[Bug libstdc++/59876] New: _Rb_tree move constructor invokes _M_copy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59876 Bug ID: 59876 Summary: _Rb_tree move constructor invokes _M_copy Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc+

[Bug tree-optimization/59875] Missed unrolling opportunity

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59875 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Status|UNCO

[Bug c++/57926] Atomic functions broken with C++ but not C?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57926 --- Comment #11 from lailavrazda1979 at gmail dot com --- I don't mean to be a bother, but this hasn't been updated in a while. Has it been fixed?

[Bug bootstrap/59864] [4.9 regression] RTL check: expected code 'reg', have 'ne' in rhs_regno, at rtl.h:1125

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59864 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug target/59379] [4.9 Regression] gomp_init_num_threads is compiled into an infinite loop with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=slm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59379 --- Comment #18 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #17) > > I prefer first patch. It splits all LEAs, where ix86_avoid_lea_for_addr is > > true. > > Then we should avoid the extra > > (set (reg:DI) (zero_extend:DI (reg:SI)))

[Bug c++/59867] Template string literal loses first symbol

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59867 --- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini --- Tuesday works for me ;) Seriously, thanks for looking into this.

[Bug fortran/34547] [4.8/4.9 regression] NULL(): Fortran 2003 changes, accepts invalid, ICE on invalid

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34547 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug c++/59877] New: Internal compiler error: Error reporting routines re-entered.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59877 Bug ID: 59877 Summary: Internal compiler error: Error reporting routines re-entered. Product: gcc Version: 4.7.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal P

[Bug c++/59877] Internal compiler error: Error reporting routines re-entered.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59877 --- Comment #1 from hawran.diskuse --- Created attachment 31890 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31890&action=edit A bug file and fixed file (I hope it could help)

[Bug c++/59766] c++1y: declaring friend function with 'auto' return type deduction is rejected with bogus reason

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59766 --- Comment #1 from lucdanton at free dot fr --- Happens too with GCC 4.9 (20140105), as well as when using decltype(auto).

[Bug tree-optimization/59875] Missed unrolling opportunity

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59875 --- Comment #2 from josephlawrie at hotmail dot com --- (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1) > I don't think it has anything to do with glibc or weak. If I patch > tree-ssa-loop-ivcanon.c (couldn't find a sufficient option or parameter) to >

[Bug fortran/57129] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE (segfault) in check_extended_derived_type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57129 --- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #7) > So r202823 is likely to have fixed this PR. I can confirm that r202823 has fixed the ICE: Reverting that revision reintroduces the ICE. I can al

[Bug fortran/34547] [4.8/4.9 regression] NULL(): Fortran 2003 changes, accepts invalid, ICE on invalid

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34547 --- Comment #13 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Sun Jan 19 11:28:44 2014 New Revision: 206772 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206772&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2014-01-19 Paul Thomas PR fortran/34547 * resolve.c (resolve_tran

[Bug fortran/34547] [4.8/4.9 regression] NULL(): Fortran 2003 changes, accepts invalid, ICE on invalid

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34547 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/20585] [meta-bug] Fortran 2003 support

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20585 Bug 20585 depends on bug 34547, which changed state. Bug 34547 Summary: [4.8/4.9 regression] NULL(): Fortran 2003 changes, accepts invalid, ICE on invalid http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34547 What|Removed

[Bug target/52125] Problems with LO16 asm operands on MIPS

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52125 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rsandifo at gcc dot

[Bug bootstrap/59878] New: [4.9 Regression] ISL from cloog does not work with trunk

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59878 Bug ID: 59878 Summary: [4.9 Regression] ISL from cloog does not work with trunk Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prio

[Bug libstdc++/59876] _Rb_tree move constructor invokes _M_copy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59876 --- Comment #1 from Jens-Wolfhard Schicke --- Sorry, I forgot. ~ % gcc-4.9 --version gcc-4.9 (Debian 4.9-20140116-1) 4.9.0 20140116 (experimental) [trunk revision 206688] ~ % dpkg -l libstdc++-4.9-dev:amd64 ||/ Name Version Archit

[Bug bootstrap/59878] [4.9 Regression] ISL from cloog does not work with trunk

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59878 --- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab --- See .

[Bug tree-optimization/59875] Missed unrolling opportunity

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59875 --- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to josephlawrie from comment #2) > (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1) > Am I correct in understanding this would not be possible without -fno-weak > or when linking dynamically? In those cases,

[Bug fortran/55172] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] gfc_variable_attr(): Bad array reference in SELECT TYPE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55172 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/59414] [4.8/4.9 Regression] [OOP] ICE in in gfc_conv_expr_descriptor on ALLOCATE inside SELECT TYPE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59414 --- Comment #12 from Paul Thomas --- (In reply to janus from comment #3) snip > > module ObjectLists > implicit none > > type :: t > end type > > type Object_array_pointer > class(t), pointer :: p(:) > end type > > co

[Bug libstdc++/59876] _Rb_tree move constructor invokes _M_copy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59876 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- isn't this a duplicate of PR 59872?

[Bug libstdc++/59872] [4.9 Regression] Cannot move std::map with move-only mapped_type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59872 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/59872] [4.9 Regression] Cannot move std::map with move-only mapped_type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59872 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- I don't want to use SFINAE here, I'll fix it the same way it's done in the other containers, tag dispatching using std::integral_constant

[Bug libstdc++/59872] [4.9 Regression] Cannot move std::map with move-only mapped_type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59872 --- Comment #7 from David Krauss --- That's a better factoring. I was just avoiding creating a new, named function. Thanks!

[Bug tree-optimization/59875] Missed unrolling opportunity

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59875 --- Comment #4 from josephlawrie at hotmail dot com --- > To let the compiler know that you want the standard operator delete (which > does nothing on 0), I am not sure what should be done. It is a different > issue, which you would need to ask abo

[Bug c++/59879] New: arrays in return statements or default arguments decay too early

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59879 Bug ID: 59879 Summary: arrays in return statements or default arguments decay too early Product: gcc Version: 4.8.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/59872] [4.9 Regression] Cannot move std::map with move-only mapped_type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59872 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||drahflow at gmx dot de --- Comment #8 f

[Bug libstdc++/59876] _Rb_tree move constructor invokes _M_copy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59876 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug other/59862] Code does not compile with 4.8.1 tarball release but compiles with 4.8.1 SVN release

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59862 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #4) > I have downloaded the two releases. Comparing gcc/fortran, the only > difference is > > Only in gcc-4.8.1/gcc/fortran/: gfortran.info > > in wget http://

[Bug fortran/57129] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Improve error message for conflicts between PROCEDURE and DERIVED.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57129 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|error-recovery, |diagnostic |ice-

[Bug other/59862] Code does not compile with 4.8.1 tarball release but compiles with 4.8.1 SVN release

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59862 --- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > The release tarball contain generated files so you don't need tools like > flex or makeinfo to build GCC. Those are not present in SVN, so this is > definitely not a packaging bug. Not sure to under

[Bug target/59379] [4.9 Regression] gomp_init_num_threads is compiled into an infinite loop with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=slm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59379 --- Comment #19 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #18) > I have checked that this patch with the testcase from Comment #9, using "-O > -march=corei7 -mtune=slm" compile options. The resulting binary worked OK. Yes, the result

[Bug other/59862] Code does not compile with 4.8.1 tarball release but compiles with 4.8.1 SVN release

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59862 --- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Sun, 19 Jan 2014, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59862 > > --- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > > The release tarball contain generate

[Bug tree-optimization/59860] [4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE in compute_may_aliases, at tree-ssa-structalias.c:6843

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59860 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- The issue is that after folding strcat_chk -> strcat -> strcpy (dst + strlen, ...) we do gimplify_and_update_call_from_tree which as part of gimplification folds the builtins again, which enters update_call_f

[Bug rtl-optimization/57763] [4.9 Regression]: comp-goto-1.c: ICE verify_flow_info failed, error: EDGE_CROSSING missing across section boundary

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57763 --- Comment #25 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Sun Jan 19 15:30:22 2014 New Revision: 206773 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206773&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR rtl-optimization/57763 * bb-reorder.c (fix_crossing_unconditiona

[Bug rtl-optimization/57763] [4.9 Regression]: comp-goto-1.c: ICE verify_flow_info failed, error: EDGE_CROSSING missing across section boundary

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57763 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/59379] [4.9 Regression] gomp_init_num_threads is compiled into an infinite loop with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=slm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59379 --- Comment #20 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Sun Jan 19 15:48:14 2014 New Revision: 206774 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206774&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/59379 * config/i386/i386.md (*lea): Zero-extend r

