Search Results

Search found 2303 results on 93 pages for 'llvm gcc'.

Page 14/93 | < Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >

  • C/GCC - Is it possible to sort arrays using preprocessor?

    - by psihodelia
    I have a number of very long arrays. No run-time sort is possible. It is also time consuming to sort them manually. Moreover, new elements can be added in any order later, so I would like to sort them by value using C preprocessor or maybe there is any compilers flag (GCC)? For example: sometype S[] = { {somevals, "BOB", someothervals}, {somevals, "ALICE", someothervals}, {somevals, "TIM", someothervals}, } must be sorted so: sometype S[] = { {somevals, "ALICE", someothervals}, {somevals, "BOB", someothervals}, {somevals, "TIM", someothervals}, }

    Read the article

  • How can I compile GCC as a static binary?

    - by CaCl
    How can I compile the GCC Compiler so that I can pull the entire thing over to another system and use the program? I don't mind pulling in other files as well, but is there a way to gather all the required system libs as well? The OS and Arch will remain constant across the different systems, but one may contain Slackware where the other contains Debian.

    Read the article

  • gcc : Is using -Werror and -pedantic considered good practice?

    - by Helper Method
    I'm just digging into the gcc manual and some things are still unclear to me: When specifying a std, should I always use -pedantic in conjunction? When using -g, it the standard level sufficient or should I specify level 3, i.e. -g3? Is it good practice to use -Werror to promote all warnings to errors and -pedantic-errors to promote all pedantic warnings to errors?

    Read the article

  • Can you explain why gcc -S output something like assemble?

    - by Mask
    $ gcc -S buffer-overflow.c && cat buffer-overflow.s _foo: pushl %ebp ;2 movl %esp, %ebp ;3 subl $16, %esp ;4 movl LC1, %eax ;5 movl %eax, -4(%ebp) ;6 leal -4(%ebp), %eax ;7 leal 8(%eax), %edx ;8 movl $_bad, %eax ;9 movl %eax, (%edx) ;10 leave ret _main: ... call _foo ;1 ... The help information says it should not compile nor assemble: -S Compile only; do not assemble or link Why are they contradictory?

    Read the article

  • gcc - using -werror and -std= -pedantic considered good practice?

    - by Helper Method
    I'm just digging into the gcc manual and some things are still unclear to me: a) When specifying a std, should I always use -pedantic in conjunction? b) When using -g, it the standard level sufficient or should I specify level 3, i.e. -g3? c) Is it good practice to use -Werror to promote all warnings to errors and -pedantic-errors to promote all pedantic warnings to errors?

    Read the article

  • Mixing libraries with and without RTTI with GCC on Mac OS X?

    - by Steve the Plant
    I've been banging my head on an issue and before I continue injuring myself some more, I'd like to confirm: Is it possible to have a GCC project that uses libraries that are compiled with and without RTTI? So, for example, I have project A (compiled without RTTI) that uses library B (compiled with RTTI) and library C (compiled without RTTI). In theory, is all that supposed to compile and link with no problems?

