[Bug c++/27292] New: ICE on casts on bitfields

2006-04-24 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 
trunk r113199, fixing bug 26534, introduced an ICE with this testcase: 

=== Cut ===
enum ColorRole
{
  WindowText, Button
};

struct QPalette {

ColorRole bg_role:8;

 bool hasBackground();
};


bool
QPalette::hasBackground ()
 {
   return (ColorRole (bg_role) != WindowText);
   }

=== Cut ===

internal compiler error: in build_c_cast, at cp/typeck.c:5433
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.


-- 
   Summary: ICE on casts on bitfields
   Product: gcc
   Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27292

[Bug c++/27292] [4.2 regression] ICE on casts on bitfields

2006-04-24 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org
   Severity|normal  |major
   Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Summary|ICE on casts on bitfields   |[4.2 regression] ICE on
   ||casts on bitfields
Version|unknown |4.2.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27292

[Bug c++/27292] [4.2 regression] ICE on casts on bitfields

2006-04-25 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-04-25 11:46 ---
the original testcase still ICEs. however now in gimplify.c:5492


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
 Resolution|FIXED   |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27292

[Bug tree-optimization/26626] [4.2 Regression] ICE in in add_virtual_operand

2006-05-03 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #24 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-03 13:02 
---
closing as fixed then. Thanks !


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26626

[Bug c++/27471] New: [4.2 Regression] ICE within build_c_cast cp/typeck.c:5434

2006-05-07 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 
Hi, 

due to the bitfield handling changes, C++ frontend now ICEs on this: 

=== Cut===
struct A { unsigned a:8; };

extern void b(unsigned char);

void breakme (A f)
{
  b((unsigned char) f.a);
}
=== Cut ===
bitfield-ice-1.cc: In function 'void breakme(A)':
bitfield-ice-1.cc:7: internal compiler error: in build_c_cast, at
cp/typeck.c:5434
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.


-- 
   Summary: [4.2 Regression] ICE within build_c_cast
cp/typeck.c:5434
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
    ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27471

[Bug c/27273] [4.2 regression] tree check fail for legal code when convert returns a constant from an expression that was not constant

2006-05-08 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #7 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-08 08:40 ---
Ah, just missed it by a few minutes :)

I've been using this patch: 

=== CUT ===
--- c-common.c  (revision 113532)
+++ c-common.c  (working copy)
@@ -1077,7 +1077,7 @@ convert_and_check (tree type, tree expr)
   tree t = convert (type, expr);
   if (TREE_CODE (t) == INTEGER_CST)
 {
-  if (TREE_OVERFLOW (t))
+  if (TREE_OVERFLOW (t) && CONSTANT_CLASS_P (expr))
{
  TREE_OVERFLOW (t) = 0;

=== CUT ===

and it seems to bootstrap and regtest fine (not closely checked against
vanilla tree yet). 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27273

[Bug tree-optimization/22303] CCP does not handle STRING_CSTs

2006-05-08 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #5 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-08 10:06 ---
I'll try taking care. 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22303

[Bug tree-optimization/22303] CCP does not handle STRING_CSTs

2006-05-08 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22303

[Bug c++/27505] New: ICE in const folding with bitfields

2006-05-08 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 
this testcase ICE's in invert_truthvalue, fold-const.c:3149:

=== Cut ===
class QSplitterPrivate;
class QSplitter
{
  void setResizeMode ();
  QSplitterPrivate *d_func ();
};
struct QSplitterPrivate
{
  bool compatMode:8;
};

void
QSplitter::setResizeMode ()
{
  QSplitterPrivate *const d = d_func ();
  if (!d->compatMode)
;
}
=== Cut ===

bitfield-ice-2.ii: In member function 'void QSplitter::setResizeMode()':
bitfield-ice-2.ii:16: internal compiler error: in invert_truthvalue, at
fold-const.c:3149
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.


-- 
   Summary: ICE in const folding with bitfields
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
    ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27505

[Bug c++/27506] New: [4.2 Regression] bitfield enum handling regression

2006-05-08 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 
the following testcase no longer compiles: 

=== Cut ===
enum EBorderStyle
{
  BNATIVE, BHIDDEN
};
class BorderValue
{
public:
  EBorderStyle style:1;
};
struct CollapsedBorderValue
{
  EBorderStyle style () const
  {
return border ? border->style : BNATIVE;
  }
  const BorderValue *border;
};
=== Cut ===


-- 
   Summary: [4.2 Regression] bitfield enum handling regression
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Keywords: rejects-valid
  Severity: critical
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27506

[Bug c++/27471] [4.2 Regression] ICE within build_c_cast cp/typeck.c:5434

2006-05-08 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-08 19:54 ---
raising severity because it triggers frequently


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Severity|normal  |major


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27471

[Bug c++/27505] [4.2 Regression] ICE in const folding with bitfields

2006-05-08 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-08 19:55 ---
triggering quite often, raising severity


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Severity|normal  |critical


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27505

[Bug c++/27506] [4.2 Regression] bitfield enum handling regression

2006-05-08 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #1 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-08 20:31 ---
error message is: 

bitfield-error-1.cc:14: error: invalid conversion from 'int' to 'EBorderStyle'


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27506

[Bug c/27273] [4.2 regression] tree check fail for legal code when convert returns a constant from an expression that was not constant

2006-05-16 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #10 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-16 08:37 
---
ok, rerunning regtest


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot  |mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
   |org |org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27273

[Bug c++/24561] no static definition at -O0

2006-05-26 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #13 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-26 18:39 
---
It also causes bootstrap failures (see PR18058)


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24561

[Bug c++/13717] duplicated parameter name not caught ?