[Bug rtl-optimization/59880] New: Improve REE for implicit SI->DI zero-extend

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59880 Bug ID: 59880 Summary: Improve REE for implicit SI->DI zero-extend Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: r

[Bug c++/59867] Template string literal loses first symbol

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59867 --- Comment #10 from Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd at verizon dot net> --- Right now, -std=c++1y means anything after c++11. Does anyone have an idea about what happens when C++14 and these other TSen actually come out? I guess I was thinking as far a

[Bug rtl-optimization/59880] Improve REE for implicit SI->DI zero-extend

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59880 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 f

[Bug fortran/59881] New: Memory corruption with allocatable arrays in polymorphic types

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59881 Bug ID: 59881 Summary: Memory corruption with allocatable arrays in polymorphic types Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug other/59882] New: dev-cpp/xsd: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59882 Bug ID: 59882 Summary: dev-cpp/xsd: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priori

[Bug rtl-optimization/59880] ix86_avoid_lea_for_addr is buggy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59880 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/59880] ix86_avoid_lea_for_addr is buggy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59880 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > Ah, indeed, it is split because of the: > (define_insn_and_split "*lea" > [(set (match_operand:SWI48 0 "register_operand" "=r") > (match_operand:SWI48 1 "addre

[Bug c/48968] incorrect warning about longjmp/vfork clobbering a local (-W -O2, x86-64)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48968 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug fortran/58410] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Bogus uninitialized variable warning for allocatable derived type array function result

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58410 --- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Sun Jan 19 18:04:22 2014 New Revision: 206778 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206778&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2014-01-19 Paul Thomas PR fortran/58410 * trans-array.c (gfc_alloc

[Bug fortran/58410] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Bogus uninitialized variable warning for allocatable derived type array function result

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58410 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 58410, which changed state. Bug 58410 Summary: [4.8/4.9 Regression] Bogus uninitialized variable warning for allocatable derived type array function result http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58410 Wha

[Bug rtl-optimization/59880] ix86_avoid_lea_for_addr is buggy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59880 --- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > Ah, indeed, it is split because of the: > (define_insn_and_split "*lea" > [(set (match_operand:SWI48 0 "register_operand" "=r") > (match_operand:SWI48 1 "a

[Bug rtl-optimization/59880] ix86_avoid_lea_for_addr is buggy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59880 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at

[Bug c/48968] incorrect warning about longjmp/vfork clobbering a local (-W -O2, x86-64)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48968 eggert at gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|FIX

[Bug rtl-optimization/59880] ix86_avoid_lea_for_addr is buggy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59880 --- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5) > Created attachment 31893 [details] > gcc49-pr59880.patch > > Untested fix. The reason for the problem is that if it is just a > (zero-extended SI->DI or normal) mo

gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57172 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added CC||leonid at volnitsky dot com --- Comment #8

[Bug c++/54425] Rvalue/Lvalue overload resolution of templated function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54425 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/59883] New: Missed C++ front-end devirtualizations

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59883 Bug ID: 59883 Summary: Missed C++ front-end devirtualizations Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug fortran/59881] Memory corruption with allocatable arrays in polymorphic types

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59881 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/59880] ix86_avoid_lea_for_addr is buggy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59880 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Sure, will do. Thought about that as well, just didn't change it before attaching ;)

[Bug c/48968] incorrect warning about longjmp/vfork clobbering a local (-W -O2, x86-64)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48968 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/59414] [4.8/4.9 Regression] [OOP] ICE in in gfc_conv_expr_descriptor on ALLOCATE inside SELECT TYPE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59414 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/59881] Memory corruption with allocatable arrays in polymorphic types

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59881 --- Comment #2 from Jürgen Reuter --- Created attachment 31895 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31895&action=edit bit smaller test case This is a bit smaller test case. The main program is basically a call, and one module has b

[Bug fortran/59881] Memory corruption with allocatable arrays in polymorphic types

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59881 --- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres --- When the executable is run under valgrind I see a lot of ==981== Invalid write of size 8 ==981==at 0x100020B99: __parser_MOD_token_assign_real (in ./seg_prod) ==981==by 0x10001ED21: __parser_MO

[Bug rtl-optimization/59880] ix86_avoid_lea_for_addr is buggy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59880 --- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7) > Sure, will do. Thought about that as well, just didn't change it before > attaching ;) Please use "long long" and target ! ia32 on testcase so that it will be tested f

[Bug rtl-optimization/59802] excessive compile time in RTL optimizers (loop unswitching, CPROP)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59802 --- Comment #8 from David Binderman --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7) > Fixed. The results I can report are for trunk dated 20130119 [dcb@zippy4 foundBugs]$ time ../results/bin/gcc -c bug129.cc real0m8.076s user0m5.925s

[Bug fortran/59198] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE on cyclically dependent polymorphic types

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59198 Mikael Morin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 f

[Bug other/59882] dev-cpp/xsd: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59882 --- Comment #1 from David Kredba --- Created attachment 31896 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31896&action=edit C-reduced test case - first run

[Bug libfortran/59836] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Wrong outputs with rounding formats for some values.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59836 --- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Jan 19 23:17:43 2014 New Revision: 206785 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206785&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2014-01-19 Jerry DeLisle Dominique d'Humieres PR libfo

[Bug libfortran/59774] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Inconsistent rounding between -m32 and -m64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59774 --- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Jan 19 23:17:43 2014 New Revision: 206785 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206785&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2014-01-19 Jerry DeLisle Dominique d'Humieres PR libf

[Bug libfortran/59771] Cleanup handling of Gw.0 and Gw.0Ee format

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59771 --- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Jan 19 23:17:43 2014 New Revision: 206785 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206785&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2014-01-19 Jerry DeLisle Dominique d'Humieres PR libfo

[Bug libfortran/59774] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Inconsistent rounding between -m32 and -m64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59774 --- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Jan 19 23:21:10 2014 New Revision: 206786 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206786&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2014-01-19 Steven G. Kargl PR libfortran/59771 PR libfortra

[Bug libfortran/59771] Cleanup handling of Gw.0 and Gw.0Ee format

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59771 --- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Jan 19 23:21:10 2014 New Revision: 206786 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206786&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2014-01-19 Steven G. Kargl PR libfortran/59771 PR libfortran

[Bug libfortran/59836] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Wrong outputs with rounding formats for some values.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59836 --- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Jan 19 23:21:10 2014 New Revision: 206786 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206786&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2014-01-19 Steven G. Kargl PR libfortran/59771 PR libfortra

[Bug c++/59873] The value of char32_t U'\u0000' and char16_t u'\u000' is 1, instead of 0.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59873 --- Comment #8 from Wesley J. Landaker --- Just as an additional point, L'\u' also yields a wchar_t with the value of 1. (If that is an illegal construct, it is not warned about when using -Wall -Wextra -Werror).

[Bug c++/59873] The value of char32_t U'\u0000' and char16_t u'\u000' is 1, instead of 0.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59873 --- Comment #9 from Wesley J. Landaker --- This also happens in strings, e.g.: static_assert(U"\u"[0] == 1, "this passes"); static_assert(U"\u"[0] == 0, "this fails");

[Bug other/59882] dev-cpp/xsd: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59882 --- Comment #2 from David Kredba --- c-reduce at --sllooww> namespace std { template < class, class > struct pair; template < typename _Iterator > struct iterator_traits { typedef typename _Iterator::value_type value_type; }; template < typen

[Bug other/36150] colorize output of gcc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36150 bluetooth.developer at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bluetooth.developer

[Bug c/59884] New: Unexpected warning pragma GCC target

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59884 Bug ID: 59884 Summary: Unexpected warning pragma GCC target Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c A

[Bug target/59884] Unexpected warning pragma GCC target

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59884 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |target --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug target/59884] Unexpected warning pragma GCC target

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59884 --- Comment #2 from Joey Ye --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > Comes from: > if (p->target_binary != target_option_current_node) > { > (void) targetm.target_option.pragma_parse (NULL_TREE, > p->target_binary); > ta

[Bug ipa/59882] [4.9 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59882 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Keywords|

[Bug lto/55113] ICE with LTO and -fshort-double

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55113 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|ICE in |ICE with LTO and |emit_

[Bug target/59880] ix86_avoid_lea_for_addr is buggy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59880 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Component|rtl-optimization|target Target Milestone|---

[Bug target/58945] Improve atomic_compare_and_swap*_doubleword pattern

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58945 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED