[Bug libfortran/19595] eor and advance="yes" should not mix

-- What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19595

[Bug libfortran/19596] eor generates false error message with advance='NO'

-- What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19596

[Bug target/19597] [4.0 Regression] avr-gcc 4.0, multiplication by constant, very long code

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 08:16 --- (In reply to comment #4) > But to summarise, this is a target bug. That is what I thought. Anyways Roger posted a patch to rewrite rtx_cost for AVR to fix this bug here:

[Bug rtl-optimization/19210] [4.0 Regression] not using do-loop for some loops

--- Additional Comments From bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 08:28 --- The thread on -funsafe-loop-optimizations extinguished without any result. Zdenek, maybe you should propose the patch together with adding -Wunsafe-loop-optimizations to -Wextra, and without adding -funsafe

[Bug c++/19208] [3.4 Regression] Spurious error about variably modified type

--- Additional Comments From bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 08:29 --- Removing 4.0.0 from known-to-fail list. -- What|Removed |Added Known to fail|4.0.0 3.4.

[Bug middle-end/19551] [3.4/4.0 Regression] pure (complex types) function call removed as dead (LAPACK routine claic1.f bug)

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 08:55 --- Subject: Bug 19551 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-24 08:54:26 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog flow.c gcc/testsui

[Bug target/19597] [4.0 Regression] avr-gcc 4.0, multiplication by constant, very long code

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-01-24 08:56 --- Marek, can you review this patch please? -- What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug bootstrap/19601] [4.0 Regression] make bootstrap-lean fails: insn-conditions.c:189: error: `flag_unsafe_math_optimizations' undeclared

--- Additional Comments From olh at suse dot de 2005-01-24 09:01 --- Created an attachment (id=8050) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8050&action=view) gccbug19601.tar.bz2 make without -jN doesnt fix it. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19601

[Bug middle-end/19551] [3.4/4.0 Regression] pure (complex types) function call removed as dead (LAPACK routine claic1.f bug)

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 09:11 --- Subject: Bug 19551 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Branch: gcc-3_4-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-24 09:10:53 Modified files: gcc: Change

[Bug tree-optimization/18316] Missed IV optimization

--- Additional Comments From stevenb at suse dot de 2005-01-24 09:12 --- Subject: Re: Missed IV optimization *sigh* The old loop optimizer... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18316

[Bug middle-end/19551] [3.4/4.0 Regression] pure (complex types) function call removed as dead (LAPACK routine claic1.f bug)

--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 09:12 --- Should be fixed in CVS. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug fortran/5900] [g77 & gfortran] Lapack regressions since g77 2.95.2

-- Bug 5900 depends on bug 19551, which changed state. Bug 19551 Summary: [3.4/4.0 Regression] pure (complex types) function call removed as dead (LAPACK routine claic1.f bug) http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19551 What|Old Value |New Value

[Bug target/19597] [4.0 Regression] avr-gcc 4.0, multiplication by constant, very long code

--- Additional Comments From marekm at amelek dot gda dot pl 2005-01-24 09:24 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] avr-gcc 4.0, multiplication by constant, very long code On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 08:56:46AM -, giovannibajo at libero dot it wrote: > Marek, can you review this patch pl

[Bug tree-optimization/19401] Trivial loop not unrolled

--- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de 2005-01-24 09:43 --- Another one - matrix multiplication: /* A [NxM], B [MxP] */ #define DOLOOP(N, M, P) \ void matmul ## N ## M ## P(double *res, const double *A, const double *B) \ { \ int i,j,k; \

[Bug libstdc++/8670] Alignment problem in std::basic_string

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-24 09:45 --- > I have read the discussion on 17744 and 19163. Nothing there suggests > that there is any reason to prefer using an __attribute__ over using > the portable, stable, apparently already-working union approach, whe

[Bug tree-optimization/19217] [4.0 Regression] ICE: verify_stmts failed: address taken, but ADDRESSABLE bit not set

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 09:51 --- I cannot reproduce this with the original test case and yesterday's CVS HEAD. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19217

[Bug rtl-optimization/19579] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -march=i686 generates a bogus program for x86*

