http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15611
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43513
--- Comment #9 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31 07:04:31 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Wed Aug 31 07:04:25 2011
New Revision: 178353
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178353
Log:
2011-08-31 Tom de Vries
PR middle-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43513
--- Comment #10 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31 07:06:04 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Wed Aug 31 07:05:59 2011
New Revision: 178354
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178354
Log:
2011-08-31 Tom de Vries
PR middle
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15798
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50247
Bug #: 50247
Summary: #pragma pack std::set segfault
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50239
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-08-31
08:27:43 UTC ---
There's no need to repeat the same info you already provided, please provide
what you _didn't_ provide, as requested by http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/#report
we need preprocessed source,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50247
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50138
Ira Rosen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||irar at il dot ibm.com
--- Comment #2 from Ir
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50138
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-08-31
08:46:46 UTC ---
That's up to you to decide, you are the maintainer ;)
My comment was just in the light of a longish ChangeLog entry, haven't read the
actual changes how risky they are, if there were a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43513
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50248
Bug #: 50248
Summary: gcc confused, tries to use variadic template to copy
itself when it should use default constructor
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50138
--- Comment #4 from Ira Rosen 2011-08-31 09:42:18 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> That's up to you to decide, you are the maintainer ;)
Yes, but not the release manager...
> My comment was just in the light of a longish ChangeLog entry, have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15844
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15845
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15846
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50248
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-08-31
10:24:07 UTC ---
Thanks for not posting an example of 30k lines :)
another workaround is to add these constructors:
MapSessionData(const MapSessionData&) = delete;
MapSessionData() = defau
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15917
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16075
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16076
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50138
--- Comment #5 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2011-08-31 10:36:51 UTC ---
This problem is not very important. If it's hard to fix this bug, then do not
fix it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16077
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16081
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16082
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16083
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227
--- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31 11:28:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> > gfortran-4.7 -c module.f90
> > gfortran-4.7 program.f90
>
> What about
> gfortran-4.7 program.f90 module.o?
> AFAIK there is not "object" in th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16084
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50249
Bug #: 50249
Summary: ira marks wrong value for inheriting
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16094
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50249
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31 11:39:32 UTC ---
Created attachment 25150
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25150
test case
testcase reduced from
libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/inserters_ex
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50249
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31 11:40:19 UTC ---
Created attachment 25151
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25151
dump before ira
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50249
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31 11:40:47 UTC ---
Created attachment 25152
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25152
dump of ira
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16095
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16096
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16097
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50249
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31 11:52:12 UTC ---
Created attachment 25153
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25153
compiler patch necessary to trigger the problem
Attached patch was used on top of r178259,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16212
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16214
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17320
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17321
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50249
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31 12:14:12 UTC ---
I bisected the failure to r172389, but to me that looks more like a trigger
than a cause:
...
2011-04-13 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/48455
* ira-costs.c (
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50250
Bug #: 50250
Summary: Driver documentation on -l does not mention shared
libraries
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17954
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
Bug #: 50251
Summary: [4.7 Regression] Revision 178353 caused many test
failures
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18205
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18221
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31416
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50248
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2316
--- Comment #31 from Marc Glisse 2011-08-31
13:40:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #25)
> (In reply to comment #23)
> > I think you can do it with a alias-declaration in an extern "C" block:
> >
> > extern "C" {
> > template
> > using func_t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18454
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50252
Bug #: 50252
Summary: Error message on "call x%y" (x not declared) can be
more informative
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRME
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18765
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40936
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31417
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32164
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #26 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-08-31 15:23:56 UTC ---
Various processors have an instruction to reverse the bit order in a word
(ARMv6T2 and later have RBIT, for example, and C6X has BITR on C64X and
above). I think a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50243
--- Comment #2 from congruwer at yahoo dot co.uk 2011-08-31 15:27:52 UTC ---
Not in this case. The example is set up such that the vtable is invisible, even
if it is emitted. Since no one can access it, it cannot be required. (I have
searched throu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237
--- Comment #12 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-08-31 15:27:44 UTC ---
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237
>
> --- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu 2011-08-31 04:21:53
> U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu 2011-08-31 15:44:02
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
>
> Arrange for the contents to have appropriate text values you can check for
> with grep (or if you wish a custom C program to run on the build system to
> ex
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50242
--- Comment #2 from congruwer at yahoo dot co.uk 2011-08-31 15:46:19 UTC ---
Sometimes I want to implement an entire method or function in assembler. The
main reasons are:
1) I want to thunk to another function &c. in a way that is hard to do from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237
--- Comment #14 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-08-31 15:46:46 UTC ---
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237
>
> --- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu 2011-08-31 15:44:02
> U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50242
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50254
Bug #: 50254
Summary: gcc-4.5 -fstrict-aliasing -fschedule-insns
optimization produces wrong code
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26099
--- Comment #31 from Paolo Carlini 2011-08-31
17:11:38 UTC ---
__is_convertible_to isn't such a big issue anymore, thanks to Core/1170 (in
C++11 SFINAE includes access control, still unimplemented in GCC, though).
However, we now need front-end s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49886
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor 2011-08-31
17:17:27 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Aug 31 17:17:19 2011
New Revision: 178386
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178386
Log:
2011-08-31 Martin Jambor
PR middle-end/49
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50241
--- Comment #4 from George R. Goffe 2011-08-31
17:38:13 UTC ---
Andrew,
Thank you for your time and the hint.
Regards,
George...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #51 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31
17:48:05 UTC ---
So, I propose we fix this now and deal with any potential fallout later.
Slightly bug pushing, which I'm not terribly fond of, but, better than leaving
it sit. The other fi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47997
--- Comment #24 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31
17:55:19 UTC ---
I don't have a take on the best way to fix this. With that said, if you like
the last patch and it tests out, Ok.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48851
--- Comment #24 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31
17:58:49 UTC ---
I don't have the regeneration environment for fixincludes, could you post the
patch with the regeneration bits in it and ask for approval?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50252
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50252
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31 19:31:10 UTC ---
Ok, here is one thing that could be easily done. Preliminary patch, not
regtested. Does this sound like an improvement?
Index: gcc/fortran/match.c
==
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49149
--- Comment #3 from Zaak 2011-08-31 19:49:20 UTC ---
When I pass -E some strange behaviour occurs. First of all the code is
preprocessed with the c preprocessor and unless the -o flag is passed the
output is written to standard out, so this text w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49149
--- Comment #4 from Zaak 2011-08-31 19:58:41 UTC ---
Created attachment 25155
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25155
test case files with Makefile
The Makefile.alt is configured to pass -E and -o /dev/null when building the
dep
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44526
Zaak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zbeekman at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from Zaak
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50223
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50255
Bug #: 50255
Summary: Linker stumbles over non-grouped text/rodata for a
non-virtual thunk
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRME
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49149
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50255
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-08-31
21:03:36 UTC ---
>GCC 4.6.0 20110603 (Red Hat 4.6.0-10)).
Does it happen with non RedHat version of the compiler meaning non modified
version of GCC? Really you should have reported this first to red
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49533
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski 2011-08-31
21:05:14 UTC ---
has this been fixed?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50255
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2011-08-31
21:06:43 UTC ---
This sounds like http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49538 but without
a testcase it is hard to say if it was really on the 4.6 branch or only with
RedHat's compiler.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17953
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49149
--- Comment #6 from Zaak 2011-08-31 22:01:06 UTC ---
I ma not saying gfortran is entirely broken, i'm merely claiming that there is
a bug in the dependency resolution feature. Please see GNU Make documentation
here for more information about Gener
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18453
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49149
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl
2011-08-31 22:17:48 UTC ---
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 10:01:06PM +, zbeekman at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> I hope you are less confused now.
>
I'm not confused. I do, however, use the grey matter
between my ear
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32181
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49149
--- Comment #8 from Zaak 2011-08-31 22:27:40 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 10:01:06PM +, zbeekman at gmail dot com wrote:
> >
> > I hope you are less confused now.
> >
>
> I'm not confused. I do, however, use t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49149
--- Comment #9 from Zaak 2011-08-31 22:34:46 UTC ---
Additionally, if my entire premise is wrong what do you anticipate the use of
the -M flag will be for? It's not hard to figure out that .o files depend on
the .f90 files with the same name. I do
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49149
--- Comment #10 from Steve Kargl
2011-08-31 22:45:41 UTC ---
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 10:27:40PM +, zbeekman at gmail dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49149
>
> --- Comment #8 from Zaak 2011-08-31 22:27:40 UTC
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49149
--- Comment #11 from Steve Kargl
2011-08-31 23:05:10 UTC ---
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 10:34:46PM +, zbeekman at gmail dot com wrote:
> Additionally, if my entire premise is wrong what do you anticipate the use of
> the -M flag will be for? It'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50256
Bug #: 50256
Summary: AVR GCC - several unnecessary register moves
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37245
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40986
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37245
--- Comment #4 from Timo Lindfors 2011-09-01
00:31:16 UTC ---
The bug still occurs for me on debian testing:
lindi2:~/tmp$ gnatmake -ggdb3 -O0 gdb_bug_2
gcc-4.4 -c -ggdb3 -O0 gdb_bug_2.adb
gdb_bug_2.adb:25:07: warning: variable "gs" is read but
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47818
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50257
Bug #: 50257
Summary: unordered_map slow initialization due to huge
__prime_list
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49149
--- Comment #12 from Zaak 2011-09-01 01:14:40 UTC
---
> Can you show me a specific passage in the GNU Make documentation
> that states -M can be used to generate dependencies for
> Fortran USE statements without the actual *.mod being
> present?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37245
--- Comment #5 from nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr 2011-09-01 01:15:04 UTC
---
During the Debian transition, the default gnat (4.4.6) uses its own gcc instead
of the default gcc (4.6.1), as you can see in line 2 of your log.
Summary of our resu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49149
--- Comment #13 from Zaak 2011-09-01 01:27:46 UTC
---
As for intrinsic F2003 modules, like ISO_C_BINDING, ISO_FORTRAN_ENV, etc. I
would expect the compiler to be able to handle this appropriately, i.e. not
require the presence of a iso_c_binding
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50258
Bug #: 50258
Summary: -std=gnu++0x should allow in-class initialization of
static const floating types without constexpr
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