2006-05-29 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-29 16:26 ---
it might not be invalid, but its certainly worth a diagnostic IMHO


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13717

[Bug c/27273] [4.2 regression] tree check fail for legal code when convert returns a constant from an expression that was not constant

2006-05-30 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #12 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-30 13:44 
---
Subject: Bug 27273

Author: mueller
Date: Tue May 30 13:43:55 2006
New Revision: 114238

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=114238
Log:
PR c/27273
* c-common.c (convert_and_check): only track TREE_CONSTANT_OVERFLOW
for CONSTANT_CLASS_P expressions.

* gcc.dg/overflow-warn-5.c: New testcase.

Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/overflow-warn-5.c
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/c-common.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27273

[Bug c/27273] [4.2 regression] tree check fail for legal code when convert returns a constant from an expression that was not constant

2006-05-30 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #13 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-30 13:44 
---
Fixed.


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27273

[Bug c/8268] no compile time array index checking

2006-06-08 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #40 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-06-08 15:50 
---
I've a patch, which is currently blocked by -fivopts bug


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8268

[Bug c++/28659] [4.2 regression] ICE (segfault) while compiling kdelibs 4.0 snapshot

2006-08-13 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-08-13 12:48 ---
I'm currently testing this patch: 

--- cp/decl2.c  (revision 116108)
+++ cp/decl2.c  (working copy)
@@ -1541,7 +1541,7 @@ static tree
 min_vis_r (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees, void *data)
 {
   int *vis_p = (int *)data;
-  if (! TYPE_P (*tp))
+  if (! TYPE_P (*tp) || ! IS_AGGR_TYPE (*tp))
 {
   *walk_subtrees = 0;
 }


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed|2006-08-08 20:50:40 |2006-08-13 12:48:44
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28659

[Bug c++/28659] [4.2 regression] ICE (segfault) while compiling kdelibs 4.0 snapshot

2006-08-18 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #7 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-08-18 17:55 ---
struct oD.1993:
  type_0 type_5 type_6 BLK
size 
constant invariant 0>
unit size  constant invariant 0>
align 8 symtab 0 alias set -1
attributes 
local bindings <(nil)>>
value 
readonly constant invariant static "default\000">>>
no-binfo use_template=1 interface-unknown>

the original type is:
oD.1985::

  type_0 type_5 type_6 BLK
size 
unit size 
align 8 symtab 0 alias set -1
attributes 
local bindings <(nil)>>
value 
readonly constant invariant static "default\000">>>
no-binfo use_template=1 interface-unknown>
QI
size 
constant invariant 8>
unit size  constant invariant 1>
align 8 symtab 0 alias set -1 method basetype >
arg-types >
unsigned SI
size 
unit size 
align 32 symtab 0 alias set -1>
chain >>>


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28659

[Bug c++/28659] [4.2 regression] ICE (segfault) while compiling kdelibs 4.0 snapshot

2006-08-22 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #9 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-08-22 09:19 ---
Thanks Jason! I'll regtest immediately. 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28659

[Bug c++/26167] -Wconversion fails to detect signedness conversion from int to unsigned int in fuction call

2006-09-18 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #11 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-09-18 12:11 
---
yes please. Actually I created my own patch for bringing the C++ frontend on
ear with the C frontend, but I didn't submit it because it produced bazillions
of (legal) warnings in the code I usually compile, too many to be useful. 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26167

[Bug c++/26785] "extra qualification" error gives line number of end of declaration

2006-10-16 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-10-16 15:22 ---
ehm, this is the same with any warning/error message? why would this case be
special?


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26785

[Bug c++/7302] -Wnon-virtual-dtor should't complain of protected dtor

2006-10-16 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Keywords||patch
   Last reconfirmed|2005-12-11 23:01:26 |2006-10-16 15:26:28
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7302

[Bug c++/18410] GCC does not warn about hidden methods

2006-10-16 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #4 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-10-16 15:34 ---
use -Woverloaded-virtual


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org
 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||WORKSFORME


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18410

[Bug c++/24525] g++ fails to warn when converting UDT through double to int

2006-10-16 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Severity|trivial |minor


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24525

[Bug c++/26167] -Wconversion fails to detect signedness conversion from int to unsigned int in fuction call

2006-10-16 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #14 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-10-16 15:37 
---
*** Bug 26298 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||m dot becker at spider-
   ||software dot net


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26167

[Bug c++/26298] -Wconversion fails to detect signedness change during widening conversion

2006-10-16 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-10-16 15:37 ---


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26167 ***


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||DUPLICATE


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26298

[Bug c++/29485] New: missing diagnostic when declared inline in class declaration

2006-10-16 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 
Hi, 

this testcase fails to produce a "return value missing" diagnostic: 

=== Cut ===

class test
{
bool fii(test* other)
{
if (!other) return false;
}

};

=== Cut ===

Interestingly, it works when declared outside the class itself, which makes me
suspect that this is caused by some C++ parser oddity.


-- 
   Summary: missing diagnostic when declared inline in class
declaration
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Keywords: diagnostic
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29485

[Bug c++/21678] Using inline disables warnings about missing return statements

2006-10-17 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #5 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-10-17 09:34 ---
take a look at the testcase in bugreport 29485 - there it should have at least
instantiated the method


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21678

[Bug debug/30629] New: [Regression:4.3/4.2] -g causes undefined references

2007-01-29 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 
Consider this testcase: 

=== Cut ===
static int hacky_auxmaps[2];
static signed int auxmap_used = 0;
static int *auxmap = &hacky_auxmaps[0];

static void
mc_pre_reg_read ( unsigned  size)
{
  vgPlain_message ("memcheck: auxmaps: %d auxmap entries in use", auxmap_used);
}
=== Cut ===

compiling it with -O2 -g results in an undefined reference to "hacky_auxmaps".
just compiling with -O2 or with -O0 fixes it.