    Read the article

  • gcc optimization? bug? and its practial implication to project

    - by kumar_m_kiran
    Hi All, My questions are divided into three parts Question 1 Consider the below code, #include <iostream> using namespace std; int main( int argc, char *argv[]) { const int v = 50; int i = 0X7FFFFFFF; cout<<(i + v)<<endl; if ( i + v < i ) { cout<<"Number is negative"<<endl; } else { cout<<"Number is positive"<<endl; } return 0; } No specific compiler optimisation options are used or the O's flag is used. It is basic compilation command g++ -o test main.cpp is used to form the executable. The seemingly very simple code, has odd behaviour in SUSE 64 bit OS, gcc version 4.1.2. The expected output is "Number is negative", instead only in SUSE 64 bit OS, the output would be "Number is positive". After some amount of analysis and doing a 'disass' of the code, I find that the compiler optimises in the below format - Since i is same on both sides of comparison, it cannot be changed in the same expression, remove 'i' from the equation. Now, the comparison leads to if ( v < 0 ), where v is a constant positive, So during compilation itself, the else part cout function address is added to the register. No cmp/jmp instructions can be found. I see that the behaviour is only in gcc 4.1.2 SUSE 10. When tried in AIX 5.1/5.3 and HP IA64, the result is as expected. Is the above optimisation valid? Or, is using the overflow mechanism for int not a valid use case? Question 2 Now when I change the conditional statement from if (i + v < i) to if ( (i + v) < i ) even then, the behaviour is same, this atleast I would personally disagree, since additional braces are provided, I expect the compiler to create a temporary built-in type variable and them compare, thus nullify the optimisation. Question 3 Suppose I have a huge code base, an I migrate my compiler version, such bug/optimisation can cause havoc in my system behaviour. Ofcourse from business perspective, it is very ineffective to test all lines of code again just because of compiler upgradation. I think for all practical purpose, these kinds of error are very difficult to catch (during upgradation) and invariably will be leaked to production site. Can anyone suggest any possible way to ensure to ensure that these kind of bug/optimization does not have any impact on my existing system/code base? PS : When the const for v is removed from the code, then optimization is not done by the compiler. I believe, it is perfectly fine to use overflow mechanism to find if the variable is from MAX - 50 value (in my case).

    Read the article

  • C++: Why does gcc prefer non-const over const when accessing operator[]?

    - by JonasW
    This question might be more appropriately asked regarding C++ in general, but as I am using gcc on linux that's the context. Consider the following program: #include <iostream> #include <map> #include <string> using namespace std; template <typename TKey, typename TValue> class Dictionary{ public: map<TKey, TValue> internal; TValue & operator[](TKey const & key) { cout << "operator[] with key " << key << " called " << endl; return internal[key]; } TValue const & operator[](TKey const & key) const { cout << "operator[] const with key " << key << " called " << endl; return internal.at(key); } }; int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { Dictionary<string, string> dict; dict["1"] = "one"; cout << "first one: " << dict["1"] << endl; return 0; } When executing the program, the output is: operator[] with key 1 called operator[] with key 1 called first one: one What I would like is to have the compiler choose the operator[]const method instead in the second call. The reason is that without having used dict["1"] before, the call to operator[] causes the internal map to create the data that does not exist, even if the only thing I wanted was to do some debugging output, which of course is a fatal application error. The behaviour I am looking for would be something like the C# index operator which has a get and a set operation and where you could throw an exception if the getter tries to access something that doesn't exist: class MyDictionary<TKey, TVal> { private Dictionary<TKey, TVal> dict = new Dictionary<TKey, TVal>(); public TVal this[TKey idx] { get { if(!dict.ContainsKey(idx)) throw KeyNotFoundException("..."); return dict[idx]; } set { dict[idx] = value; } } } Thus, I wonder why the gcc prefers the non-const call over the const call when non-const access is not required.

    Read the article

  • How to resolve include file names conflicts in GCC?

    - by actual
    I have two header files named string.h in different libraries, they are conflicted with each other and even conflicted with standard C include file of the same name. There is no need to use any string.h except standard one, but I need to include libraries headers paths in GCC search path. Currently I use something like -I /usr/local/include/lib1 -I /usr/local/include/lib2, but that way I can not include standard C string.h. What is the right way to resolve such conflicts?

    Read the article

  • C printf not working on ubuntu 13.10 terminal

    - by Blaze Tama
    First, im new in ubuntu so please bear with me. I need to create a C based program for a course in my university. I was using opensuse and its konsole when i was in the university's lab. So basically i need to install opensuse on my system or using a vmware. But i feel lazy to do that, so i tried to run it on my ubuntu instead of opensuse. However, no C code seems working on ubuntu's terminal. The compiling is success, but its not running, or at least the printf is not running. This is my code, a very very simple one : #include<stdio.h> #include<unistd.h> #include<stdlib.h> int main() { printf("test"); return 0; } When i compile it with gcc test.c -o test everything work fine and i get an executeable file. Then i try to run it by ./test, but the printf is not printed. No error or warning was shown. Am i missing something? Note : my gcc is the new one, it should has no problem. Thanks for your help :D

