[Bug libgcc/58571] New: Warning while building gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58571 Bug ID: 58571 Summary: Warning while building gcc Product: gcc Version: 4.7.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority: P3 Component: libgcc Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mirraz1 at rambler dot ru While building gcc-4.7.3 I'v got this compilation warning: gcc-4.7.3/libgcc/crtstuff.c:451:19: warning: array subscript is above array bounds [-Warray-bounds]
[Bug tree-optimization/58483] missing optimization opportunity for const std::vector compared to std::array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58483 --- Comment #5 from dennis luehring --- but clang 3.3 produces only the optimized output when using -O2 (-O3 still invokes the loop optimizer too early - but this is a known bug) so it seems that the llvm/clang developers think that new/delete can be removed the same way as malloc/free
[Bug c/58564] possible wrong code bug at -O0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58564 --- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson --- (In reply to John Regehr from comment #3) > Kai, this is a real bug, please reopen it. > > Here is what I get out of -fdump-tree-original: > > b = (int) (d == &c && a != 1); > > This is wrong. > > One way to illustrate the problem is to remove the useless comma operator > from the test case, which now looks like this (I've also added parens around > the ^): I can confirm this observation. Adding parentheses around the "a ^ 1" makes no difference, but removing the comma operator and its left operand "0, " makes 4.7 to trunk compute the same result as 4.6 and older did.
[Bug libgcc/58571] Warning while building gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58571 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution|--- |INVALID --- Comment #1 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- Not a problem. See: http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FAQ#stage1warnings
[Bug libstdc++/58562] std::sort fails with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG enabled, whose bug?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58562
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This looks like rockstar programmer work here:
bool operator< (const matrixVectorProdTerm &j) const {
return (hentry < j.hentry) || (gentry < j.gentry) || (dest < j.dest);
};
http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/StrictWeakOrdering.html
[Bug libstdc++/58562] std::sort fails with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG enabled, whose bug?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58562 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- Specifically it fails this requirement: matrixVectorProdTerm a(1, 0, 0); matrixVectorProdTerm b(0, 1, 0); assert( !(a
[Bug libstdc++/58562] std::sort fails with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG enabled, whose bug?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58562 --- Comment #7 from Joshua N Pritikin --- Ah, I see. Thanks for pointing out my stupidity. :-)
[Bug bootstrap/58572] New: [4.9 regression] make install uses -Wno-narrowing with system compiler which does not know about it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58572 Bug ID: 58572 Summary: [4.9 regression] make install uses -Wno-narrowing with system compiler which does not know about it Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: bootstrap Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: gerald at pfeifer dot com Created attachment 30926 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30926&action=edit Build log for a non-parallel build and install that shows the failure On i386-unknown-freebsd10.0, amd64-unknown-freebsd8.3, and I assume any system that has a sufficiently old version of GCC as the system compiler installation now fails as follows: gmake[2]: Entering directory `/scratch/tmp/gerald/OBJ-0927-1848/gcc' g++ -c -DIN_GCC_FRONTEND -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -W -Wall -Wno-narrowing -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wmissing-format-attribute -pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros -Wno-overlength-strings -Werror -fno-common -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -Ic -I/scratch/tmp/gerald/gcc-HEAD/gcc ...[-I options]... -o c/c-lang.o -MT c/c-lang.o -MMD -MP -MF c/.deps/c-lang.TPo /scratch/tmp/gerald/gcc-HEAD/gcc/c/c-lang.c cc1plus: error: unrecognized command line option "-Wno-narrowing" gmake[2]: *** [c/c-lang.o] Error 1 gmake[1]: *** [install-gcc] Error 2 gmake: *** [install] Error 2 g++ here is GCC 4.2 which does not know about -Wnarrowing. And configuring for and building stage 1 we correctly identify that checking whether gcc supports -Wnarrowing... no and this flag was not used during stage 1. This works until and including r202892 | law | 2013-09-25 15:33:34.
[Bug tree-optimization/57719] [4.8/4.9 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57719 --- Comment #6 from Mikael Pettersson --- The wrong-code for tests #3 and #4 (both 4.9-only regressions) was fixed by Richard's PR58223 patch in r202096.
[Bug libgcc/58571] Warning while building gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58571 --- Comment #2 from Ilya --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #1) > Not a problem. See: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FAQ#stage1warnings > GCC is built in stages. The first stage uses the system compiler, which may > have bugs or not handle special conversion type characters handled by the GCC > version being built (this particular warning). Therefore, warnings produced > by the system compiler are often wrong. Please, do not report them. The system compiler for the first stage was also gcc-4.7.3
[Bug ada/58573] New: Bug box on return conditional expression with an imported function
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58573 Bug ID: 58573 Summary: Bug box on return conditional expression with an imported function Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority: P3 Component: ada Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: laguest at archeia dot com Created attachment 30927 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30927&action=edit Minimal files to cause bug box. After defining a function which imports another C function and using this as the return type in a conditional expression, I get a bug box. $ gnatmake -gnatd.n -c debug.adb gcc -c -gnatd.n debug.adb /home/laguest/opt/tinyada/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.0/adainclude/system.ads debug.adb debug.ads /home/laguest/opt/tinyada/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.0/adainclude/interfac.ads /home/laguest/opt/tinyada/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.0/adainclude/i-c.ads /home/laguest/opt/tinyada/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.0/adainclude/s-parame.ads /home/laguest/opt/tinyada/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.0/adainclude/s-stalib.ads /home/laguest/opt/tinyada/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.0/adainclude/ada.ads /home/laguest/opt/tinyada/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.0/adainclude/a-unccon.ads /home/laguest/opt/tinyada/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.0/adainclude/s-exctab.ads +===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+ | 4.9.0 20130916 (experimental) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Assert_Failure nlists.adb:930| | Error detected at debug.adb:23:7 | | Please submit a bug report; see http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html.| | Use a subject line meaningful to you and us to track the bug.| | Include the entire contents of this bug box in the report. | | Include the exact gcc or gnatmake command that you entered. | | Also include sources listed below in gnatchop format | | (concatenated together with no headers between files). | +==+ Please include these source files with error report Note that list may not be accurate in some cases, so please double check that the problem can still be reproduced with the set of files listed. Consider also -gnatd.n switch (see debug.adb). debug.adb debug.ads compilation abandoned gnatmake: "debug.adb" compilation error I can get around the bug by changing the code to a temporary c.int and doing the test on that. ... Error : C.int := SDL_Pixel_Format_Enum_To_Masks (Format, Bits, Red_Mask, Green_Mask, Blue_Mask, Alpha_Mask); begin return (if Error = 1 then True else False); end To_Masks; ...
[Bug c++/58536] [c++1y] ICE with auto in constructor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58536 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail. ||com --- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler --- This code snippet is not valid, not even in C++14. Could you explain why you think it would be valid?
[Bug c++/58548] [4.9 Regression] [c++1y] ICE with local struct in function with auto parameter
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58548 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail. ||com --- Comment #2 from Daniel Krügler --- This is invalid code. The auto placeholder in the position of a parameter is only valid for polymorphic lambda closures.
[Bug c++/58549] [4.9 Regression] [c++1y] ICE with local function in function with auto parameter
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58549 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail. ||com --- Comment #4 from Daniel Krügler --- This is invalid code (auto as decl-specifier only supported by polymorphic lambda closures)
[Bug c++/58561] [c++11] ICE using declaration of function with auto in return type
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58561 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail. ||com --- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler --- The code is invalid under C++11 but should be valid under C++14
[Bug target/58574] New: [4.9 Regression] Wrong code due to s390x machine reorg pass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58574 Bug ID: 58574 Summary: [4.9 Regression] Wrong code due to s390x machine reorg pass Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org CC: krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org Created attachment 30928 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30928&action=edit scipy.C The attached testcase is miscompiled with -O2 -march=z10 -m64 on s390x-linux. foo function starts with: cfdbr %r1,5,%f0 clijle %r1,93,.L70 .L68: larl%r5,.L586 but doesn't initialize %r5 at all at label .L70 or after it (that is the switch), while various cases use %r5.
[Bug tree-optimization/57719] [4.8/4.9 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57719 --- Comment #7 from Mikael Pettersson --- The wrong-code for tests #1 and #2 (both 4.8/4.9 regressions) was also fixed for 4.9 by Richard's PR58223 patch in r202096. That patch has been backported to 4.8 branch, and the tests do work with current 4.8.
[Bug target/58574] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Wrong code due to s390x machine reorg pass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58574 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.8.2 Summary|[4.9 Regression] Wrong code |[4.8/4.9 Regression] Wrong |due to s390x machine reorg |code due to s390x machine |pass|reorg pass --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Reproduced with 4.8 branch too.
[Bug c++/52094] ICE on definition of nested class in wrong namespace scope with wrong nested-name-qualifier
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52094
arnaut.billings at yahoo dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arnaut.billings at yahoo dot
com
--- Comment #6 from arnaut.billings at yahoo dot com ---
Cygwin gcc (GCC) 4.7.3
Nested class in wrong class with typedef name qualifier also causes a
segmentation fault:
struct Foo
{
struct Impl;
};
struct Bar
{
typedef Foo base_type;
struct base_type::Impl
{
};
};
Note: if "struct base_type::Impl" is changed to "struct Foo::Impl" then it will
produce an error message.
[Bug target/10901] non-local goto's don't work on darwin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10901 --- Comment #28 from Iain Sandoe --- Author: iains Date: Sun Sep 29 20:14:39 2013 New Revision: 203019 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203019&root=gcc&view=rev Log: gcc: PR target/10901 * config/darwin-protos.h (machopic_get_function_picbase): New. * config/darwin.c (machopic_get_function_picbase): New. * config/rs6000/darwin.md (load_macho_picbase_si): Update picbase label for a new func. (load_macho_picbase_di): Likewise. (reload_macho_picbase): New expand. (reload_macho_picbase_si): New insn. (reload_macho_picbase_di): New insn. (nonlocal_goto_receiver): New define and split. * config/rs6000/rs6000.md (unspec enum): Add UNSPEC_RELD_MPIC. (unspecv enum): Add UNSPECV_NLGR. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/config/darwin-protos.h trunk/gcc/config/darwin.c trunk/gcc/config/rs6000/darwin.md trunk/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.md
[Bug target/58574] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Wrong code due to s390x machine reorg pass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58574 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2013-09-29 CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1
[Bug c++/58536] [c++1y] ICE with auto in constructor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58536 --- Comment #2 from Volker Reichelt --- It's a GNU extension as mentioned in the ChangeLog: 2013-09-16 Adam Butcher * cp-tree.h (type_uses_auto_or_concept): Declare. (is_auto_or_concept): Declare. * decl.c (grokdeclarator): Allow 'auto' parameters in lambdas with -std=gnu++1y or -std=c++1y or, as a GNU extension, in plain functions. [...]
[Bug c++/58548] [4.9 Regression] [c++1y] ICE with local struct in function with auto parameter
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58548 --- Comment #3 from Volker Reichelt --- It's a GNU extension, see comment #2 in PR58536.
[Bug c++/58549] [4.9 Regression] [c++1y] ICE with local function in function with auto parameter
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58549 --- Comment #5 from Volker Reichelt --- It's a GNU extension, see comment #2 in PR58536.
[Bug c++/58575] New: gcc should compile firefox code faster.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58575 Bug ID: 58575 Summary: gcc should compile firefox code faster. Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: tsaunders at mozilla dot com CC: hubicka at ucw dot cz Its ceretainly possible given https://blog.mozilla.org/nnethercote/2013/09/12/bleg-for-a-new-machine-2/ (I'm not sure what versions njn is using but probably doesn't matter too much). I rofiled build a build of content/ in the firefox tree for a --enable-optimize --disable-debug build you can see the data I gathered at http://people.mozilla.org/~tsaunders/gcc-perf.data . The two things that came up high in profiles were C++ parsing stuff and memory allocation. I suppose there isn't too much to be done about the memory allocation issue in the short term, but I wonder if there's changes to the parser that would help at least some.
[Bug middle-end/57586] ICE when expanding volatile asm using unaligned pointer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57586 Bernd Edlinger changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de --- Comment #8 from Bernd Edlinger --- (In reply to Alan Modra from comment #7) > Fixed Sorry, this change does not look right, because you should not use EXPAND_NORMAL for an output parameter, even if it is no inout.
[Bug target/10901] non-local goto's don't work on darwin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10901 mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #29 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org --- Thanks all.
[Bug libstdc++/58576] New: std::regex_match() reports mismatched braces on a valid regex
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58576 Bug ID: 58576 Summary: std::regex_match() reports mismatched braces on a valid regex Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: galens at capaccess dot org Created attachment 30929 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30929&action=edit Archive containing the g++ -v -save-temps compile log, the generated .ii file and the original .cpp with the minimum-to-reproduce test case. I attempted to use a regex to validate qualified hostnames. However, when I used the regex from this thread ( http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1418423/the-hostname-regex ), with or without replacing the [0-9A-Za-z] with [:alnum:] (and properly escaping the backslashes), I get a regex_error exception thrown on std::regex_match() call, with a regex_constants::error_brack as the reported code(). Using: An unmodified copy of gcc 4.8.1 20130603 from the Fedora 19 primary repository (rpm ver: 4.8.1-1.fc19 ) (I use 4-spaces-per-tab in my source code, which isn't relevant for the code, but might make hand-tracing of Parens, Braces, and Brackets I did in comments more understandable.) (And, yes, I know replacing [0-9A-Za-z] with [:alnum:] isn't a legitimate change WRT domain name validity, unless I force a 'C' locale. It was just easier to read when hunting down this issue.)
[Bug libstdc++/58576] std::regex_match() reports mismatched braces on a valid regex
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58576 Galen G Brownsmith changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #30929|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #1 from Galen G Brownsmith --- Created attachment 30930 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30930&action=edit re-uploading my tar.gz -- fixed an independent but potentially distracting typo. There was a case where part of the regex read "(?(?:" rather than "(?:(?:". Fixed that, behvior remains.
[Bug target/56853] GNU Fortran is not working
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56853 msharp at TxBiomed dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msharp at TxBiomed dot org --- Comment #2 from msharp at TxBiomed dot org --- Created attachment 30931 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30931&action=edit x86_64-apple-darwin12/libgfortran/config.log Ran: sudo port upgrade outdated
[Bug c++/58568] [4.8/4.9 Regression] [c++11] ICE with lambda in invalid template variable definition
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58568 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2013-09-30 CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org, ||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- Started with r196742.
[Bug c/58564] possible wrong code bug at -O0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58564 Kai Tietz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Last reconfirmed||2013-09-30 Resolution|INVALID |--- Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #5 from Kai Tietz --- Sorry, missed that outer condition is 0 > ... boolean-typed-expr. Can confirm this issue. Btw this condition has to be always false for unsigned 1-bit precision typed integrals.