-- 
   Summary: [Regression:4.3/4.2] -g causes undefined references
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
  GCC host triplet: i686-suse-linux


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30629

[Bug middle-end/30636] [4.3 Regression] incorrect array bounds warning on multi-dimensional arrays

2007-01-30 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #3 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-01-30 13:09 ---
I'm not flagging this as diagnostic for now, because it is imho still a bug in
ccp that could cause other side-effects (aliasing analysis?). 

if it is clear that the only problem this causes is the warning then I'll
happily add a suppression for this case. 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords|diagnostic  |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30636

[Bug c++/30601] [4.3 regression] -Wreturn-type warns about more than what the documentation says

2007-01-30 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #13 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-01-30 16:20 
---
Subject: Bug 30601

Author: mueller
Date: Tue Jan 30 16:20:06 2007
New Revision: 121342

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=121342
Log:
2007-01-30  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   PR c++/30601
   * doc/invoke.texi (-Wreturn-type): Update description to
   match new behavior.

Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/doc/invoke.texi


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30601

[Bug c/8268] no compile time array index checking

2007-01-30 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #45 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-01-30 17:17 
---
Subject: Bug 8268

Author: mueller
Date: Tue Jan 30 17:17:39 2007
New Revision: 121346

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=121346
Log:
backport from mainline:

  2007-01-21  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PR bootstrap/30511
* tree-vrp.c (check_array_bounds): do not warn
about ADDR_EXPR's of ARRAY_REF's which are immediately
used in binary expressions.

  2007-01-19  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

* config/i386.h (CONDITIONAL_REGISTER_USAGE): Store
result of PIC_OFFSET_TABLE_REGNUM in temporary variable to avoid
duplicate evaluation.

  2007-01-18  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PR diagnostic/8268
* doc/invoke.texi (Warray-bounds): Document -Warray-bounds.
* common.opt (Warray-bounds): Add new warning option.
* c-opts.c (c_common_handle_option): Define -Warray-bounds
if -Wall is given.
* Makefile.in: make tree-vrp.o depend on toplev.h
* tree-vrp.c (vrp_finalize): Call check_array_refs if
* -Warray-bounds
is enabled.
(check_array_refs, check_array_bounds, check_array_ref): New.


Added:
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-2.C
  - copied unchanged from r120898,
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-2.C
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds.C
  - copied unchanged from r120898,
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds.C
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Warray-bounds-2.c
  - copied unchanged from r120898,
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Warray-bounds-2.c
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Warray-bounds.c
  - copied unchanged from r120898,
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Warray-bounds.c
Modified:
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/Makefile.in
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/c-opts.c
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/common.opt
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/config/i386/i386.h
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/tree-vrp.c


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8268

[Bug bootstrap/30511] False array bound check causes gcc failed to boostrap

2007-01-30 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #9 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-01-30 17:18 ---
Subject: Bug 30511

Author: mueller
Date: Tue Jan 30 17:17:39 2007
New Revision: 121346

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=121346
Log:
backport from mainline:

  2007-01-21  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PR bootstrap/30511
* tree-vrp.c (check_array_bounds): do not warn
about ADDR_EXPR's of ARRAY_REF's which are immediately
used in binary expressions.

  2007-01-19  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

* config/i386.h (CONDITIONAL_REGISTER_USAGE): Store
result of PIC_OFFSET_TABLE_REGNUM in temporary variable to avoid
duplicate evaluation.

  2007-01-18  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PR diagnostic/8268
* doc/invoke.texi (Warray-bounds): Document -Warray-bounds.
* common.opt (Warray-bounds): Add new warning option.
* c-opts.c (c_common_handle_option): Define -Warray-bounds
if -Wall is given.
* Makefile.in: make tree-vrp.o depend on toplev.h
* tree-vrp.c (vrp_finalize): Call check_array_refs if
* -Warray-bounds
is enabled.
(check_array_refs, check_array_bounds, check_array_ref): New.


Added:
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-2.C
  - copied unchanged from r120898,
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-2.C
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds.C
  - copied unchanged from r120898,
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds.C
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Warray-bounds-2.c
  - copied unchanged from r120898,
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Warray-bounds-2.c
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Warray-bounds.c
  - copied unchanged from r120898,
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Warray-bounds.c
Modified:
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/Makefile.in
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/c-opts.c
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/common.opt
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/config/i386/i386.h
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
branches/suse/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/tree-vrp.c


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30511

[Bug middle-end/30636] [4.3 Regression] incorrect array bounds warning on multi-dimensional arrays

2007-01-31 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30636

[Bug middle-end/30636] [4.3 Regression] incorrect array bounds warning on multi-dimensional arrays

2007-02-01 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #8 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-02-01 13:27 ---
removing diagnostic keyword again. This is latent wrong-code. 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|mueller at gcc dot gnu dot  |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
   |org |org
   Keywords|diagnostic  |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30636

[Bug bootstrap/30510] [4.3 Regression] Gcc failed to bootstrap

2007-02-05 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #21 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-02-05 12:43 
---
Subject: Bug 30510

Author: mueller
Date: Mon Feb  5 12:43:17 2007
New Revision: 121596

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=121596
Log:
2007-02-05  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   PR bootstrap/30510
   * parser.c (cp_parser_class_specifier): Always initialize bases.

Modified:
trunk/gcc/cp/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/cp/parser.c


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30510

[Bug bootstrap/30510] [4.3 Regression] Gcc failed to bootstrap

2007-02-05 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #22 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-02-05 12:43 
---
Fixed in 4.3. 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30510

[Bug c/17946] wanted: warning for "a && MASK" when "a & MASK" was probably intended

2007-02-19 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #12 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-02-19 10:21 
---
I've submitted a patch


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17946

[Bug c++/30860] Should warn about boolean constant false used in pointer context

2007-02-19 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #1 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-02-19 16:43 ---
manu, is this something already covered by your pending -Wconversion fixes?