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 09:40 --- wrong-code bug, should be P1. -- What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug target/19597] [4.0 Regression] avr-gcc 4.0, multiplication by constant, very long code

--- Additional Comments From bernie at develer dot com 2005-01-24 10:28 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] avr-gcc 4.0, multiplication by constant, very long code marekm at amelek dot gda dot pl wrote: > --- Additional Comments From marekm at amelek dot gda dot pl 2005-01-24 > 09

[Bug rtl-optimization/19579] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -march=i686 generates a bogus program for x86*

--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 10:30 --- Regarding the question in #11: LOG_LINKS only point to instructions in the same basic block: /* Set up in flow.c; empty before then. Holds a chain of INSN_LIST rtx's whose first operands point at previou

[Bug regression/19174] wrong code regression or library problem in gcc-4.0-20041226

--- Additional Comments From andre dot maute at gmx dot de 2005-01-24 10:42 --- It looks like it is fixed now Compiling gcc-4.0-20050123 with a gcc-4.0-20050116, which has the architecture option disabled, works. Great! Regards Andre -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cg

[Bug libstdc++/8670] Alignment problem in std::basic_string

-- What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8670

[Bug rtl-optimization/13712] Executable runs 25% slower than when compiled with INTEL compiler

--- Additional Comments From uros at kss-loka dot si 2005-01-24 11:16 --- (In reply to comment #14) > Where are we standing with this one today? gcc version 4.0.0 20050124 (experimental) g++ -O3 -ffast-math y.cc real0m27.102s user0m26.980s sys 0m0.016s g++ -O3 -ff

[Bug rtl-optimization/15853] [3.3 Regression] temporaries are not destroyed and overwritten later

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 11:27 --- Um... first of all, this works on 3.4 branch only by accident, i.e. I think the underlying problem is still present there. What happens is that a call has an argument containing a TARGET_EXPR with cleanup

[Bug rtl-optimization/19579] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -march=i686 generates a bogus program for x86*

-- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org | Status|NEW

[Bug c++/19603] New: code generation error

gcc CVS mainline, 2005/01/23 12:10 PST Configured with: /net/legless/scratch1/rwgk/gcc_cvs_head/configure -- prefix=/usr/local_cci/gcc_cvs_head_20050123 --enable-languages=c,c++ Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS release 3 (Taroon) Boost CVS mainline, 2005/01/06 10:09 PST The following piece of code work

[Bug c++/19603] code generation error

--- Additional Comments From rwgk at yahoo dot com 2005-01-24 11:49 --- Created an attachment (id=8052) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8052&action=view) Reproducer -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19603

[Bug bootstrap/18058] [4.0 Regression] Sun CC cannot bootstrap GCC (static inline)

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 12:08 --- Subject: Bug 18058 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-24 12:08:07 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog genconditions.c Log messa

[Bug target/19593] ICE at build_def_use, at regrename.c:763

--- Additional Comments From joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 12:11 --- (In reply to comment #3) > Can you try 3.4.4? There is no 3.4.4 on gcc.gnu.org. Do you mean the head of the 3.4 branch? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19593

[Bug bootstrap/18058] [4.0 Regression] Sun CC cannot bootstrap GCC (static inline)

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 12:20 --- Thanks Joseph! -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RES

[Bug middle-end/19583] [4.0 Regression] Incorrect diagnostic: control may reach end of non-void function '...' being inlined

--- Additional Comments From andre dot maute at gmx dot de 2005-01-24 12:27 --- with the following the problem also does occur -- O3Wall.cc --- #include double test( double x ) { return fabs(x); } -- O3Wall.cc --- > g++-4.0-20050123 O3Wall.cc

[Bug middle-end/19583] [4.0 Regression] Incorrect diagnostic: control may reach end of non-void function '...' being inlined

--- Additional Comments From andre dot maute at gmx dot de 2005-01-24 12:30 --- oh sorry, i did not read the bug history :-( regards andre -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19583

[Bug target/19597] [4.0 Regression] avr-gcc 4.0, multiplication by constant, very long code

--- Additional Comments From bernie at develer dot com 2005-01-24 13:15 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] avr-gcc 4.0, multiplication by constant, very long code Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > marekm at amelek dot gda dot pl wrote: > >>--- Additional Comments From marekm at amelek d

[Bug rtl-optimization/19078] [4.0 Regression] Poor quality code after loop unrolling.