    Read the article

  • Install newer version of GCC in Knoppix

    - by Z boson
    I have Knoppix 7.30 installed on a USB with a persistent file. It comes with GCC 4.7.2. I would like to install GCC 4.9.x or 4.8.x. Being that Knopppix is based on Debian I would normally do something like apt-get upgrade But as far as I understand it's not recommended to do this with Knoppix. Warning: apt-get upgrade is a BAD IDEA. It will, quite probably, render your KNOPPIX remaster unbootable, or broken in some way. A far safer method is to only upgrade packages as necessary. I can say from experience that that is the cse. So how should I go about installing GCC 4.9? Another option would be to "remaster" knoppix to use GCC 4.9 by default rather than install it with a persistent file. I would be happy with either solution.

    Read the article

  • Problem with GCC calling static templates functions in templated parent class.

    - by Adisak
    I have some code that compiles and runs on MSVC++ but will not compile on GCC. I have made a test snippet that follows. My goal was to move the static method from BFSMask to BFSMaskSized. Can someone explain what is going on with the errors (esp. the weird 'operator<' error)? Thank you. In the case of both #defines are 0, then the code compiles on GCC. #define DOESNT_COMPILE_WITH_GCC 0 #define FUNCTION_IN_PARENT 0 I get errors if I change either #define to 1. Here are the errors I see. #define DOESNT_COMPILE_WITH_GCC 0 #define FUNCTION_IN_PARENT 1 Test.cpp: In static member function 'static typename Snapper::BFSMask<T>::T_Parent::T_SINT Snapper::BFSMask<T>::Create_NEZ(TCMP)': Test.cpp(492): error: 'CreateMaskFromHighBitSized' was not declared in this scope #define DOESNT_COMPILE_WITH_GCC 1 #define FUNCTION_IN_PARENT 0 Test.cpp: In static member function 'static typename Snapper::BFSMask<T>::T_Parent::T_SINT Snapper::BFSMask<T>::Create_NEZ(TCMP) [with TCMP = int, T = int]': Test.cpp(500): instantiated from 'TVAL Snapper::BFWrappedInc(TVAL, TVAL, TVAL) [with TVAL = int]' Test.cpp(508): instantiated from here Test.cpp(490): error: invalid operands of types '<unresolved overloaded function type>' and 'unsigned int' to binary 'operator<' #define DOESNT_COMPILE_WITH_GCC 1 #define FUNCTION_IN_PARENT 1 Test.cpp: In static member function 'static typename Snapper::BFSMask<T>::T_Parent::T_SINT Snapper::BFSMask<T>::Create_NEZ(TCMP) [with TCMP = int, T = int]': Test.cpp(500): instantiated from 'TVAL Snapper::BFWrappedInc(TVAL, TVAL, TVAL) [with TVAL = int]' Test.cpp(508): instantiated from here Test.cpp(490): error: invalid operands of types '<unresolved overloaded function type>' and 'unsigned int' to binary 'operator<' Here is the code namespace Snapper { #define DOESNT_COMPILE_WITH_GCC 0 #define FUNCTION_IN_PARENT 0 // MASK TYPES // NEZ - Not Equal to Zero #define BFSMASK_NEZ(A) ( ( A ) | ( 0 - A ) ) #define BFSELECT_MASK(MASK,VTRUE,VFALSE) ( ((MASK)&(VTRUE)) | ((~(MASK))&(VFALSE)) ) template<typename TVAL> TVAL BFSelect_MASK(TVAL MASK,TVAL VTRUE,TVAL VFALSE) { return(BFSELECT_MASK(MASK,VTRUE,VFALSE)); } //----------------------------------------------------------------------------- // Branch Free Helpers template<int BYTESIZE> struct BFSMaskBase {}; template<> struct BFSMaskBase<2> { typedef UINT16 T_UINT; typedef SINT16 T_SINT; }; template<> struct BFSMaskBase<4> { typedef UINT32 T_UINT; typedef SINT32 T_SINT; }; template<int BYTESIZE> struct BFSMaskSized : public BFSMaskBase<BYTESIZE> { static const int SizeBytes = BYTESIZE; static const int SizeBits = SizeBytes*8; static const int MaskShift = SizeBits-1; typedef typename BFSMaskBase<BYTESIZE>::T_UINT T_UINT; typedef typename BFSMaskBase<BYTESIZE>::T_SINT T_SINT; #if FUNCTION_IN_PARENT template<int N> static T_SINT CreateMaskFromHighBitSized(typename BFSMaskBase<N>::T_SINT inmask); #endif }; template<typename T> struct BFSMask : public BFSMaskSized<sizeof(T)> { // BFSMask = -1 (all bits set) typedef BFSMask<T> T_This; // "Import" the Parent Class typedef BFSMaskSized<sizeof(T)> T_Parent; typedef typename T_Parent::T_SINT T_SINT; #if FUNCTION_IN_PARENT typedef T_Parent T_MaskGen; #else typedef T_This T_MaskGen; template<int N> static T_SINT CreateMaskFromHighBitSized(typename BFSMaskSized<N>::T_SINT inmask); #endif template<typename TCMP> static T_SINT Create_NEZ(TCMP A) { //ReDefineType(const typename BFSMask<TCMP>::T_SINT,SA,A); //const typename BFSMask<TCMP>::T_SINT cmpmask = BFSMASK_NEZ(SA); const typename BFSMask<TCMP>::T_SINT cmpmask = BFSMASK_NEZ(A); #if DOESNT_COMPILE_WITH_GCC return(T_MaskGen::CreateMaskFromHighBitSized<sizeof(TCMP)>(cmpmask)); #else return(CreateMaskFromHighBitSized<sizeof(TCMP)>(cmpmask)); #endif } }; template<typename TVAL> TVAL BFWrappedInc(TVAL x,TVAL minval,TVAL maxval) { const TVAL diff = maxval-x; const TVAL mask = BFSMask<TVAL>::Create_NEZ(diff); const TVAL incx = x + 1; return(BFSelect_MASK(mask,incx,minval)); } SINT32 currentsnap = 0; SINT32 SetSnapshot() { currentsnap=BFWrappedInc<SINT32>(currentsnap,0,20); return(currentsnap); } }