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||manu at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30860

[Bug c++/30860] Should warn about boolean constant false used in pointer context

2007-02-19 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2007-02-19 20:21:31
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30860

[Bug c++/30860] Should warn about boolean constant false used in pointer context

2007-02-19 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-02-19 20:23 ---
there is an implicit value conversion, boolean "false" to address "0". I think
that is the definition of -Wconversion, no?

anyway, I'll work on a patch. 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30860

[Bug middle-end/31058] New: array overflow warning due to incorrect loop unrolling

2007-03-06 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 
building this testcase with -O2 -march=athlon -Wall -fprefetch-loop-arrays
gives:

warning: array subscript is above array bounds
[...]

which, according to VRP, seems to be valid. 

testcase is:

=== Cut ===
struct real_value
{
  unsigned int cl:2;
  unsigned int decimal:1;
  unsigned long sig[5];
};
unsigned int uexp;

static void
clear_significand_below (struct real_value *r, unsigned int n)
{
  int i, w = n / 32;
  for (i = 0; i < w; ++i)
r->sig[i] = 0;
}
void
do_fix_trunc (struct real_value *r)
{
  if (uexp < 160)
clear_significand_below (r, 160 - uexp);
}
=== Cut ===


-- 
   Summary: array overflow warning due to incorrect loop unrolling
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31058

[Bug middle-end/31058] array overflow warning due to incorrect loop unrolling

2007-03-06 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #1 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-06 15:22 ---
after prefetch-loop-arrays run, vrp2 looks like this: 

:;
  D.1885_87 = &r_4(D)->sig[i_13];
  D.1886_88 = D.1885_87 + 160B;
  __builtin_prefetch (D.1886_88, 1);
  r_4(D)->sig[i_13] = 0;
  i_8 = i_13 + 1;
  i_26 = i_8;
  r_4(D)->sig[i_26] = 0;
  i_28 = i_26 + 1;
  i_30 = i_28;
  r_4(D)->sig[i_30] = 0;
  i_32 = i_30 + 1;
  i_34 = i_32;
  r_4(D)->sig[i_34] = 0;
  i_36 = i_34 + 1;
  i_38 = i_36;
  r_4(D)->sig[i_38] = 0;
  i_40 = i_38 + 1;
  i_42 = i_40;
  r_4(D)->sig[i_42] = 0;
  i_44 = i_42 + 1;
  i_46 = i_44;
  r_4(D)->sig[i_46] = 0;
  i_48 = i_46 + 1;
  i_50 = i_48;
  r_4(D)->sig[i_50] = 0;
  i_52 = i_50 + 1;
  i_54 = i_52;
  r_4(D)->sig[i_54] = 0;
  i_56 = i_54 + 1;
  i_58 = i_56;
  r_4(D)->sig[i_58] = 0;
  i_60 = i_58 + 1;
  i_62 = i_60;
  r_4(D)->sig[i_62] = 0;
  i_64 = i_62 + 1;
  i_66 = i_64;
  r_4(D)->sig[i_66] = 0;
  i_68 = i_66 + 1;
  i_70 = i_68;
  r_4(D)->sig[i_70] = 0;
  i_72 = i_70 + 1;
  i_74 = i_72;
  r_4(D)->sig[i_74] = 0;
  i_76 = i_74 + 1;
  i_78 = i_76;
  r_4(D)->sig[i_78] = 0;
[...]

and so on. since it definitely writes more than 5 ints, I don't see how it
should *not* overflow the array. 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31058

[Bug middle-end/31058] bogus array overflow warnings in unrolled loops

2007-03-07 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #7 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-07 10:59 ---
I don't think this is the same testcase. you will get any warning in this case,
because the compiler cannot determine that it is supposed to be dead code. 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|bogus array overflow|bogus array overflow
   |warnings in unreachable code|warnings in unrolled loops


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31058

[Bug middle-end/31058] bogus array overflow warnings in unrolled loops

2007-03-07 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #9 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-07 11:34 ---
well, the unrolled body is generated code, it could set TREE_NO_WARNING (for
example). or it could avoid unrolling if its not a flex array. 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31058

[Bug middle-end/31058] overflow warnings should not be enabled with -Wall

2007-03-07 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2007-03-07 21:55:36
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31058

[Bug middle-end/31058] overflow warnings should not be enabled with -Wall

2007-03-07 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #18 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-07 22:03 
---
IIRC there are some cases that are only caught in the 2nd vrp run. It is still
a possibility if this bug cannot be fixed otherwise. 

However, I don't see the issue with this testcase. 

a) its not a flex array
b) the unrolled loop produces out of bounds accesses
c) hence, the unrolled version cannot ever be used
d) it shouldn't be produced in the first place. 

we can turn this bug about a false positive warning into a code bloat
regression by removing the warning (or disabling it from -Wall). That doesn't
fix it though. 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31058

[Bug middle-end/31058] overflow warnings should not be enabled with -Wall

2007-03-08 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #23 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-08 21:32 
---
Great, this patch makes a -fprefetch-loop-arrays bootstrap succeed. I think
LSHIFT_EXPR should be handled similar. 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31058

[Bug c/17946] wanted: warning for "a && MASK" when "a & MASK" was probably intended

2007-03-09 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #13 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-09 16:16 
---
Subject: Bug 17946

Author: mueller
Date: Fri Mar  9 16:16:35 2007
New Revision: 122751

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122751
Log:
2007-03-09  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   PR c++/17946
   * doc/invoke.texi (-Wlogical-op): Document.
   * common.opt (-Wlogical-op): New.
   * c-common.h (warn_logical_operator): Declare.
   * c-common.c (warn_logical_operator): Define.
   * c-typeck.c (parser_build_binary_op): Call
   warn_logical_operator.

   * cp/call.c (build_new_op): Call warn_logical_operator.

   * testsuite/gcc.dg/Wlogical-op-1.c: New.
   * testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wlogical-op-1.C: New.

Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wlogical-op-1.C
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Wlogical-op-1.c
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/c-common.c
trunk/gcc/c-common.h
trunk/gcc/c-typeck.c
trunk/gcc/common.opt
trunk/gcc/cp/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/cp/call.c
trunk/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17946

[Bug c/17946] wanted: warning for "a && MASK" when "a & MASK" was probably intended

2007-03-09 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #14 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-09 16:17 
---
Fixed for 4.3.


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED
   Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17946

[Bug c/17946] wanted: warning for "a && MASK" when "a & MASK" was probably intended

2007-03-10 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #17 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-10 17:26 
---
Subject: Bug 17946

Author: mueller
Date: Sat Mar 10 17:26:33 2007
New Revision: 122798

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122798
Log:
2007-03-10  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   PR c++/17946
   * gcc.dg/Wlogical-op-1.c: Remove duplicated part.
   * g++.dg/warn/Wlogical-op-1.C: Remove duplicated part.

Modified:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17946

[Bug c++/30860] Should warn about boolean constant false used in pointer context

2007-03-14 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #10 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-14 23:17 
---
Subject: Bug 30860

Author: mueller
Date: Wed Mar 14 23:17:03 2007
New Revision: 122934

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122934
Log:
2007-03-15  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PR c++/30860
* call.c (convert_conversion_warnings): New..
(convert_like_real): .. factored out from here.
(convert_conversion_warnings): Add warning about
false being converted to NULL in argument passing.

* g++.dg/warn/Wconversion2.C: New.


Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wconversion2.C
Modified:
trunk/gcc/cp/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/cp/call.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30860

[Bug c++/30860] Should warn about boolean constant false used in pointer context

2007-03-14 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #11 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-14 23:20 
---
Fixed for 4.3.


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED
   Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30860

[Bug middle-end/30864] [4.3 Regression] ice for legal code with -O2

2007-03-19 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-19 13:21 ---
it seems to be caused by -r121780


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30864

[Bug middle-end/30864] [4.3 Regression] ice for legal code with -O2

2007-03-20 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #7 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-20 12:48 ---
testcase works after PR31146 fix

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 31146 ***


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||DUPLICATE


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30864

[Bug tree-optimization/31146] forwprop does not look through casts

2007-03-20 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #8 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-20 12:48 ---
*** Bug 30864 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31146

[Bug tree-optimization/31227] [4.3 Regression] -Warray-bounds doesn't play together with loop optimizations

2007-03-21 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #3 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-21 09:05 ---
both are caused by our well known offender -fivopts. 

the problem why the existing workarounds don't work is because the adress is
first converted to unsigned int before +/- modification is done. the traversal
stops at the type conversion. I'm currently working on fixing that. 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31227

[Bug tree-optimization/31227] [4.3 Regression] -Warray-bounds doesn't play together with loop optimizations

2007-03-21 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #4 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-21 14:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=13242)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13242&action=view)
patch

this is the patch I'm currently testing. would be nice if you could confirm
that this is also fixing your obj-c++ bootstrap problem (which I cannot
reproduce). 

Thanks.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31227

[Bug tree-optimization/31227] [4.3 Regression] -Warray-bounds doesn't play together with loop optimizations

2007-03-21 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31227

[Bug tree-optimization/31227] [4.3 Regression] -Warray-bounds doesn't play together with loop optimizations

2007-04-18 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-04-18 21:09 ---
Subject: Bug 31227

Author: mueller
Date: Wed Apr 18 21:09:21 2007
New Revision: 123958

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123958
Log:
2007-04-18  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   PR diagnostic/31227
   * tree-vrp.c (search_for_addr_array): New.
   (check_array_bounds): Suppress warning about
   address taken of array refs if its not de-referenced.

   * gcc.dg/Warray-bounds-3.c: New.

Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Warray-bounds-3.c
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/tree-vrp.c


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31227

[Bug tree-optimization/31227] [4.3 Regression] -Warray-bounds doesn't play together with loop optimizations

2007-04-18 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #7 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-04-18 21:10 ---
Fixed in 4.3.


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31227

[Bug c++/32756] [4.3 Regression] wrong ambiguous overload error?

2007-08-20 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #4 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-08-20 11:13 ---
ping.. any results?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32756

[Bug c++/32756] [4.3 Regression] wrong ambiguous overload error?

2007-08-20 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-08-20 12:43 ---
I`d be happy to help with testing :)


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32756

[Bug c++/33399] New: [4.2 regression] -fvisibility=hidden not working after including STL headers

2007-09-11 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 
Hi, 

g++ 4.2.1 doesn't seem to apply hidden visibility to classes after including
e.g. . 

the following testcase was reduced: 

=== Cut ===
namespace std  __attribute__ ((__visibility__ ("default")))
{
  template < typename A > class C;
  template < typename A > int foo (C < A > *);

  template < typename A > class C
  {
  public:
friend int foo<>(C  *);
  };
  extern template class C < char >;
}

struct TestClass
{
  void hidden();
};
void TestClass::hidden() {}
=== cut ===
g++ -O1 -fvisibility=hidden -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -fPIC testcase.cc -c -o
nostl.o
g++ -shared -o libnostl.so nostl.o
nm -CD libnostl.so | grep TestClass 

gives

048c T TestClass::hidden()


the symbol is properly hidden if I put the namespace std into default
visibility or otherwise try to reduce the code further.


-- 
   Summary: [4.2 regression] -fvisibility=hidden not working after
including STL headers
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
  GCC host triplet: i686-suse-linux


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33399

[Bug c++/32470] fvisibility=hidden without effect in some cases

2007-09-11 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #4 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-09-11 22:37 ---
I can confirm it as well


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2007-09-11 22:37:55
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32470

[Bug c++/33399] [4.2 regression] -fvisibility=hidden not working after including STL headers

2007-09-11 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-09-11 22:39 ---


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 32470 ***


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||DUPLICATE


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33399

[Bug c++/32470] [4.2 regression] fvisibility=hidden without effect in some cases

2007-09-11 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #5 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-09-11 22:39 ---
*** Bug 33399 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32470

[Bug middle-end/36902] Array bound warning with dead code after optimization

2008-08-25 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #22 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-08-25 07:59 
---
there is currently no good way to detect if a block is dead during the VRP
pass, as the VRP information is used for *determining* wether or not a block is
dead. 

