From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 56881 invoked by alias); 23 Jan 2019 02:55:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 56869 invoked by uid 89); 23 Jan 2019 02:55:37 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_SHORT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=HX-HELO:sk:mail-ed X-HELO: mail-ed1-f50.google.com Received: from mail-ed1-f50.google.com (HELO mail-ed1-f50.google.com) (209.85.208.50) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 Jan 2019 02:55:36 +0000 Received: by mail-ed1-f50.google.com with SMTP id g22so502833edr.7 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 18:55:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=nsGQtIayH9n8T/0tVrRZj7AanLKssdPQ/a7uuexSGeQ=; b=ZNhhvF6BUuoCvsoL6jGuXR4+mTVP1+c8pRa5D+GCmLTpUQsqTNAyOPS9l1BOJUTu6X HjWFEvhYqHKLS+COf6pcMO6zX++JLMcAtu6u32cYjFTeOnOKCw+Pm28GnC9jPbE2Y7vV FgXXcE/7dsN0yJfk/OWybZiueIdoN0Qqn5L86pjxrqtF2RRmVS5ST7HDJvvPw66c3Gk4 KLEhMG8lDKsSjfl9LTpcLCH6MVdNRHnpUoyCQw+O8hVf7asPLIW/vSP15kyWId0IbPol jRbCBp7Gs2+SI+v0Nsn0vcLJ0TOF8HRcGJ0/GSp0k1/3prPgl75HD1dhAIZQoelkepKt 5Alg== MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Tejas Joshi Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 02:55:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: About GSOC. To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-01/txt/msg00182.txt.bz2 > differ. (It's the unoptimized, stage1 cc1 that should be run under a > debugger. See for more details.) Hello. I normally configure GCC by (as you told) /configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-bootstrap --disable-multilib And further as told in make STAGE1_CXXFLAGS="-g -O0" all-stage1 but instead of -g to use -g3 is suggested for making macros debuggable and then use GDB. May I proceed the same? On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 04:33, Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Jan 2019, Tejas Joshi wrote: > > > the number like nan or normal in the functions. Though, attributes of > > struct real_value are pretty unclear to me regarding to the number it > > represents. (Am I right within this grasp?). > > It may be helpful to run the compiler under a debugger to examine how > particular real numbers are represented in real_value - that should help > answer questions such as what endianness is used for the significand, or > whether floating point values with a given exponent are in the range > [2^EXP, 2^(EXP+1)) or [2^(EXP-1), 2^EXP), where conventions commonly > differ. (It's the unoptimized, stage1 cc1 that should be run under a > debugger. See for more details.) > > And of course contribute comments in real.h once you've determined the > answers - because there are such areas where conventions about > representation of floating-point numbers commonly differ, it's > particularly valuable to have such comments because even someone familiar > with floating-point won't know which convention has been chosen by this > code in GCC. > > -- > Joseph S. Myers > joseph@codesourcery.com