gcc archive
date index for July, 2001

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:

July 31, 2001
23:16 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) Mark Mitchell
23:05 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) Benjamin Kosnik
23:01 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) Benjamin Kosnik
22:59 Re: libstdc++ test suite still drives machine into swap Benjamin Kosnik
22:57 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) Mark Mitchell
21:55 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Tim Prince
21:27 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Tim Prince
20:55 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis
20:46 Re: libstdc++ test suite still drives machine into swap Gabriel Dos Reis
20:40 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) Gabriel Dos Reis
19:10 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
19:05 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine) Linus Torvalds
18:53 Re: libstdc++ test suite still drives machine into swap Phil Edwards
18:50 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Joern Rennecke
18:23 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
18:20 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
18:15 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
18:12 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine) Linus Torvalds
18:12 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine) Linus Torvalds
18:10 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Linus Torvalds
18:06 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) Richard Henderson
17:58 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) David Edelsohn
17:37 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
17:28 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine) Linus Torvalds
17:24 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) Richard Henderson
17:19 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) Phil Edwards
17:08 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) Richard Henderson
16:55 Re: GCC 3.0 for i686-pc-cygwin target, bootstrap fails Richard Henderson
16:38 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
16:37 Re: Simple returns are broken in gcc 3.X Richard Henderson
16:11 Re: robustness vs. conservative GC dewar
16:08 Re: Simple returns are broken in gcc 3.X John David Anglin
15:57 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Toon Moene
15:32 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) David Edelsohn
15:24 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) Gabriel Dos Reis
15:23 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Branko Čibej
15:16 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) David Edelsohn
14:53 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) Gabriel Dos Reis
14:31 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) David Edelsohn
14:23 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) Gabriel Dos Reis
14:16 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) Gabriel Dos Reis
14:16 Re: libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) David Edelsohn
14:05 libstdc++ bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.8 (analyzed) Gerald Pfeifer
13:52 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Joe Buck
13:49 Re: Simple returns are broken in gcc 3.X Richard Henderson
13:43 Re: Simple returns are broken in gcc 3.X John David Anglin
13:29 Re: robustness vs. conservative GC Fergus Henderson
13:13 Re: Simple returns are broken in gcc 3.X Richard Henderson
11:51 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main mike stump
11:39 Re: Request for information mike stump
11:37 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Joern Rennecke
10:43 Re: Which .stabs to use? (please help) Carlo Wood
10:39 Re: Simple returns are broken in gcc 3.X John David Anglin
10:29 Re: Request for information Phil Edwards
10:28 Re: Which .stabs to use? (please help) Geoff Keating
10:27 Re: [RFA:] Fix invalid tests (was: Re: Tests gcc.dg/c99-scope-2.c ...) Geoff Keating
09:56 Re: Simple returns are broken in gcc 3.X Richard Henderson
09:22 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) mike stump
08:47 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main mike stump
08:37 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
08:36 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) mike stump
08:36 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
08:35 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
08:19 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) mike stump
08:13 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Kevin Handy
08:03 Re: Simple returns are broken in gcc 3.X John David Anglin
07:59 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) mike stump
07:26 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
06:51 patches addressing g++ 3.0 compilation speed? Dale E Martin
06:47 Re: GCC Alexandre Oliva
06:34 Re: 3.0 compiled application twice as slow as 2.95.3 compiled application (execution time) Carlo Wood
06:07 GCC Kutzler, Paul
05:49 Request for information Andrew Stubbs
05:46 Re: precomiled template-class member functions Gabriel Dos Reis
05:29 Re: precomiled template-class member functions Bohdan Vlasyuk
05:10 Re: precomiled template-class member functions Alexandre Oliva
04:35 Successful build of gcc 3.0 on HP-UX 11.00 David Balazic
04:15 precomiled template-class member functions Bohdan Vlasyuk
04:15 sgi cc and gcc David Bourguignon
04:15 Re: robustness vs. conservative GC Erik Schnetter
04:07 Re: Trunk frustration Jan Hubicka
04:03 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Jan Hubicka
03:09 RE: , operand with no effect warning Bernard Dautrevaux
02:58 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis
02:54 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine) Linus Torvalds
02:45 RE: robustness vs. conservative GC Bernard Dautrevaux
02:35 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Olivier Galibert
02:04 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis
02:03 Re: make install problems (libjava) with CVS 3.0.x branch Christian Iseli
01:35 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Linus Torvalds
00:29 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Richard Henderson

July 30, 2001
23:24 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main law
23:16 Re: Simple returns are broken in gcc 3.X Richard Henderson
23:11 Re: 3.0 compiled application twice as slow as 2.95.3 compiled application (execution time) Daniel Berlin
22:27 Where are the snapshots? Martin Kahlert
22:05 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Joern Rennecke
21:58 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Alexandre Oliva
21:56 Re: GCC 3.0 for i686-pc-cygwin target, bootstrap fails Di-an Jan
21:53 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis
21:53 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Joern Rennecke
21:48 3.0 compiled application twice as slow as 2.95.3 compiled application (execution time) Carlo Wood
21:47 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Joern Rennecke
21:43 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Joern Rennecke
21:39 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Joern Rennecke
21:34 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis
21:31 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine) Mark Mitchell
21:13 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
21:11 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis
20:54 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
20:38 Re: Simple returns are broken in gcc 3.X John David Anglin
20:37 Re: covariant returns and multiple inheritance. Alexandre Oliva
20:25 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis
20:20 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Alexandre Oliva
20:19 Re: make install problems (libjava) with CVS 3.0.x branch Alexandre Oliva
20:14 Re: make install problems (libjava) with CVS 3.0.x branch Tom Tromey
20:00 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis
19:54 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis
19:46 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
19:34 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Alexandre Oliva
19:32 Re: , operand with no effect warning Joern Rennecke
19:32 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Alexandre Oliva
19:31 Re: Which .stabs to use? (please help) Carlo Wood
19:30 Re: Simple returns are broken in gcc 3.X Richard Henderson
19:29 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis
19:27 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis
19:22 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Alexandre Oliva
19:21 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Joern Rennecke
19:18 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Alexandre Oliva
19:12 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Joern Rennecke
19:11 Re: Trunk frustration Alexandre Oliva
19:08 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Joern Rennecke
19:06 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis
18:40 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Olivier Galibert
18:39 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
18:38 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
18:25 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Joe Buck
18:08 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
18:02 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
18:01 Re: robustness vs. conservative GC dewar
18:00 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
17:29 Re: Traditional numbers Joseph S. Myers
17:21 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine) Joseph S. Myers
17:02 Re: Traditional numbers Richard Henderson
16:39 Re: make install problems (libjava) with CVS 3.0.x branch Alexandre Oliva