Is there a general warning-queuing implementation that I could make use of or
is there some other warning that does that already? Iirc the "is used/ might be
used uninitialized" type of warnings do not use something like that. 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36902

[Bug target/35135] New: [4.3 regression] unable to find a register to spill in class �GENERAL_REGS�

2008-02-07 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 
gcc -v -O2 -c test.c

=== Cut ===
extension__ typedef unsigned long long int uint64_t;
typedef unsigned target_ulong;
register target_ulong T0 asm ("ebx");
register target_ulong T1 asm ("esi");
register target_ulong T2 asm ("edi");
typedef struct CPUX86State
{
  uint64_t xmm_regs[8];
}
CPUX86State;

save_raw_fp_state (CPUX86State * env)
{
  int i;
  char *addr;
  for (i = 0; i < 8; i++)
env->xmm_regs[i] = *(uint64_t *) (addr);
}
=== Cut ===

GNU C (SUSE Linux) version 4.3.0 20080131 (experimental) [trunk revision
131976] (i586-suse-linux)
compiled by GNU C version 4.3.0 20080131 (experimental) [trunk revision
131976], GMP version 4.2.2, MPFR version 2.3.1.
GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=100 --param ggc-min-heapsize=131072
Compiler executable checksum: 86307befc2a0b2e7a5d9beb62be4b74e
test.c: In function ‘save_raw_fp_state’:
test.c:18: error: unable to find a register to spill in class ‘GENERAL_REGS’
test.c:18: error: this is the insn:
(insn:HI 14 13 15 3 test.c:17 (set (mem/s:DI (plus:SI (mult:SI (reg/v:SI 64 [ i
])
(const_int 8 [0x8]))
(reg/v/f:SI 66 [ env ])) [2 .xmm_regs S8 A8])
(reg:DI 67)) 63 {*movdi_2} (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:DI 67)
(nil)))
test.c:18: confused by earlier errors, bailing out


-- 
   Summary: [4.3 regression] unable to find a register to spill in
class ‘GENERAL_REGS’
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
  GCC host triplet: i686-suse-linux


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35135

[Bug target/35135] unable to find a register to spill in class �GENERAL_REGS� with global registers

2008-02-12 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #4 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-02-12 17:18 ---
new testcase:

-O2 -fno-gcse -fomit-frame-pointer

=== Cut ===
__extension__ typedef unsigned long long int uint64_t;
typedef unsigned int target_ulong;
register struct CPUX86State *env asm ("ebp");
register target_ulong T0 asm ("ebx");
register target_ulong T1 asm ("esi");
register target_ulong T2 asm ("edi");
typedef union
{
  uint64_t _q[2];
}
XMMReg;
typedef struct CPUX86State
{
  XMMReg xmm_regs[8];
}
CPUX86State;
save_raw_fp_state (CPUX86State * env, char * ptr)
{
  int i, fpus, fptag, nb_xmm_regs;
  char *addr;
  nb_xmm_regs = 8 << 0;
  addr = ptr + 0xa0;
  for (i = 0; i < nb_xmm_regs; i++)
  {
  env->xmm_regs[i]._q[0] = *(uint64_t *) (addr);
  addr += 16;
  }
}

=== Cut ===


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35135

[Bug target/35135] unable to find a register to spill in class �GENERAL_REGS� with global registers

2008-02-12 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #3 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-02-12 16:31 ---
the original code uses -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-gcse -O2. I can verify that
-O3 fixes the issue. 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35135

[Bug c++/31775] static object mangling conflicts with extern object

2008-02-29 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #7 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-02-29 13:57 ---
how about 

extern "C" void abort();
extern "C" { static int i; }
int *p = &i;
int main()
{ 
  int i;
  { 
extern int i;
i = 1;
*p = 2;
if (i == 2)
  abort ();
  }
  return 0;
}

in this case, the "i" name should not be mangled, right?


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

     CC|                        |mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
       ||org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31775

[Bug rtl-optimization/31806] New: miscompilation with -fschedule-insns2 -fthreadsafe-statics and static variables

2007-05-03 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 
Hi, 

the testcase below aborts with gcc 4.1.3 compiled with:
g++ -O2 -fno-threadsafe-statics

=== Cut ===
extern "C" void abort(void);

struct A
{
void *d;
};

static const A& staticA()
{
static A s_static;
return s_static;
}

void assert_failed()
{
abort();
}

A testMethod()
{
static const A& s = staticA( );
if (&s == 0)
assert_failed();
return s;
}

int main()
{
testMethod();
return 0;
}

// g++ -O2 -fno-inline -fno-threadsafe-statics -o kglobaltest kglobaltest.cpp
=== Cut ===

The testcase was extracted from a KDE miscompilation. -fno-schedule-insns2
seems to work around it. 

the bug is visible in assembler:

·   call·   _Z7staticAv·#
·   movl·   _ZZ10testMethodvE1s, %ebx·  # s, s.1
·   movb·   $1, _ZGVZ10testMethodvE1s·  #,
·   testl·  %ebx, %ebx· # s.1
·   movl·   %eax, _ZZ10testMethodvE1s·  # tmp61, s

the movl %eax,_ZZ10testMethodvE1s is moved below the movl·  
_ZZ10testMethodvE1s, %ebx, which causes the bug.


