http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45777
--- Comment #13 from Thomas Koenig 2011-01-08
09:38:17 UTC ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sat Jan 8 09:38:13 2011
New Revision: 168596
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168596
Log:
2011-01-08 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/4577
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45777
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.0
Known to fail|4.5.0, 4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36462
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|wrong-code |
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47031
--- Comment #7 from Nicola Pero 2011-01-08 11:39:38
UTC ---
> Usually, the lock is not held. If it is, you do a little trick: You spin 10
> times and if you still could not get the lock, it's likely the current thread
> is blocking another threa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47078
Nicola Pero changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
> One failure is
>
> /tmp/ccJSP9PV.lto.o: In function `main':^M
> ccWUIi0z.o:(.text.startup+0x1d): undefined reference to `g_ebp_save'^M
> ccWUIi0z.o:(.text.startup+0x23): undefined reference to `g_esp_save'^M
> ccWUIi0z.o:(.text.startup+0x3b): undefined reference to `g_edi'^M
> ccWUIi0z.o:(.text.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47222
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08 13:43:27 UTC
---
> One failure is
>
> /tmp/ccJSP9PV.lto.o: In function `main':^M
> ccWUIi0z.o:(.text.startup+0x1d): undefined reference to `g_ebp_save'^M
> ccWUIi0z.o:(.text.startup+0x23): undefined ref
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47223
--- Comment #1 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2011-01-08 14:01:47 UTC ---
Try to configure with `--disable-shared --enable-shared=lto-plugin'.
What is the failure?
Honza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47223
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08 14:38:20 UTC
---
What is the failure?
Honza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47223
--- Comment #3 from coolypf 2011-01-08 14:42:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> What is the failure?
>
> Honza
when configuring target-libgcc,
failed with xgcc cannot create executable
config.log shows 'liblto_plugin-0.dll not found'
maybe -f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47078
Nicola Pero changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |nicola at gcc dot gnu.org
> when configuring target-libgcc,
> failed with xgcc cannot create executable
> config.log shows 'liblto_plugin-0.dll not found'
> maybe -fuse-linker-plugin option not handled correctly
Yes, it seems that linker plugin handling on cygwin is not done well.
Is linker plugin built for you and does th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47223
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08 14:56:10 UTC
---
> when configuring target-libgcc,
> failed with xgcc cannot create executable
> config.log shows 'liblto_plugin-0.dll not found'
> maybe -fuse-linker-plugin option not handled correctly
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47223
--- Comment #5 from coolypf 2011-01-08 15:05:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> > when configuring target-libgcc,
> > failed with xgcc cannot create executable
> > config.log shows 'liblto_plugin-0.dll not found'
> > maybe -fuse-linker-plugin o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47218
Yu Simin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||silver24k at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47116
Yu Simin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47218
--- Comment #3 from Yu Simin 2011-01-08 15:13:42
UTC ---
A simple test in PR47116:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22866
> lto and linker plugin was OK in 20110101 snapshot
> in which '-fuse-linker-plugin' was off by default
> but in rev 168594, the option becomes on by default
Yes, I've changed the default when linker is detected to have linker support and
lto-plugin is build.
>
> this option causes checking LTOPL
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47223
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08 15:17:54 UTC
---
> lto and linker plugin was OK in 20110101 snapshot
> in which '-fuse-linker-plugin' was off by default
> but in rev 168594, the option becomes on by default
Yes, I've changed the defau
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46367
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38292
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45566
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18687
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to fa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18687
--- Comment #53 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08
16:10:38 UTC ---
Concerning Steven's comment, for infcode the time report is:
callgraph optimization: 0.07 ( 1%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 0.04 ( 0%) wall
139 kB ( 0%) ggc
cfg cleanup :
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47031
--- Comment #8 from js-gcc at webkeks dot org
2011-01-08 16:14:28 UTC ---
Yeah, but Linux is just one of the many OSes supported by GCC. And I don't know
of any other OS that uses futexes fors pthread mutexes.
> It would still be good to try a w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21485
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2008-10-03 23:54:40 |2011-02-06 23:54:40
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46469
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08
16:34:03 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sat Jan 8 16:33:57 2011
New Revision: 168598
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168598
Log:
PR tree-optmization/46469
* ipa.c (function
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47218
--- Comment #4 from Dave Korn 2011-01-08 16:35:31
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> A simple test in PR47116:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22866
Thankyou, that should make debugging it easier :)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46469
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08
16:37:20 UTC ---
Fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47224
Summary: ICE with procedure pointer component
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassig...@
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47225
Summary: [4.6.0 regression]: cross-compile fails while
configuring libgcc with "xgcc: fatal error:
-fuse-linker-plugin, but liblto_plugin.so not found"
Product: gcc
Version: 4
>
> There is indeed no liblto_plugin.so found in my build tree.
>
> With r168592 I had the last confirmed successful build.
Seems like plugin autodetection somehow screws up. Do you get the
lto-plugin/Makefile configured? What is it building there?
Honza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47225
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08 17:58:59 UTC
---
>
> There is indeed no liblto_plugin.so found in my build tree.
>
> With r168592 I had the last confirmed successful build.
Seems like plugin autodetection somehow screws up. Do you g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47218
--- Comment #5 from Dave Korn 2011-01-08 18:06:07
UTC ---
Bug is caused by the change at rev 167795 applied to fix PR46667.
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=167795
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47222
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2011-01-08 18:07:00
UTC ---
I got the same failure with gold:
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/stackalign/builtin-apply-3.c -O2 -flto execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/stackalign/builtin-apply-3.c -O2 -flto execution test
F
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47222
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2011-01-08 18:20:58
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
>
> Hmm, this does not seem to be dependent on plugin implementation, but it seems
> like
> bug in 32bit only testcase. The testcase seems to use:
>
> int g_edi=I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47225
--- Comment #2 from John Tytgat 2011-01-08
18:22:14 UTC ---
I'm giving the --disable-shared configure option for building cross-compiler as
I'm not interested in shared target libraries and it looks like this is passed
on to lto-plugin which is o
> I tried
> -int g_edi=INIT_EDI, g_esi=INIT_ESI, g_ebx=INIT_EBX;
> -int g_ebp, g_ebp_save, g_esp, g_esp_save;
> +int g_edi __attribute__((externally_visible)) =INIT_EDI;
> +int g_esi __attribute__((externally_visible)) =INIT_ESI;
> +int g_ebx __attribute__((externally_visible)) = INIT_EBX;
> +int
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47222
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08 18:54:30 UTC
---
> I tried
> -int g_edi=INIT_EDI, g_esi=INIT_ESI, g_ebx=INIT_EBX;
> -int g_ebp, g_ebp_save, g_esp, g_esp_save;
> +int g_edi __attribute__((externally_visible)) =INIT_EDI;
> +int g_esi __
> I.e. only static library of lto-plugin gets built.
Ahh, static library for lto-plugin is of course pointless thing. I guess we
want to disable plugin when --disable-shared is passed. I will see if my
autoconf-fu is on par to do so.
Still, it is bit sad situation - you are right that you are no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47225
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08 18:58:09 UTC
---
> I.e. only static library of lto-plugin gets built.
Ahh, static library for lto-plugin is of course pointless thing. I guess we
want to disable plugin when --disable-shared is passed.
Hi,
is this dup of PR47225? I.e. is the --disable-shared the problem?
Honza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47223
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08 18:58:46 UTC
---
Hi,
is this dup of PR47225? I.e. is the --disable-shared the problem?
Honza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47218
--- Comment #6 from Dave Korn 2011-01-08 19:00:25
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Bug is caused by the change at rev 167795 applied to fix PR46667.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=167795
Full details at http://gcc.gnu.o
Hi,
since lto plugin already enables shared libiberty, this patch extends the
machinery
for plugin itself too.
Does it fix your problem? I seem to be able to bootstrap (C only) with
disable-shared.
Index: configure
===
--- configure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47225
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08 19:15:24 UTC
---
Hi,
since lto plugin already enables shared libiberty, this patch extends the
machinery
for plugin itself too.
Does it fix your problem? I seem to be able to bootstrap (C only) with
disa
Hi,
I posed patch to the aforementioned PR, hopefully it will fix this one too.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47223
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08 19:16:09 UTC
---
Hi,
I posed patch to the aforementioned PR, hopefully it will fix this one too.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46896
--- Comment #13 from Paul Thomas 2011-01-08 19:17:06
UTC ---
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jan 8 19:17:03 2011
New Revision: 168600
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168600
Log:
2011-01-08 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/46896
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47225
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
/trunk-3/build-inst2/gcc/:[0]# /abuild/jh/trunk-install/bin/g++
--version
g++ (GCC) 4.6.0 20110108 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47078
--- Comment #3 from Nicola Pero 2011-01-08 19:44:34
UTC ---
Author: nicola
Date: Sat Jan 8 19:44:30 2011
New Revision: 168601
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168601
Log:
In gcc/:
2011-01-08 Nicola Pero
PR objc/4707
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47078
Nicola Pero changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42402
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42613
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46710
Nicola Pero changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43659
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43891
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47225
--- Comment #6 from John Tytgat 2011-01-08
19:58:00 UTC ---
That patch results in successful build. And lto works as well.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44904
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45007
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to wo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45810
--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08
20:08:26 UTC ---
Does --param hot-bb-frequency-fraction=10 work here?
This is weird!-( I have done the following profiling and it shows that -flto
prevents the inlining of __perdida_m_MOD_perdida,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46083
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46492
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46578
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47209
Zdenek Sojka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE: SIGSEGV in |ICE: SIGSEGV in
|should_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47209
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47226
Summary: GCC doesn't expand template parameter pack that
appears in a lambda-expression
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46905
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #25 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08
21:06:27 UTC ---
With current mainline and release checking compiler, I can for first time build
mozilla with debug info. 7.5GB of RAM is needed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #26 from Alexey Feldgendler
2011-01-08 21:10:50 UTC ---
This is a great success, although I have to say it's still way too much RAM to
ask for. In particular, this excludes the possiblity of compiling on a 32-bit
architecture.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45089
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08
21:22:42 UTC ---
Confirmed that mozilla now builds with debug info.
-gnu
--disable-nls --enable-threads=posix --enable-symvers=gnu --enable-__cxa_atexit
--enable-languages=c++ --enable-shared --enable-c99 --enable-long-long
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.6.0 20110108 (experimental) [trunk revision 168603] (GCC)
$ ./xgcc -B. -march=armv6 -mfpu=vfp -mfloat-abi=softfp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44951
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka 20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44846
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08
21:28:15 UTC ---
The workaround was comitted to the mainline, but the duplicated decl issue
probably remains.
There is a lot of room for improvement in the WPA memory use, but I am not sure
how much we can still fit in 4.6.0...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #27 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-08 21:35:00
UTC ---
There is a lot of room for improvement in the WPA memory use, but I am not sure
how much we can still fit in 4.6.0...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46017
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43136
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig 2011-01-08
22:18:31 UTC ---
We have to watch out for aliasing here; if
foo changes the arguments, we have to have a copy.
Compare PR 47065.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47005
--- Comment #17 from Laurent GUERBY 2011-01-08
22:48:51 UTC ---
For reference ACATS is now clean on arm-linux as well:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-01/msg00648.html
LAST_UPDATED: Fri Jan 7 00:49:12 UTC 2011 (revision 168562)
Nati
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47227
Summary: GCC ignores conversion function template
specializatons if a derived class' conversion function
converts to the same type
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46405
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig 2011-01-08
22:59:45 UTC ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sat Jan 8 22:59:42 2011
New Revision: 168604
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168604
Log:
2011-01-08 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/46405
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46405
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46905
--- Comment #5 from Andi Kleen 2011-01-08
23:16:25 UTC ---
slim lto will take some time (next stage1)
i also plan to drop most of the code because with forced plugin
the elf code in collect2 should not be needed anymore.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47218
Dave Korn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38536
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46905
--- Comment #6 from Andi Kleen 2011-01-08
23:56:48 UTC ---
And to add: if you have more fixes for -fno-lto please add them now,
don't wait.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47218
--- Comment #7 from Dave Korn 2011-01-09 00:47:15
UTC ---
Created attachment 22932
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22932
proposed patch
Ensures thunks get a section name assigned in cgraphunit.c#assemble_thunk().
Taking this
Consider the patch pre-approved if it passes testing. Thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47218
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-09 00:57:12 UTC
---
Consider the patch pre-approved if it passes testing. Thanks!
> slim lto will take some time (next stage1)
I was chatting about this with Diego yesterday and he seems to be fine with the
basic slim LTO patch getting in. So it seems to me that we might get the slim
LTO patch for 4.6.0 and flip the default for 4.7.0
> i also plan to drop most of the code bec
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46905
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-09 01:10:25 UTC
---
> slim lto will take some time (next stage1)
I was chatting about this with Diego yesterday and he seems to be fine with the
basic slim LTO patch getting in. So it seems to me that we
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47209
--- Comment #5 from Zdenek Sojka 2011-01-09 01:17:54
UTC ---
Created attachment 22933
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22933
different testcase
(In reply to comment #4)
> Well, the issue here seems to be that in should_emit_st
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46769
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2010-12-03 13:29:21 |2011-01-08 13:29:21
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44463
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-09
02:11:27 UTC ---
Well, walking the alias pairs don't seem to be that easy after all. If I
understand it right, we first merge the decls and then read the alias pairs.
This means that we don't really have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41816
Rob changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rob1weld at aol dot com
--- Comment #5 from Rob 20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47224
--- Comment #1 from Martien Hulsen 2011-01-09
07:35:28 UTC ---
The second line should be removed. Modified code:
module element_defs_m
type coefficients_t
procedure (dum_vfunc), pointer, nopass :: vfunc => null()
end type coefficients_t
98 matches
Mail list logo