16:35 Re: make install problems (libjava) with CVS 3.0.x branch Christian Iseli
16:29 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Alexandre Oliva
16:29 Re: robustness vs. conservative GC Fergus Henderson
16:28 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Alexandre Oliva
16:25 Re: GC use within GCC Fergus Henderson
16:16 Re: , operand with no effect warning Daniel Jacobowitz
16:15 Re: , operand with no effect warning Fergus Henderson
16:14 Re: , operand with no effect warning Fergus Henderson
16:11 Re: robustness vs. conservative GC dewar
16:11 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Neil Booth
16:11 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
16:10 Re: robustness vs. conservative GC Fergus Henderson
16:05 Re: GC use within GCC Alexandre Oliva
16:03 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Alexandre Oliva
16:00 Re: make install problems (libjava) with CVS 3.0.x branch Alexandre Oliva
15:54 Re: a .NET alternative (GJC et al) Fergus Henderson
15:52 Re: GC use within GCC Tom Lord
15:51 Re: , operand with no effect warning Neil Booth
15:47 Re: GC use within GCC Neil Booth
15:46 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine) Stephen L Moshier
15:45 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Neil Booth
15:39 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Toon Moene
15:35 Re: GC use within GCC Tom Tromey
15:33 Simple returns are broken in gcc 3.X John David Anglin
15:29 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
15:29 [RFA:] Fix invalid tests (was: Re: Tests gcc.dg/c99-scope-2.c ...) Hans-Peter Nilsson
15:26 Re: make install problems (libjava) with CVS 3.0.x branch Christian Iseli
15:18 Re: , operand with no effect warning Alexandre Oliva
15:17 Re: HOW CAN I REMOVE MYSELF FROM THIS LIST Alexandre Oliva
15:14 Re: SH Linux and multilib Alexandre Oliva
15:12 Re: , operand with no effect warning Phil Edwards
15:11 Re: make install problems (libjava) with CVS 3.0.x branch Alexandre Oliva
15:10 Re: SH Linux: remove big endian multilib Alexandre Oliva
15:07 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Alexandre Oliva
15:00 Re: HOW CAN I REMOVE MYSELF FROM THIS LIST alexus
14:58 Re: HOW CAN I REMOVE MYSELF FROM THIS LIST Phil Edwards
14:53 GC use within GCC Tom Lord
14:43 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Alexandre Oliva
14:37 Re: a .NET alternative (GJC et al) Florian Weimer
13:55 Re: robustness vs. conservative GC dewar
13:43 Re: robustness vs. conservative GC Fergus Henderson
13:32 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Richard Henderson
13:24 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Jan Hubicka
13:10 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
13:08 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Toon Moene
12:41 Re: Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative lawin combine) Stephen L Moshier
12:30 , operand with no effect warning John Levon
12:26 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
12:22 HOW CAN I REMOVE MYSELF FROM THIS LIST alexus
12:20 Re: Value Range Propagation Patch John Wehle
12:13 Re: Traditional numbers Neil Booth
12:04 Re: robustness vs. conservative GC dewar
11:58 Re: robustness vs. conservative GC Tom Lord
11:53 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis
11:52 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
11:37 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine) Linus Torvalds
11:36 GCC documentation Sanjay Bhatia
11:34 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Richard Henderson
11:32 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Jan Hubicka
11:29 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Richard Henderson
11:08 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Jan Hubicka
11:07 Re: Tests gcc.dg/c99-scope-2.c and gcc.c-torture/execute/align-1.cwrong? Joseph S. Myers
11:05 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Fergus Henderson
10:49 Re: c++ dynamic link speedup? Andreas Jaeger
10:34 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine) Linus Torvalds
10:24 Re: Tests gcc.dg/c99-scope-2.c and gcc.c-torture/execute/align-1.c wrong? Geoff Keating
10:17 Re: Which .stabs to use? (please help) Geoff Keating
10:12 Re: SH Linux and multilib Andrew Haley
10:07 Re: SH Linux and multilib M. R. Brown
10:01 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Jan Hubicka
10:00 Re: Trunk frustration Gerald Pfeifer
09:58 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Jan Hubicka
09:39 Re: __attribute__((aligned(16)) on x86 Ryan T. Sammartino
09:37 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main Richard Henderson
09:29 Re: Traditional numbers James Grosbach
09:27 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc Nathan Sidwell
09:27 Re: SH Linux and multilib Andrew Haley
09:25 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc Joe Buck
09:23 Re: i386 stack missalignment on main H . J . Lu
09:19 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc mike stump
09:15 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc mike stump
09:11 c++ dynamic link speedup? Florin Iucha
09:10 Re: SH Linux and multilib M. R. Brown
09:08 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc mike stump
09:03 Re: is --enable-threads supported on HP-UX 11.00? Loren James Rittle
08:59 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) mike stump
08:51 RE: Traditional numbers Bernard Dautrevaux
08:48 Re: SH Linux: remove big endian multilib M. R. Brown
08:42 Re: decrement and branch optimization broken? Andreas Jaeger
08:31 Re: __attribute__((aligned(16)) on x86 mike stump
08:30 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Kevin Handy
08:17 Re: [C++] Keep or lose FNADDR_FROM_VTABLE_ENTRY? Nathan Sidwell
08:14 Re: decrement and branch optimization broken? Jan Hubicka
08:07 Re: robustness vs. conservative GC Eric W. Biederman
08:07 Re: Mercury front-end Fergus Henderson
08:05 Re: Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) tprinceusa
08:04 Re: Traditional numbers James Grosbach
08:02 Re: decrement and branch optimization broken? David Edelsohn
07:54 RE: stamp time of last update mike stump
07:52 [C++] Keep or lose FNADDR_FROM_VTABLE_ENTRY? Stan Shebs
07:09 Re: gcc, pthread on SunOS5.7 Dima Volodin
06:53 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Tim Hollebeek
06:14 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
06:01 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
06:00 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
05:57 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
05:55 make install problems (libjava) with CVS 3.0.x branch Christian Iseli
05:43 SH Linux: remove big endian multilib Andrew Haley
05:18 i386 stack missalignment on main Jan Hubicka
03:00 gcc, pthread on SunOS5.7 Anand Padhye
02:56 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc Joseph S. Myers
02:53 Re: decrement and branch optimization broken? Jan Hubicka
02:50 Re: unloading dynamically loaded libraries Jagadish Chandra Prasad
02:46 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc Gabriel Dos Reis
02:42 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc Gabriel Dos Reis
02:41 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc Fergus Henderson
02:38 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc Florian Schintke
02:32 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc Gabriel Dos Reis
02:31 Re: unloading dynamically loaded libraries Andreas Jaeger
02:28 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc Florian Schintke
02:23 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc Nathan Sidwell
02:16 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc Gabriel Dos Reis
02:10 Tests gcc.dg/c99-scope-2.c and gcc.c-torture/execute/align-1.c wrong? Hans-Peter Nilsson
02:07 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc Florian Schintke
01:56 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc Gabriel Dos Reis
01:38 Re: robustness vs. conservative GC Tom Lord
01:35 unloading dynamically loaded libraries Jagadish Chandra Prasad
01:14 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc Florian Schintke
00:55 Re: GCC 3.0 for i686-pc-cygwin target, bootstrap fails Corwin Joy
00:51 “域名、虚拟主机、及企业内部邮局”系统火暴登陆 天互科技
00:39 covariant returns and multiple inheritance. Alexander Rozenman
00:23 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis

July 29, 2001
23:32 Re: robustness vs. conservative GC Fergus Henderson
22:42 robustness vs. conservative GC Tom Lord
21:33 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine) Linus Torvalds
21:17 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Fergus Henderson
21:08 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine) Linus Torvalds
20:49 Re: a .NET alternative (GJC et al) Fergus Henderson
20:48 Re: a .NET alternative (GJC et al) Fergus Henderson
20:08 Which .stabs to use? (please help) carlo
19:08 Re: decrement and branch optimization broken? David Edelsohn
18:40 Re: decrement and branch optimization broken? Roman Zippel
15:43 Re: * Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Gabriel Dos Reis
14:22 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
14:20 Re: * Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) dewar
14:03 Re: __STDC_VERSION__ is undefined in gcc-3.x? Gordon Sadler
14:03 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine) Stephen L Moshier
13:37 Re: __STDC_VERSION__ is undefined in gcc-3.x? Joseph S. Myers
13:25 Re: __STDC_VERSION__ is undefined in gcc-3.x? Gordon Sadler
13:17 Re: a .NET alternative (GJC et al) dewar
12:56 Re: __STDC_VERSION__ is undefined in gcc-3.x? Neil Booth
12:54 Re: a .NET alternative (GJC et al) Tom Lord
12:52 Re: * Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative lawin combine) Linus Torvalds
12:52 Re: a .NET alternative (GJC et al) Tom Lord
12:43 Re: a .NET alternative (GJC et al) Tom Tromey
12:39 Re: __attribute__((aligned(16)) on x86 Ryan T. Sammartino
12:27 __STDC_VERSION__ is undefined in gcc-3.x? Gordon Sadler
12:17 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Jan Hubicka
12:14 * Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine) Stephen L Moshier
12:11 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Tim Prince
10:50 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Linus Torvalds
10:26 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Jan Hubicka
10:18 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Tim Prince
08:52 The Linux binutils 2.11.90.0.25 is released. H . J . Lu
08:12 Re: a .NET alternative (GJC et al) Jeff Sturm
06:33 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Jan Hubicka
05:11 Very odd configure failure Richard Kenner

July 28, 2001
23:49 Re: is --enable-threads supported on HP-UX 11.00? Mark Mitchell
23:21 Re: documentation for cross compiling. tm
23:04 Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine) Tim Prince
22:58 Re: a .NET alternative (GJC et al) Tom Lord
22:51 Re: documentation for cross compiling. Alexandre Oliva
22:47 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc? H . J . Lu
22:44 Re: documentation for cross compiling. tm
21:57 Re: __attribute__((aligned(16)) on x86 Alexandre Oliva
21:40 Re: How can I get libm.a on AIX? Alexandre Oliva
21:36 Re: gcc on HP-UX Alexandre Oliva
21:34 Re: documentation for cross compiling. Alexandre Oliva
21:28 Re: is --enable-threads supported on HP-UX 11.00? Alexandre Oliva
14:13 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Richard Henderson
14:10 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc? Martin v. Loewis
13:16 Re: Status for simulator targets (bad, that is, but that's no news) Joern Rennecke
13:16 Re: Suggestion for option RenE J.V. Bertin
13:10 Re: Statements: break and continue Kevin Handy
13:00 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Jan Hubicka
11:48 Model of branch penalties Jan Hubicka
11:42 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Richard Henderson
11:19 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Jan Hubicka
09:08 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc? H . J . Lu
07:21 Re: a .NET alternative (GJC et al) Tom Tromey
04:03 Re: Statements: break and continue dewar
03:59 Re: a .NET alternative (GJC et al) dewar
02:37 Re: Statements: break and continue Branko Čibej
02:05 Re: __attribute__((aligned(16)) on x86 Ryan T. Sammartino
00:54 Statements: break and continue LocKDowN

July 27, 2001
22:20 Re: a .NET alternative (GJC et al) Fergus Henderson
20:46 a .NET alternative (GJC et al) Tom Lord
19:08 Re: Shared libstdc++ on AIX Zoltan Hidvegi
18:36 Re: Shared libstdc++ on AIX David Edelsohn
17:57 Re: Shared libstdc++ on AIX Zoltan Hidvegi
17:51 Status for simulator targets (bad, that is, but that's no news) Hans-Peter Nilsson
16:52 Re: decrement and branch optimization broken? Michael Hayes
15:41 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc? Martin v. Loewis
14:25 Re: decrement and branch optimization broken? Richard Henderson
14:17 Re: Suggestion for option Joern Rennecke
14:11 Re: stamp time of last update Richard Henderson
14:01 Re: Suggestion for option Nix
14:00 RE: Internal compiler error on Cygwin-To-H8 cross Gary R Van Sickle
13:33 Re: dwarf 2.1 .debug_ranges Richard Henderson
13:32 Re: Suggestion for option Nix
13:25 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc? Mark Mitchell
13:22 Re: Suggestion for option Mark Mitchell
13:05 Re: Suggestion for option Joern Rennecke
13:01 Re: Suggestion for option Nix
13:00 Re: dwarf 2.1 .debug_ranges Daniel Berlin
12:26 dwarf 2.1 .debug_ranges Richard Henderson
11:55 Re: Shared libstdc++ on AIX David Edelsohn
11:51 Re: Shared libstdc++ on AIX David Edelsohn
11:50 Re: Shared libstdc++ on AIX Zoltan Hidvegi
11:36 Re: Shared libstdc++ on AIX David Edelsohn
11:36 Re: Help for porting mike stump
11:32 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Joern Rennecke
10:58 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Richard Henderson
10:57 GCC-30-CVS Embedded Cross Status Spreadsheet Joel Sherrill
10:56 Re: Unpleasant problem w/ foo-config style scripts (and possible solutions). Rob Browning
10:43 Re: decrement and branch optimization broken? Roman Zippel
10:37 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips H . J . Lu
10:36 Traditional numbers Neil Booth
10:21 Re: How can I get libm.a on AIX? rock huang
10:06 Shared libstdc++ on AIX Zoltan Hidvegi
09:57 Re: turning throw into a jump Richard Henderson
09:51 SWEATY CUNTS daniel
09:47 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips Joe Buck
09:24 gcc on HP-UX ed.guenther
09:02 Re: documentation for cross compiling. tm
08:58 analyze_brprob fix Jan Hubicka
08:50 Re: Trunk frustration Jan Hubicka
08:47 Re: Trunk frustration Fergus Henderson
08:41 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips H . J . Lu
08:39 comparing native/cross build results on 3.0 branch Joel Sherrill
08:37 Re: decrement and branch optimization broken? Jan Hubicka
08:34 Re: decrement and branch optimization broken? Roman Zippel
08:29 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips Rainer Orth
08:25 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips H . J . Lu
08:18 Re: Trunk frustration Jan Hubicka
08:17 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Jan Hubicka
08:11 Re: is --enable-threads supported on HP-UX 11.00? Mark Mitchell
08:07 Re: decrement and branch optimization broken? Jan Hubicka
08:01 decrement and branch optimization broken? Roman Zippel
07:50 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc? H . J . Lu
07:40 Re: Trunk frustration Jan Hubicka
07:33 Re: Suggestion for option RenE J.V. Bertin
07:33 Re: Trunk frustration Gerald Pfeifer
07:29 Re: Trunk frustration Jan Hubicka
07:27 Re: Suggestion for option RenE J.V. Bertin
07:13 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Jan Hubicka
07:00 Re: Trunk frustration Jan Hubicka
06:57 Re: Trunk frustration Gerald Pfeifer
06:45 Re: Trunk frustration Jan Hubicka
03:11 PATCH for Re: dead link! Urgent Gerald Pfeifer
03:00 Re: turning throw into a jump Sylvain Pion
01:55 Re: about newlib Alexandre Oliva
01:53 Re: Installation Problems Alexandre Oliva
01:52 Re: 64-bit for Sparc/HP in 3.0.1 or 3.1 ? Alexandre Oliva
01:49 Re: reporting results even with bootstrap failure Alexandre Oliva
01:49 Re: One more question on building m68k cross-compiler. Alexandre Oliva
01:46 Re: documentation for cross compiling. Alexandre Oliva
01:44 Re: Problems compiling a small C++ test with gcc Alexandre Oliva
01:34 Re: __attribute__((aligned(16)) on x86 Alexandre Oliva
01:34 SH Linux: remove big endian multilib NIIBE Yutaka
01:26 Re: make gcc & -lstdc++ problem Alexandre Oliva
01:23 Re: "make install" fails when doing a manual bootstrap Alexandre Oliva
01:23 Re: is --enable-threads supported on HP-UX 11.00? Alexandre Oliva
01:18 Re: and the next bug as compilation on Solaris 2.6 Alexandre Oliva
01:17 Re: Apache module in C++ Alexandre Oliva
01:14 Re: Internal compiler error on Cygwin-To-H8 cross Alexandre Oliva
01:12 Re: why the shared libgcc version bump ? Alexandre Oliva
00:52 dead link! Urgent Hisoka
00:20 Re: The future C++ template model in gcc? Joseph S. Myers

July 26, 2001
23:56 The future C++ template model in gcc? Martin v. Loewis
23:09 RE: stamp time of last update Billinghurst, David (CRTS)
23:02 Re: stamp time of last update Richard Henderson
22:53 Re: stamp time of last update Gerald Pfeifer
22:32 Re: Help for porting brahmaiah
22:23 Re: How can I get libm.a on AIX? David Edelsohn
22:21 How can I get libm.a on AIX? rock huang
18:29 Re: SH Linux: remove big endian multilib Alexandre Oliva
18:17 Re: fixinc + HPUX + __va__list Bruce Korb
16:32 Re: gcc on HPUX Alexandre Oliva
16:18 Re: gcc-3.0 bool type Falk Hueffner
16:00 Re: Suggestion for option Nix
15:32 Re: Suggestion for option Mark Mitchell
15:31 Re: Trunk frustration Toon Moene
15:13 Re: Suggestion for option Joern Rennecke
15:12 Re: Suggestion for option Joern Rennecke
14:55 Re: Suggestion for option Mark Mitchell
14:34 Re: Trunk frustration Gabriel Dos Reis
14:14 Re: Trunk frustration Gerald Pfeifer
14:11 Re: Trunk frustration Gerald Pfeifer
14:07 Re: Trunk frustration Tim Josling
13:44 Re: config files for new port Alan Lehotsky
13:44 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Jan Hubicka
13:41 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Joern Rennecke
13:41 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Richard Kenner
13:38 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Jan Hubicka
13:32 Re: Suggestion for option Joern Rennecke
13:27 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Jan Hubicka
13:27 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Joern Rennecke
13:23 Re: Suggestion for option Phil Edwards
13:22 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Jan Hubicka
13:16 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Richard Henderson
13:11 Re: Suggestion for option RenE J.V. Bertin
13:10 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Richard Kenner
13:03 config files for new port Bahman Sistany
12:19 Re: java broken/miscompiled on i686 Andreas Jaeger
11:24 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Richard Kenner
10:42 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Richard Henderson
10:40 stamp time of last update Richard Henderson
10:32 Re: java broken/miscompiled on i686 Richard Henderson
10:25 Re: fixinc + HPUX + __va__list jbohr
10:13 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Richard Kenner
10:10 Re: INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Richard Henderson
09:10 Reach Audience of Adult and Sex Sites Swap2Sex BannerExchange Team
09:07 gcc-3.0 bool type David Durham
09:02 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips Rainer Orth
08:20 Re: Trunk frustration Jan Hubicka
07:03 Re: Trunk frustration Gabriel Dos Reis
06:34 Help for porting dhinakaran
