in gcc?

Security4U

• 1999-09-28 19:58 >>> Guaranteed Credit Card Approval for 1st 500 applicants <

shannon

• 1999-09-07 08:40 gcc-2.95.1 on sun

Stan Shebs

• 1999-09-30 15:00 Re: STL support in gdb

Steinar Bang

• 1999-09-23 05:28 Re: Processor information
• 1999-09-23 05:29 Re: Processor information
• 1999-09-23 05:35 Re: Processor information
• 1999-09-30 01:58 Re: what does it mean "undefined reference to `xxxx virtual table'.

Stephen L Moshier

• 1999-09-18 07:11 Re: The complex problems
• 1999-09-18 07:30 Re: type based aliasing again

Steve

• 1999-09-16 15:57 GNU compiler

Steve Grubb

• 1999-09-20 08:26 Function return problem

Steve Kettle

• 1999-09-09 10:43 linking egcs code on the DEC

Steven W Orr

• 1999-09-17 13:55 Inyone know what inadru is?
• 1999-09-30 07:20 I'm having questions regarding use of gcc on ppc.

Steven W. Orr

• 1999-09-18 18:42 Re: Inyone know what inadru is?
• 1999-09-22 19:13 A simple C question?
• 1999-09-26 15:15 Re: lazy execution optimization

stockmarket

• 1999-09-04 00:07 Get Your { FREE!!! } Internet Stock Newsletter

Sudish Joseph

• 1999-09-10 12:29 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-11 23:40 Re: type based aliasing again

Sylvain Pion

• 1999-09-26 09:30 lazy execution optimization
• 1999-09-27 02:15 Re: lazy execution optimization
• 1999-09-29 02:56 Re: lazy execution optimization

T & B Associates

• 1999-09-04 22:57 9,000,000 "*BYTEBLE" email addresses PLUS!

Terry Barnaby

• 1999-09-21 02:33 Re: Gcc-2.95.1 and LessTif (solved!)

Theodore Papadopoulo

• 1999-09-01 02:15 Re: Memory leaks?
• 1999-09-02 15:52 C++ and static data members...
• 1999-09-03 10:13 Re: C++ and static data members...
• 1999-09-03 16:16 Re: C++ and static data members...

Thomas Flynn

• 1999-09-04 16:29 g++ inlining problem?
• 1999-09-05 16:58 Re: g++ inlining problem?
• 1999-09-05 17:18 Re: g++ inlining problem?
• 1999-09-05 17:33 Re: g++ inlining problem?
• 1999-09-05 22:20 Re: g++ inlining problem?
• 1999-09-05 22:38 Re: g++ inlining problem?

Thomas van Gulick

• 1999-09-27 17:14 allocation on the stack
• 1999-09-27 17:18 -fno-exceptions and bad_alloc
• 1999-09-27 19:08 Big object allocation problem
• 1999-09-27 19:09 Re: allocation on the stack

Timothy J. Wood

• 1999-09-03 11:43 Bug in EGCS AltiVec support?

Tkil

• 1999-09-18 18:40 Re: on vacation till 1999-04-10

Tom Browder

• 1999-09-01 03:54 Successful Installations of gcc-2.95.1

Tom Tromey

• 1999-09-16 17:15 Re: -MD behavior does not match documentation

Toon Moene

• 1999-09-01 13:14 Re: g77 performance on ALPHA
• 1999-09-14 14:48 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-14 16:01 Re: type based aliasing again
• 1999-09-18 03:52 Re: The complex problems
• 1999-09-19 03:02 g77 -c bla.f crashes with SIGSEGV using recently CVS'd mainline.
• 1999-09-26 06:28 unroll.c (copy_loop_body): splittable_regs[src_regno] with src_regno == -1 - BWAM !
• 1999-09-30 13:27 Re: fille errors

Ulisses T. Mello

• 1999-09-07 17:13 static_cast + virtual table = problems ?

Ullas Ponnadi

• 1999-09-30 10:06 64 bit Wide mode support for PA RISC 2.0

Ulrich Lauther

• 1999-09-22 07:51 __builtin_return_address why const parameter ?

veksler

• 1999-09-23 08:23 danger: Global Null Pointer Test Elimination

Vincent Diepeveen

• 1999-09-29 16:55 a C routine to optimize GCC for

wam

• 1999-09-01 15:05 platforms

Wes Morgan

• 1999-09-14 19:32 FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 07:42 Re: FreeBSD 4.0

wethankyou

• 1999-09-10 23:44 Have You Ever Considered ?
• 1999-09-12 14:27 Have You Ever Considered ?

Wolfram Gloger

• 1999-09-21 01:26 Re: ABI/compatibility details? (egcs -> gcc 2.95 -> future?)
• 1999-09-22 01:09 Re: ABI/compatibility details? (egcs -> gcc 2.95 -> future?)

Zack Weinberg

• 1999-09-01 11:44 Re: RTL type checking
• 1999-09-01 17:36 drop support for bootstrap with no <stdarg.h>?
• 1999-09-01 18:24 Why we can't have nice discarding const warnings
• 1999-09-01 20:59 Re: drop support for bootstrap with no <stdarg.h>?
• 1999-09-01 22:55 Re: 2.95, x86: severe performance problems with short arithmetic
• 1999-09-01 23:20 Re: Compilation getting slower
• 1999-09-02 17:55 wint_t in stddef.h - why?
• 1999-09-02 22:05 Re: Why we can't have nice discarding const warnings
• 1999-09-03 10:43 Re: Support for C9X in gcc?
• 1999-09-05 16:29 The treatment of null characters in C source files
• 1999-09-05 17:38 Re: The treatment of null characters in C source files
• 1999-09-07 12:27 Re: The treatment of null characters in C source files
• 1999-09-11 21:15 odd things in md files
• 1999-09-12 00:18 Re: odd things in md files
• 1999-09-13 12:36 Re: odd things in md files
• 1999-09-13 13:08 Re: question about preprocessor directives in macro calls
• 1999-09-13 15:21 Re: odd things in md files
• 1999-09-14 17:00 Re: ANSI incompatability in gcc stdio.h
• 1999-09-14 23:00 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 00:25 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 09:23 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-15 18:57 why are these alias sets different?
• 1999-09-15 20:48 Re: why are these alias sets different?
• 1999-09-15 21:15 Re: why are these alias sets different?
• 1999-09-16 09:35 aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 12:36 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 12:36 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 12:36 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-16 12:36 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-17 01:20 RMS's aliasing suggestion appears unimplementable
• 1999-09-17 22:46 Re: RMS's aliasing suggestion appears unimplementable
• 1999-09-18 11:20 Re: RMS's aliasing suggestion appears unimplementable
• 1999-09-20 09:26 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-20 10:17 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-20 11:02 Re: FreeBSD 4.0
• 1999-09-23 17:51 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-25 13:47 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-25 14:10 Re: aliasing warnings [patch]
• 1999-09-28 13:59 Re: Questions about cpp, cpplib, and precompiled headers
• 1999-09-30 12:10 Re: genattrtab.c [Am I on drugs?!?]
• 1999-09-30 15:44 aliasing warnings: help

¨Marcel Cox

• 1999-09-09 11:37 ix86 backend: opportunities for optimizations ?

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: This time period only This mailing list only All mailing lists Entire site (no limit)