    Read the article

  • Adding icon to gcc executable and opening in terminal.

    - by sfactor
    I made a program to connect to a device via Bluetooth and send the data to the web using pure C in gcc. I won't be able to implement any GUI portion in the code right now but I need to deploy it to test users for testing. I want to have the executable with an icon so that a user can click on the executable and the program starts in the terminal. How do I add an icon to the executable and start the program in the terminal? Sorry I failed to mention before that its in Ubuntu Linux

    Read the article

  • how to raise warning if return value is disregarded - gcc or static code check?

    - by Drakosha
    I'd like to see all the places in my code (C++) which disregard return value of a function. How can I do it - with gcc or static code analysis tool? Bad code example: int f(int z) { return z + (z*2) + z/3 + z*z + 23; } int main() { int i = 7; f(i); ///// <<----- here I disregard the return value return 1; } Update: it should work even if the function and its use are in different files free static check tool

    Read the article

  • How to get rid of `deprecated conversion from string constant to ‘char*’` warnings in GCC?

    - by Josh Matthews
    So I'm working on an exceedingly large codebase, and recently upgraded to gcc 4.3, which now triggers this warning: warning: deprecated conversion from string constant to ‘char*’ Obviously, the correct way to fix this is to find every declaration like char *s = "constant string"; or function call like void foo(char *s); foo("constant string"); and make them const char pointers. However, that would mean touching 564 files, minimum, which is not a task I wish to perform at this point in time. The problem right now is that I'm running with -werror, so I need some way to stifle these warnings. How can I do that?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >