http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-20
08:37:09 UTC ---
Nice, so we want Paolo's patch. Out of interest, what are the 447.deal numbers
when comparing linking against old (pre-Benjamin's commit) libstdc++.a and
current libstdc++.a with Pao
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52298
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
AssignedTo|jakub at gcc dot g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
--- Comment #19 from rguenther at suse dot de
2012-02-20 09:27:48 UTC ---
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012, jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
>
> --- Comment #17 from Martin Jambor 2012-02-17
> 17:59:43
-elf
Configured with: ../gcc-trunk/configure --target=sh-elf --prefix=/usr/local
--enable-languages=c,c++ --enable-multilib --disable-libssp --disable-nls
--disable-werror --enable-lto --with-newlib --with-gnu-as --with-gnu-ld
--with-system-zlib
Thread model: single
gcc version 4.7.0 20120220 (experimental) (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52309
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-20 11:11:44 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Feb 20 11:11:39 2012
New Revision: 184388
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184388
Log:
2012-02-20 Paolo Carlini
PR libs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52285
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52261
--- Comment #4 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-02-20
11:17:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Could you add support for the few new devices with USB Support aswell? example
> Xmega32A4U.
I am not sure if that would help much because there is no su
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52309
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-20 11:31:07 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Feb 20 11:31:01 2012
New Revision: 184389
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184389
Log:
2012-02-20 Paolo Carlini
PR libs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52309
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52188
--- Comment #13 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-20
11:38:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> First and foremost, sorry for the big delay but I could not have a
> look at this PR earlier. Nevertheless, I doubt that the decision of
> the new IPA-C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45472
--- Comment #21 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-20
11:43:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> It seems to me that volatile reads/writes should get their own gimple
> statements, not be part of a larger block move. So instead of
>
> vv1 = vv2;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52286
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52287
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52304
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52314
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-20
11:57:38 UTC ---
Once I made create_tmp_var_raw use TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (type) - but I don't
remember what the fallout from this was. I suppose at least
create_tmp_from_val
should do that though, at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286
--- Comment #39 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-20
11:50:00 UTC ---
Apart from that libada bootstrap issue (reproduces with the stage1 compiler),
the testsuite is clean apart from vectorizer testcases which show that
do_hoist_insertion is hoisting
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52302
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52283
--- Comment #11 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-20 11:58:28 UTC ---
The problem stems from the unconditional forcing of TREE_NO_WARNING in
convert_to_integer. This was done to fix PR26632. I don't see how such a
forcing can be correct, since
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52299
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52297
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 |hppa64-hp-hpux11.11,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52290
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52298
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52272
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-20
12:21:19 UTC ---
Even though it makes sense (I think) the patch regresses more benchmarks
than it fixes, and it does not fix the 410.bwaves regression fully. Defering
to 4.8 as I don't have any bet
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52294
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52286
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-20
12:19:54 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Feb 20 12:19:47 2012
New Revision: 184391
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184391
Log:
PR tree-optimization/52286
* fold-const.c (
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52286
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.6/4.7 Regression] wrong |[4.6 Regression] wrong code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52208
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52272
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milesto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52188
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor 2012-02-20
12:57:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> Can/do we mark all clones having hidden visibility? Would a matching regexp
> in the linker script override that? Isn't that a bug?
I believe they are m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52297
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-02-20
13:22:36 UTC ---
The tests pass on powerpc-apple-darwin9 and x86_64-apple-darwin10, but not on
i686-pc-linux-gnu; so x86_64-*-* does not seem the right target descriptor.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52315
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52298
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-20
13:41:59 UTC ---
DOM optimizes the |s with zero if you adjust the integer_..._p predicates like
Index: gcc/tree.c
===
--- gcc/tree.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50063
--- Comment #19 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-02-20
13:41:39 UTC ---
FYI, after updating to SVN 184386 (2012-02-20) I see 14 new FAILs in the avr
test suite; all of which can be cured with -fno-dse:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020215-1.c executio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50063
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-20
13:52:50 UTC ---
Please just fix up your backend, e.g. by turning that sp = hfp move (insn 47
above) into an UNSPEC move.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52298
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-20
14:14:48 UTC ---
Not sure why in vect_model_reduction_cost we do not consider the reduction
at all if nested_in_vect_loop_p (loop, orig_stmt). I think simply dropping
that conditional would model t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52316
Bug #: 52316
Summary: Loops not optimized away, though result is not used
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimiza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52315
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52316
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52316
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-20
15:08:05 UTC ---
can not prove finiteness of loop 1
can not prove finiteness of loop 2
number of iteration analysis does not work on non-integral IVs.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52298
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-20
15:16:00 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Feb 20 15:15:52 2012
New Revision: 184396
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184396
Log:
2012-02-20 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52298
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52283
--- Comment #12 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-20 15:27:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 26705
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26705
Tentative fix.
Testing this patch. Avoids setting TREE_NO_WARNING if not necessary, and st
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52283
--- Comment #13 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-20
15:40:44 UTC ---
Related to PR37985, which is caused by the fix for PR26632, too. I still think
that patch should possibly be reverted instead.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
Bug #: 52317
Summary: incorrect FSF address
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivial
Priority: P3
Compo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-20
15:51:38 UTC ---
Confirmed. It also contains still a GPLv2 and old exception license. Also
broken on trunk.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|trivial |normal
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wak
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |trivial
--- Comment #4 from Richard Gu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52283
--- Comment #14 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-02-20
15:59:39 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> Related to PR37985, which is caused by the fix for PR26632, too. I still
> think
> that patch should possibly be reverted instead.