06:31 Re: gcc-3.0 does not compile on Solaris... Franz Sirl
06:29 Re: Trunk frustration Gerald Pfeifer
06:27 java broken/miscompiled on i686 Andreas Jaeger
06:17 gcc-3.0 does not compile on Solaris... jean-frederic clere
06:11 Can't build GCC CVS 3.0.x branch on x86 Linux Christian Iseli
05:40 Re: Trunk frustration Daniel Berlin
05:11 Question about reload ICE while compiling MIPS linux Richard Sandiford
02:49 Re: Instalation error Gerald Pfeifer
02:46 Instalation error Ramiro Polo
01:24 Re: Trunk frustration Gerald Pfeifer

July 25, 2001
22:59 Where is the new snapshot? Martin Kahlert
22:26 Re: flow.c and nested subregs Stephen Clarke
22:12 Re: Trunk frustration Andreas Jaeger
19:21 Re: mailing list archives? Jeff Sturm
18:01 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar Marc Espie
17:52 Re: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report Marc Espie
17:21 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar Mark Mitchell
16:55 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar nbecker
16:42 Re: when do object destuctors run? Phil Edwards
16:39 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips H . J . Lu
16:32 Re: mailing list archives? Joseph S. Myers
16:32 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips Anthony Green
16:29 Re: mailing list archives? Phil Edwards
16:24 mailing list archives? Jeff Sturm
16:13 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips H . J . Lu
15:56 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar Joseph S. Myers
14:44 deletion of g++.dg/virtual Geoff Keating
14:09 Re: Suggestion for option Mark Mitchell
13:54 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips Geoff Keating
13:22 Re: SPEC2000 testing page Jan Hubicka
13:19 Re: Suggestion for option mike stump
13:11 Re: SPEC2000 testing page Andreas Jaeger
12:42 Re: SPEC2000 testing page Toon Moene
12:07 Re: SH Linux: remove big endian multilib Andrew Haley
12:01 Re: Trunk frustration Stan Shebs
12:00 Re: alphaev6-unknown-linux-gnu: error in extract_insn, at recog.c:2127 Richard Henderson
11:59 Re: alphaev6-unknown-linux-gnu: error in extract_insn, at recog.c:2127 Toon Moene
11:58 Re: SH Linux: remove big endian multilib Joern Rennecke
11:32 Re: Replacing bitmap.[ch] Joern Rennecke
10:35 Re: alphaev6-unknown-linux-gnu: error in extract_insn, at recog.c:2127 Richard Henderson
09:54 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips H . J . Lu
09:47 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips Tom Tromey
09:34 Re: Trunk frustration Jan Hubicka
09:30 Re: jump threading law
09:30 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar Mark Mitchell
09:16 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar Theodore Papadopoulo
08:57 Re: jump threading Jan Hubicka
08:52 Re: Trunk frustration Geoff Keating
08:50 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar Mark Mitchell
08:38 Re: Recent changes to cse.c Bernd Schmidt
08:37 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips H . J . Lu
08:35 Suggestion for option RenE J.V. Bertin
08:06 Re: C++ compile-time regressions (was: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report) Gerald Pfeifer
07:56 Re: Trunk frustration law
07:50 jump threading law
07:48 Re: Trunk frustration Richard Kenner
07:40 Re: Trunk frustration Geoff Keating
07:27 Re: Recent changes to cse.c law
07:18 Re: Recent changes to cse.c Richard Kenner
07:02 SH Linux: remove big endian multilib Andrew Haley
07:01 Re: Recent changes to cse.c law
06:03 Re: alphaev6-unknown-linux-gnu: error in extract_insn, at recog.c:2127 Toon Moene
05:09 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips Geoff Keating
03:59 INSN_CODE_NUMBER of INT_MAX Richard Kenner
03:52 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar Gerald Pfeifer
03:28 Re: Has ANYONE taken a good run at MacOSX Gerald Pfeifer
03:16 Re: Recent changes to cse.c Richard Kenner
03:07 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar Joseph S. Myers
01:48 Re: Recent changes to cse.c Richard Earnshaw
00:18 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips H . J . Lu

July 24, 2001
23:51 Re: More build problems on Alpha Richard Henderson
23:40 Re: More build problems on Alpha Roman Lechtchinsky
22:37 Re: Brach request - cfg infrastructure Mark Mitchell
22:11 Re: Replacing bitmap.[ch] Daniel Berlin
22:03 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips Jeff Sturm
21:30 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar William C. Cox
21:03 Re: thread_jumps -- am I crazy? law
21:02 Re: Replacing bitmap.[ch] law
19:56 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar Ross Smith
18:48 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar Mark Mitchell
18:25 fixinc + HPUX + __va__list Bruce Korb
18:05 Re: alphaev6-unknown-linux-gnu: error in extract_insn, at recog.c:2127 Richard Henderson
17:50 please forgive me for flooding you with messages about ftp.freesoftware.com being gone. george r goffe