--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2005-01-24 13:20 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] Poor quality code after loop unrolling. > Zdenek, is this still a regression, or are your suggestions from > comment #12 only enhancements? I think it

[Bug tree-optimization/19217] [4.0 Regression] ICE: verify_stmts failed: address taken, but ADDRESSABLE bit not set

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 13:24 --- (In reply to comment #8) > I cannot reproduce this with the original test case and yesterday's > CVS HEAD. Did you use --disable-checking (please look at the keywords)? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s

[Bug c++/19603] code generation error

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 13:27 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19317 *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/19317] [4.0 Regression] removing a temporary return value when we cannot

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 13:27 --- *** Bug 19603 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug regression/19174] [4.0 Regression] wrong code regression or library problem in gcc-4.0-20041226

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 13:29 --- Fixed so lets close it. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/19217] [4.0 Regression] ICE: verify_stmts failed: address taken, but ADDRESSABLE bit not set

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 13:43 --- This should be a checking compiler, or at least I didn't disable checking explicitly. I did use a non-gcc to build it, perhaps that turned off checking... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi

[Bug bootstrap/19601] [4.0 Regression] make bootstrap-lean fails: insn-conditions.c:189: error: `flag_unsafe_math_optimizations' undeclared

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 13:50 --- I tried it last night on powerpc-darwin but I did not reproduce it. Some else will have to look into this. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19601

[Bug c++/19569] no code for explicit instantiation of template class specialization

--- Additional Comments From jamesp at trdlnk dot com 2005-01-24 14:03 --- According to paragraph 7 of section 14.7.2 in the C++ standard, this is supposed to work as I described. I admit that the sample code I supplied doesn't show why this functionality is necessary, so I'll try to ex

[Bug rtl-optimization/19579] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -march=i686 generates a bogus program for x86*

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 14:13 --- Patch here: . -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/19569] no code for explicit instantiation of template class specialization

--- Additional Comments From lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 14:27 --- There is a defect report DR259 about this issue: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#259 According to the DR, the original standard mentions that the instantiation: template cl

[Bug c++/19604] New: vtable error with virtual inheritance and tables

I don't know if it's a bug in g++ or a lack in the specifications of C++ ... I define two classes, one inherited from the second. I allocate a table of the child, I give it to a fonction that waits for the parent class. Inside this function, when I try to access virtual functions of an element of

[Bug c++/19569] no code for explicit instantiation of template class specialization

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 14:30 --- So this is not a bug, so closing. -- What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING

[Bug c++/19604] vtable error with virtual inheritance and tables

--- Additional Comments From webmyster at addoc dot u-psud dot fr 2005-01-24 14:31 --- Created an attachment (id=8053) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8053&action=view) vtable error with virtual inheritance and tables This file shows two things : * the size of one el

[Bug java/19295] [4.0 regression] Incorrect bytecode produced for bitwise AND

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 14:34 --- Subject: Bug 19295 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-24 14:34:20 Modified files: gcc/java : ChangeLog jcf-write.c libjav

[Bug c++/19604] vtable error with virtual inheritance and arrays

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 14:37 --- I think this is invalid and here is why? Basically the sizeof (A) is smaller than sizeof(B). But if you convert from B* to A* you cannot access the second element any more. -- What|Removed

[Bug java/19295] [4.0 regression] Incorrect bytecode produced for bitwise AND

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 14:41 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug java/17574] [meta-bug] gcj and libgcj 4.0 tracking PR

-- Bug 17574 depends on bug 19295, which changed state. Bug 19295 Summary: [4.0 regression] Incorrect bytecode produced for bitwise AND http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19295 What|Old Value |New Value -

[Bug c++/19605] New: Wrong member offset in inherited classes

gcc-4.0 returns incorrect class relative offsets for members Following: 1. example program producing the error 2. console output for gcc 4.0 (incorrect) and gcc 3.2 (correct) #include #include #define GET_MEMBER_PTR(type,member)

[Bug c++/19604] vtable error with virtual inheritance and arrays

--- Additional Comments From webmyster at addoc dot u-psud dot fr 2005-01-24 14:53 --- (In reply to comment #2) > I think this is invalid and here is why? > Basically the sizeof (A) is smaller than sizeof(B). > But if you convert from B* to A* you cannot access the second element any >

[Bug c++/19569] no code for explicit instantiation of template class specialization

--- Additional Comments From jamesp at trdlnk dot com 2005-01-24 14:55 --- It seems that paragraph 5 of 14.7.3 explains what I should have been doing. Sorry for the mix-up. James -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19569

[Bug c++/19605] Wrong member offset in inherited classes

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 14:56 --- &(((type *) 0)->*p); That is not offsetof any more. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19605

[Bug c++/19605] [4.0 Regression] Wrong member offset in inherited classes

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 15:02 --- Someone else has to say if this is valid C++ but I think it is just undefined but I could be wrong. -- What|Removed |Added --

[Bug c++/19605] [4.0 Regression] Wrong member offset in inherited classes

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 15:04 --- Also one note is that 3.4.0 produces the same as 3.2. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19605

[Bug c++/19605] [4.0 Regression] Wrong member offset in inherited classes

--- Additional Comments From fm3 at os dot inf dot tu-dresden dot de 2005-01-24 15:12 --- added myself as cc -- What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug java/19505] Java bytecode ICE in except.c remove_unreachable_regions

-- What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Last reconfirmed|2005-01-19 12:11:08 |2005-01-24 15:24:00 date|

[Bug middle-end/19606] New: wrong code for arith.expr: (((unsigned int)(signed int) a ) / 2LL) with signed char a=-4

The value of test should be 0x7ffe and is 0xfffe; Flags: none (Also in 3.3.5) #include signed char a=-4; int test(){ return (((unsigned int)(signed int) a ) / 2LL) ; } int main(void){ int r; r=test(); printf("test output: %#x == %d %x %x\n",r,r

[Bug middle-end/19606] wrong code for arith.expr: (((unsigned int)(signed int) a ) / 2LL) with signed char a=-4

--- Additional Comments From falk at debian dot org 2005-01-24 16:20 --- Confirmed on alpha-linux. Has been broken since at least 2.95. -- What|Removed |Added S

[Bug target/19528] [4.0 regression] missing ra.h

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 16:21 --- Fixed by: 2005-01-24 J"orn Rennecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * sh.c (ra.h): Don't #include. (hard_regs_intersect_p): New function, resurrected from ra.c. * sh.c: Fix 1996 Copyright. --

[Bug bootstrap/18974] error in compiling gcc 4.0 for i686-pc-linux-gnu: gengtype-lex.c

--- Additional Comments From brett dot albertson at stratech dot com 2005-01-24 16:23 --- I think I'm seeing the same problem on Sparc Solaris without bison on the 4.0 bootstrap. gcc -c -g -DENABLE_CHECKING -DENABLE_ASSERT_CHECKING -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototyp

[Bug bootstrap/18974] error in compiling gcc 4.0 for i686-pc-linux-gnu: gengtype-lex.c

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 16:28 --- Actually if you are compiling from source from a snapshot you need both bison and flex. This is invalid. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/19505] [4.0 Regression] Java bytecode ICE in except.c remove_unreachable_regions

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 16:34 --- Just a little more information. changing "s = redirect_edge_succ_nodup (e, dest);" to a "return false;" in remove_forwarder_block makes this pass so this is a tree optimization problem. Basically what is

[Bug middle-end/19606] wrong code for arith.expr: (((unsigned int)(signed int) a ) / 2LL) with signed char a=-4

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 16:41 --- Also on powerpc-darwin. -- What|Removed |Added GCC build triplet|Intel-Linux

template inheritance bug in gcc 3.4.3 ?

1. bash-2.05b$ gcc -v Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc/i486-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.3/specs Configured with: /var/tmp/portage/gcc-3.4.3-r1/work/gcc-3.4.3/configure --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs --prefix=/usr --bindir=/usr/i486-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin/3.4.3 --includedir=/usr/lib/gcc/i486-pc-linux-gnu/

[Bug bootstrap/16024] gengtype crashes with mingw and c++ extension

--- Additional Comments From guardia at sympatico dot ca 2005-01-24 17:20 --- I think the "relative path" issue with MSYS and MinGW should be added for example in the notes at: http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html It would save a lot of grief from people trying to build it on MSYS.