I also think th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52299
--- Comment #2 from Joseph Garvin 2012-02-20
16:45:21 UTC ---
#include
template
struct test {
static const std::size_t a_
= x ? 10 / x : 10;
};
I just forgot to copy and paste the include. My command line is just "g++
alignptrtest.cpp"
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52299
--- Comment #3 from Joseph Garvin 2012-02-20
16:47:23 UTC ---
Also this is x86-64, which could be relevant since it affects the underlying
type of std::size_t.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52299
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52299
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-20
17:02:03 UTC ---
I can't reproduce it with 4.4.3, but then ...
(In reply to comment #0)
>
> alignptrtest.cpp: In instantiation of ‘const size_t test<0ul>::a_’:
> alignptrtest.cpp:11: instantiate
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52299
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32380
--- Comment #10 from Thomas Koenig 2012-02-20
17:16:38 UTC ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Mon Feb 20 17:16:33 2012
New Revision: 184398
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184398
Log:
2012-02-13 Thomas Koenig
PR testsuite/52
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52229
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52229
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig 2012-02-20
17:16:38 UTC ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Mon Feb 20 17:16:33 2012
New Revision: 184398
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184398
Log:
2012-02-13 Thomas Koenig
PR testsuite/522
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52229
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-20
17:27:07 UTC ---
This is wrong. You should use some vector_* or vect* target predicate, like
vect_hw_misalign or whatever you actually need.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
--- Comment #20 from Martin Jambor 2012-02-20
17:27:36 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> base returned from get_base_address should never be NULL, so it's
> safe to assume it isn't. Otherwise the patch looks ok to me.
>
Unfortunately, when I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52299
--- Comment #7 from Joseph Garvin 2012-02-20
17:56:20 UTC ---
Sorry, I should have copy and pasted the whole file. I was trying to save
people's time by providing a condensed snippet ;p
(In reply to comment #6)
> This reproduces it:
>
> templat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52299
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241
--- Comment #20 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-02-20
18:04:45 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> Nice, so we want Paolo's patch. Out of interest, what are the 447.deal
> numbers
> when comparing linking against old (pre-Benjamin's commit) libstdc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52299
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52314
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52318
Bug #: 52318
Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE: in execute_todo, at
passes.c:1748 with -O3 -ftracer -fno-tree-ccp
-fno-tree-copy-prop -fno-tree-dce and stpcpy_chk()
Classification: Unc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
--- Comment #21 from rguenther at suse dot de
2012-02-20 19:44:46 UTC ---
On Mon, 20 Feb 2012, jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
>
> --- Comment #20 from Martin Jambor 2012-02-20
> 17:27:36
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52318
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241
--- Comment #21 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-20 21:08:55 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Feb 20 21:08:48 2012
New Revision: 184404
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184404
Log:
2012-02-20 Paolo Carlini
PR lib
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241
--- Comment #23 from Paolo Carlini 2012-02-20
21:16:41 UTC ---
PS: Vladimir, thanks a lot for all the good testing!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52300
--- Comment #3 from Kai Tietz 2012-02-20 21:22:11
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Mon Feb 20 21:22:07 2012
New Revision: 184406
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184406
Log:
PR libstdc++/52300
* gthr.h (GTHREAD_USE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52300
--- Comment #4 from Kai Tietz 2012-02-20 21:28:41
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Mon Feb 20 21:28:36 2012
New Revision: 184408
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184408
Log:
PR libstdc++/52300
* gthr.h (GTHREAD_U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52300
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52233
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52247
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52281
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52262
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52246
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52232
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52273
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52285
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52245
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52316
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
--- Comment #6 from Christopher Yeleighton
2012-02-20 21:54:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 26707
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26707
updates the FSF address in boilerplate comments
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52238
--- Comment #9 from Kai Tietz 2012-02-20 22:05:12
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Mon Feb 20 22:05:08 2012
New Revision: 184409
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184409
Log:
PR target/52238
* stor-layout.c (place_field):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-20
22:05:32 UTC ---
The entire boilerplate text needs to be updated to GPLv3, and the new text
doesn't include the postal address at all, so the patch isn't right.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini 2012-02-20
22:08:14 UTC ---
Indeed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52238
--- Comment #10 from Kai Tietz 2012-02-20 22:09:52
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Mon Feb 20 22:09:48 2012
New Revision: 184410
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184410
Log:
PR target/52238
* stor-layout.c (place_field)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52238
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52250
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52319
Bug #: 52319
Summary: Legal program rejected, "use" clause in subpackage
invalidates "use type" clause
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52315
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52315
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52312
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-20
23:34:48 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Feb 20 23:34:42 2012
New Revision: 184416
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184416
Log:
PR c++/52312
* typeck.c (check_literal_oper
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52312
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52141
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez 2012-02-20
23:43:35 UTC ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Mon Feb 20 23:43:31 2012
New Revision: 184417
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184417
Log:
PR middle-end/52141
* trans-mem.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52141
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51368
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