17:45 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar Mark Mitchell
17:45 Re: More build problems on Alpha Richard Kenner
17:43 Re: flow.c and nested subregs Richard Kenner
17:40 Re: alphaev6-unknown-linux-gnu: error in extract_insn, at recog.c:2127 Richard Henderson
17:35 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar Joseph S. Myers
17:18 Re: Where to find ABI specs for g++ David Edelsohn
16:59 Re: Prefix attributes vs. grammar Stan Shebs
16:56 Re: Replacing bitmap.[ch] Richard Henderson
16:49 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips H . J . Lu
16:45 Re: PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips Tom Tromey
16:39 Re: thread_jumps -- am I crazy? Jan Hubicka
16:21 Prefix attributes vs. grammar Mark Mitchell
16:10 Re: More build problems on Alpha Richard Henderson
16:10 Re: Replacing bitmap.[ch] law
16:09 PATCH: Disable libgcj and gprof on Linux/mips H . J . Lu
16:04 Re: Replacing bitmap.[ch] Richard Henderson
15:51 Re: turning throw into a jump Richard Henderson
15:50 Where to find ABI specs for g++ Scott Long
15:47 Re: flow.c and nested subregs Joern Rennecke
15:46 Re: A problem with include_next and removing duplicated include paths Neil Booth
15:15 thread_jumps -- am I crazy? law
14:58 Re: WARNING_ABOUT_CCD #defined anywhere? Mark Mitchell
14:56 flow.c and nested subregs Stephen Clarke
14:10 Re: Has ANYONE taken a good run at MacOSX Stan Shebs
13:47 Brach request - cfg infrastructure Jan Hubicka
13:44 A problem with include_next and removing duplicated include paths Andrey Slepuhin
13:31 IA64 RA register breakage Clinton Popetz
12:40 gcc on HPUX Jamie Bohr
12:02 Re: Recent changes to cse.c law
11:08 Re: C++ compile-time regressions (was: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report) Daniel Berlin
10:56 Re: C++ compile-time regressions (was: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report) Gabriel Dos Reis
10:49 Re: C++ compile-time regressions (was: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report) Joe Buck
10:44 Re: C++ compile-time regressions (was: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report) Joe Buck
10:28 Re: Recent changes to cse.c Richard Kenner
10:25 Re: C++ compile-time regressions (was: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report) Daniel Berlin
10:19 Re: C++ compile-time regressions (was: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report) Gabriel Dos Reis
10:19 Re: Coding style: Are fold markers allowed? Phil Edwards
10:09 Re: C++ compile-time regressions (was: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report) Joe Buck
09:27 Re: [GCC 3.0] Bad regression, binary size Linus Torvalds
08:47 Re: optimization defaults (was: Re: [GCC 3.0] Bad regression, binary size) dewar
08:46 Re: Why do not it works with g++? Joe Buck
08:46 Re: Build problem with current tree Tom Tromey
08:40 SPEC2000 testing page Andreas Jaeger
08:40 Re: help- URGENT build errors while using gcc Joe Buck
08:33 Re: Trunk frustration Richard Kenner
08:32 Coding style: Are fold markers allowed? Diego Novillo
08:30 Re: ast-optimizer-branch Diego Novillo
08:27 Re: Has ANYONE taken a good run at MacOSX Casey Cady
08:17 Re: Trunk frustration Andreas Jaeger
07:57 Has ANYONE taken a good run at MacOSX Matthew P. Marino
07:55 Re: C++ compile-time regressions (was: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report) Daniel Berlin
07:42 Re: Trunk frustration Mark Mitchell
07:18 Re: C++ compile-time regressions (was: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report) Gerald Pfeifer
07:07 Re: turning throw into a jump mike stump
07:04 Re: help- URGENT build errors while using gcc Radhika Shenoy
05:50 optimization defaults (was: Re: [GCC 3.0] Bad regression, binary size) Jonathan Thornburg
05:48 More build problems on Alpha Richard Kenner
05:03 Build problem with current tree Richard Kenner
03:15 Why do not it works with g++? antonio cala
02:12 Re: ast-optimizer-branch Nathan Sidwell
01:56 Re: ast-optimizer-branch Andreas Jaeger
01:54 Re: ast-optimizer-branch Gerald Pfeifer
01:50 Re: ast-optimizer-branch Andreas Jaeger
01:26 Re: Recent changes to cse.c Richard Earnshaw
01:10 Re: Recent changes to cse.c Richard Earnshaw
00:48 Re: turning throw into a jump Sylvain Pion
00:05 GCC for TMS34010 - Thanks Helfried Tschemmernegg

July 23, 2001
23:01 Replacing bitmap.[ch] Daniel Berlin
19:42 Re: [GCC 3.0] Bad regression, binary size dewar
18:28 Re: Can't compile helloworld.C Stephen Taylor
17:55 Re: Trunk frustration David Edelsohn
17:18 Re: turning throw into a jump Richard Henderson
16:20 Re: Trunk frustration Neil Booth
15:55 Trunk frustration Stan Shebs
15:42 i386.md has overly restrictive constraints in mulsi3_1 and mulhi3_1 Colin Howell
15:14 Re: [GCC 3.0] Bad regression, binary size Linus Torvalds
14:36 Re: C++ compile-time regressions (was: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report) Mark Mitchell
14:03 Re: Unpleasant problem w/ foo-config style scripts (and possible solutions). Marius Vollmer