[Bug bootstrap/19607] New: Build fails on MSYS/MingGW because of incorrect SYSTEM_HEADER_DIR

On MSYS, the system headers are found in /mingw/include ... I made a modified gcc/config/i386/t-mingw32 adding: NATIVE_SYSTEM_HEADER_DIR = /mingw/include And it works here. Also, the configure script needs to be started with a relative path or the "srcdir" anyway needs to be relative or gengtype

[Bug bootstrap/19607] Build fails on MSYS/MingGW because of incorrect SYSTEM_HEADER_DIR

--- Additional Comments From guardia at sympatico dot ca 2005-01-24 17:31 --- Created an attachment (id=8054) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8054&action=view) new t-mingw32 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19607

[Bug target/17751] Undefined .LCTOC0 symbol

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 17:39 --- Subject: Bug 17751 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-24 17:39:37 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/testsuite : C

[Bug c++/19538] Missing diagnostic for typedef name in elaborated type specifier

--- Additional Comments From austern at apple dot com 2005-01-24 18:06 --- I've raised this issue on the C++ standardization committee's core language reflector. I now find it a little less clear than I did before. This is closely related to open issue 407. See http://www.open- std

[Bug c++/11036] typedef-name used in an elaborated-type-specifier is incorrectly accepted

--- Additional Comments From austern at apple dot com 2005-01-24 18:06 --- I've raised this issue on the C++ standardization committee's core language reflector. I now find it a little less clear than I did before. This is closely related to open issue 407. See http://www.open- std

[Bug target/19530] MMX load intrinsic produces SSE superfluous instructions (movlps)

--- Additional Comments From guardia at sympatico dot ca 2005-01-24 18:09 --- MMX intrinsics don't seem to be a standard (?), but I'm under the impression that _mm_cvtsi32_si64 is supposed to generate MMX code. I just tested With (GCC) 4.0.0 20050123, and with -mmmx flag, the result is s

[Bug rtl-optimization/17387] Redundant instructions in loop optimization

--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2005-01-24 18:17 --- Looking at the mainline result, I still see "mov %eax, %eax", which was the original bug report for mainline. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/19520] protected function pointer doesn't work right

--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2005-01-24 18:35 --- This is the updated patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg01551.html This is the testcase patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg01550.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?

[Bug target/19558] openssl speed compiled with 20051020 gcc-4.0 (HEAD) segfaults

--- Additional Comments From gj at pointblue dot com dot pl 2005-01-24 18:47 --- sorry, still happends on amd64. I don't have intel 32bit platorm to test it on. I can only say it works fine on 32bit compiled openss for sparc. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/13018] -mminimal-toc breaks at -O0

-- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|tree-ssa|4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13018

[Bug rtl-optimization/17387] Redundant instructions in loop optimization

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 18:52 --- Confirmed again. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug target/19558] openssl speed compiled with 20051020 gcc-4.0 (HEAD) segfaults

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 19:00 --- ".align 16 \n" This is the bug but it is not in gcc, either it is in binutils or in the source, not in gcc since gcc just outputs the assembly instruction aka it just copies a

[Bug c++/19608] New: ICE after friend function definition in local class

ation fault Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. bash-2.05b$ ./cc1plus --version GNU C++ version 4.0.0 20050124 (experimental) (sh-elf) compiled by GNU C version 3.2.3 20030502 (Red Hat Linux 3.2.3-

[Bug c++/19608] [3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE after friend function definition in local class

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 19:30 --- : Search converges between 2003-03-23-trunk (#215) and 2003-03-30-trunk (#216). Confirmed. A regression from 3.3.3. -- What|Removed |Added --

[Bug middle-end/19609] New: real and imaginary part interchanged when flags_complex_divide_method=1

I've bootstrapped a gcc tree with the fix for PR 19486 and flags_complex_divide_method=1 , and found that the code now confuses the real and complex parts for divisions in certain cases. Here's an example: $ cat complex-a.c #include #include #include #include int main() { complex float a

[Bug middle-end/19609] real and imaginary part interchanged when flags_complex_divide_method=1

-- What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||18902 nThis|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19609

[Bug middle-end/19609] real and imaginary part interchanged when flags_complex_divide_method=1

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-24 20:00 --- Added rth to the CC list, added keyword. -- What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug libfortran/19451] Read after a write with a read only file

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-24 20:03 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug target/19492] can not build crosscompiler for solaris2.8 (when building libstdc++ - error wcslen...:Link tests are not allowed after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES)

--- Additional Comments From yiye242 at hotmail dot com 2005-01-24 20:07 --- (In reply to comment #9) > Andrew, any comments?.. Have you tried this??? http://lists.resellerhostingbox.com/redhat-archive/msg21.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19492

[Bug c++/19610] New: default constructor not called for static template member of template class

I've run into a problem where a static template member of a template class is not being created properly. --- Begin Sample Code --- #include using namespace std; template class A { public: A() { cout << "A created" << endl; } }; template class AA { public: AA( int i = 0 ) { cout << "A

[Bug libgcj/19611] New: create 'sources.zip' for use in eclipse

It would be handy for the libgcj build to create a 'sources.zip' holding all the sources to libgcj. Eclipse could then use this to let the user easily view core library sources. Perhaps this could be optional so that it isn't built by default; not everybody cares about this. -- Summary

[Bug libgcj/19612] New: gjdoc in libgcj

It would be good to incorporate gjdoc into libgcj. First, it would make our system more complete. second, it would make it simpler for us to generate javadoc pages at release time (and install them on gcc.gnu.org -- we ought to do this). One wrinkle is that gjdoc is GPL. Perhaps some segregation

[Bug target/19558] openssl speed compiled with 20051020 gcc-4.0 (HEAD) segfaults

--- Additional Comments From gj at pointblue dot com dot pl 2005-01-24 20:37 --- so if it is binutils, how do you explain that gcc 3.3.5 got that right, and it isnt' ok with 4.0 ? I have the very same version of binutils in both cases. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?i

[Bug libfortran/19596] eor generates false error message with advance='NO'

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-24 20:37 --- Two cases for the same error. Thomas *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19595 *** -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug libfortran/19595] eor and advance="yes" should not mix

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-24 20:37 --- *** Bug 19596 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19595

[Bug c++/19610] default constructor not called for static template member of template class

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 20:38 --- I think this is invalid because you are just specializing them and nothing else (note the aa2 can be done the non specialized way too but I showed the specialized way): // declare space for them template A

[Bug libgcj/19612] gjdoc in libgcj

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 20:40 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancemen

[Bug libgcj/19611] create 'sources.zip' for use in eclipse

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 20:40 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancemen

[Bug target/19492] can not build crosscompiler for solaris2.8 (when building libstdc++ - error wcslen...:Link tests are not allowed after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES)

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 20:41 --- Not a bug explained by that email. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/18133] computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all

--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-01-24 20:46 --- Subject: Re: computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all On Sun, 2005-01-23 at 21:09 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote: > ---

[Bug libgcj/19613] New: java.util.prefs should work like the JDK

The current java.util.prefs.Preferences.userRoot defaults to a memory-based back end. Instead we should have a file-based back end that default to reading from $HOME/.java/.userPrefs and is compatible with the JDK. -- Summary: java.util.prefs should work like the JDK Produ

[Bug tree-optimization/18133] computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all

--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-01-24 20:56 --- Subject: Re: computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all Hi Jeff, > Interesting approach. I'm not sure if your approach is easier > than

[Bug libgcj/19527] libgij fails to install in a temporary directory

--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 20:56 --- I believe this was fixed by this patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg01702.html I haven't checked to verify it however. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19527

[Bug c++/19614] New: Excessive memory consumption

Processing the attached file causes g++ to consume about 1.4G of virtual memory on x86_64. The same file caused problems on x86 in an earlier release - see bug #15320. Also, on my project's mailing list I have seen the implication that similar issues exist on powerpc: http://www.cliftonlabs.com/s

  1   2   >