-- 
   Summary: miscompilation with -fschedule-insns2 -fthreadsafe-
statics and static variables
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Keywords: wrong-code
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
    ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
  GCC host triplet: i686-suse-linux


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31806

[Bug c/32135] New: bogus array-ref fold triggering array overflow warning

2007-05-28 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 
Hi, 

-O2 Warray-bounds:

=== Cut ===
struct PhaseEntryType
{
  char raw_field[50 + 1];
};
int
ParsePhase (char in_cols[15][250], struct PhaseEntryType *P)
{
  __builtin_strncpy (P->raw_field, in_cols[2], 50);
}
~
=== Cut ===

triggered by 

  __builtin_strncpy ((char *) &P->raw_field, (const char *) (char *) in_cols +
500B, 50);

being gimplified to:
  D.1970 = &(*in_cols)[500];
  D.1971 = &P->raw_field[0];
  __builtin_strncpy (D.1971, D.1970, 50)


-- 
   Summary: bogus array-ref fold triggering array overflow warning
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
    ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
  GCC host triplet: i686-suse-linux


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32135

[Bug c++/31809] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] sometimes TREE_READONLY is still set for non read only variables causing wrong code

2007-05-30 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #5 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-05-30 22:46 ---
is it okay that was_readonly will eventually turn on TREE_READONLY()
afterwards?


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31809

[Bug c++/31809] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] sometimes TREE_READONLY is still set for non read only variables causing wrong code

2007-05-31 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #7 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-05-31 09:06 ---
PR 31806 is not fixed by this, and it contains a reference type. 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31809

[Bug c++/31806] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] miscompilation with -fschedule-insns2 -fno-threadsafe-statics

2007-06-06 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #8 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-06-06 15:02 ---
testcase works with gcc 3.4 and gcc 3.3


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Known to fail|4.1.3   |4.1.3 4.0.4
  Known to work|4.3.0 4.2.0 |
Summary|miscompilation with -   |[4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression]
   |fschedule-insns2 -fno-  |miscompilation with -
   |threadsafe-statics  |fschedule-insns2 -fno-
   ||threadsafe-statics


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31806

[Bug c++/31806] [4.1/4.2 Regression] miscompilation with -fschedule-insns2 -fno-threadsafe-statics

2007-06-08 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #9 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-06-08 21:48 ---
Subject: Bug 31806

Author: mueller
Date: Fri Jun  8 21:48:34 2007
New Revision: 125580

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125580
Log:
2007-06-08  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   PR c++/31809
   PR c++/31806
   Backport from mainline:
   2007-05-31  Jakub Jelinek  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   * decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Also clear was_readonly if a static var
   needs runtime initialization.

   2007-05-30  Jakub Jelinek  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   * decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Clear TREE_READONLY flag on TREE_STATIC
   variables that need runtime initialization.

   PR c++/31809
   Backport from mainline:
   2007-05-30  Jakub Jelinek  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   * g++.dg/opt/static5.C: New test.

Added:
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/static5.C
  - copied unchanged from r125201, trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/static5.C
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/cp/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/cp/decl.c
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31806

[Bug c++/31809] [4.1/4.2 Regression] sometimes TREE_READONLY is still set for non read only variables causing wrong code

2007-06-08 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #10 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-06-08 21:48 
---
Subject: Bug 31809

Author: mueller
Date: Fri Jun  8 21:48:34 2007
New Revision: 125580

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125580
Log:
2007-06-08  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   PR c++/31809
   PR c++/31806
   Backport from mainline:
   2007-05-31  Jakub Jelinek  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   * decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Also clear was_readonly if a static var
   needs runtime initialization.

   2007-05-30  Jakub Jelinek  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   * decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Clear TREE_READONLY flag on TREE_STATIC
   variables that need runtime initialization.

   PR c++/31809
   Backport from mainline:
   2007-05-30  Jakub Jelinek  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   * g++.dg/opt/static5.C: New test.

Added:
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/static5.C
  - copied unchanged from r125201, trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/static5.C
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/cp/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/cp/decl.c
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31809

[Bug c++/31806] [4.1 Regression] miscompilation with -fschedule-insns2 -fno-threadsafe-statics

2007-06-14 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #10 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-06-14 23:12 
---
Subject: Bug 31806

Author: mueller
Date: Thu Jun 14 23:12:25 2007
New Revision: 125726

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125726
Log:
2007-06-14  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   PR c++/31806
   * g++.dg/opt/static6.C: New testcase.

Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/static6.C
Modified:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31806

[Bug c++/31806] [4.1 Regression] miscompilation with -fschedule-insns2 -fno-threadsafe-statics

2007-06-20 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #11 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-06-20 16:27 
---
Subject: Bug 31806

Author: mueller
Date: Wed Jun 20 16:27:23 2007
New Revision: 125887

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125887
Log:
2007-06-20  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   PR c++/31809
   PR c++/31806
   Backport from mainline:
   2007-05-31  Jakub Jelinek  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   * decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Also clear was_readonly if a static var
   needs runtime initialization.

   2007-05-30  Jakub Jelinek  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   * decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Clear TREE_READONLY flag on TREE_STATIC
   variables that need runtime initialization.

   * g++.dg/opt/static5.C: New testcase
   * g++.dg/opt/static6.C: Likewise


Added:
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/static5.C
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/static6.C
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/cp/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/cp/decl.c
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31806

[Bug c++/31809] [4.1 Regression] sometimes TREE_READONLY is still set for non read only variables causing wrong code

2007-06-20 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #11 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-06-20 16:27 
---
Subject: Bug 31809

Author: mueller
Date: Wed Jun 20 16:27:23 2007
New Revision: 125887

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125887
Log:
2007-06-20  Dirk Mueller  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   PR c++/31809
   PR c++/31806
   Backport from mainline:
   2007-05-31  Jakub Jelinek  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   * decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Also clear was_readonly if a static var
   needs runtime initialization.

   2007-05-30  Jakub Jelinek  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   * decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Clear TREE_READONLY flag on TREE_STATIC
   variables that need runtime initialization.

   * g++.dg/opt/static5.C: New testcase
   * g++.dg/opt/static6.C: Likewise


Added:
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/static5.C
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/static6.C
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/cp/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/cp/decl.c
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31809

[Bug c++/31809] [4.1 Regression] sometimes TREE_READONLY is still set for non read only variables causing wrong code

2007-06-20 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #12 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-06-20 16:28 
---
Fixed.


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31809

[Bug c++/31806] [4.1 Regression] miscompilation with -fschedule-insns2 -fno-threadsafe-statics

2007-06-20 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #12 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-06-20 16:28 
---
Fixed


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31806

[Bug middle-end/32546] 'warning: array subscript is above/below array bounds' on delete[]

2007-07-13 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-07-13 11:10 ---
unfortunately setting TREE_NO_WARNING on the synthesized delete[] parameters
does not help because it is lost during middle end folding


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32546

[Bug middle-end/32546] 'warning: array subscript is above/below array bounds' on delete[]

2007-07-13 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #1 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-07-13 11:05 ---
this is yet another case of the middle end folding memory arithmetics back into
an array ref that is out of bounds: 

 operator delete [] ((void *) A + 0xfffc);

(from orig dump)

later it is:

  D.2607_30 = &(*D.2517_7)[-4];
  operator delete [] (D.2607_30);

which will then trigger this warning (because -4 is clearly out of bounds). 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2007-07-13 11:05:25
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32546

[Bug c++/32756] New: wrong ambiguous overload error?

2007-07-13 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 
Hi, 

this might be invalid, needs verification. starting with gcc 4.3, the following
testcase is rejected: 

=== Cut ===

class QString;

struct QByteArray
{
  QByteArray ();
  bool operator!= (const QString & s2) const;
};

bool operator!= (const QByteArray & a1, const QByteArray & a2);

struct QString
{
  QString ();
  QString (const QByteArray & a);
};

QByteArray abbreviation ();

void
fromString ()
{
  QByteArray zoneAbbrev;
  if (abbreviation () != zoneAbbrev)
{
}
}
=== Cut ===
ambiguity.cc:23: error: ISO C++ says that these are ambiguous, even though the
worst conversion for the first is better than the worst conversion for the
second:
ambiguity.cc:9: note: candidate 1: bool operator!=(const QByteArray&, const
QByteArray&)
ambiguity.cc:6: note: candidate 2: bool QByteArray::operator!=(const QString&)
const


-- 
   Summary: wrong ambiguous overload error?
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32756

[Bug c++/32756] [4.3 Regression] wrong ambiguous overload error?

2007-07-14 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #1 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-07-14 07:33 ---
this was introduced by the following patch:

2007-05-30  Russell Yanofsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Pedro Lamarao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Howard Hinnant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PR c++/7412
PR c++/29939


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||doug dot gregor at gmail dot
   ||com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32756

[Bug c++/32756] [4.3 Regression] wrong ambiguous overload error?

2007-07-14 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-07-14 10:00 ---
Created an attachment (id=13914)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13914&action=view)
patch

the following patch moves the change of ranking described in the working draft
under a "dialect" check, which hot-fixes this bug


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32756

[Bug c++/34111] New: new oveload resolution error

2007-11-15 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 
this used to work a few days ago still:


-- 
   Summary: new oveload resolution error
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Keywords: rejects-valid
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34111

[Bug c++/34111] new oveload resolution error

2007-11-15 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #1 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-11-15 16:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=14559)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14559&action=view)
the preprocessed source

.ii file


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34111

[Bug bootstrap/34110] gcc fails to build on i686

2007-11-15 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #1 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-11-15 18:21 ---
temp_stack.reg[i_90] is the access, compare_for_stack_reg is the function,
and i_90 has the VRP determined range [-1, 2147483646]. 

it shouldn't warn for that. I'll work on a patch. 


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2007-11-15 18:21:40
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34110

[Bug c++/34111] new overload resolution error

2007-11-15 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-11-15 23:17 ---
reduced testcase:

class QChar
{
};
struct QString
{
  QString(QChar);
};
struct QPainter
{
  void drawText (int x, int y, const QString &);
};

  class KHEChar:public QChar
  {
  public:KHEChar (QChar C);
  };

void
drawByte (QPainter * P, char, KHEChar B)
{
  P->drawText (0, 0, B);
}


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2007-11-15 23:17:52
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34111

[Bug bootstrap/34110] gcc fails to build on i686

2007-11-16 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-11-16 11:37 ---
workaround:

--- reg-stack.c (revision 130198)
+++ reg-stack.c (working copy)
@@ -925,7 +925,7 @@ swap_to_top (rtx insn, stack regstack, r
   /* Place operand 1 at the top of stack.  */
   regno = get_hard_regnum (&temp_stack, src1);
   gcc_assert (regno >= 0);
-  if (regno != FIRST_STACK_REG)
+  if (regno >= 0 && regno != FIRST_STACK_REG)
 {
   k = temp_stack.top - (regno - FIRST_STACK_REG);
   j = temp_stack.top;
@@ -938,7 +938,7 @@ swap_to_top (rtx insn, stack regstack, r
   /* Place operand 2 next on the stack.  */
   regno = get_hard_regnum (&temp_stack, src2);
   gcc_assert (regno >= 0);
-  if (regno != FIRST_STACK_REG + 1)
+  if (regno >= 0 && regno != FIRST_STACK_REG + 1)
 {
   k = temp_stack.top - (regno - FIRST_STACK_REG);
   j = temp_stack.top - 1;


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34110

[Bug middle-end/34197] array overflow warning without line number

2007-11-22 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #4 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-11-22 22:34 ---
thanks for the analysis. I would go for a slightly more verbose version of the
same patch: 

--- gcc/tree-vrp.c  (revision 130297)
+++ gcc/tree-vrp.c  (working copy)
@@ -4339,7 +4339,7 @@ check_array_ref (tree ref, location_t* l

   low_sub = up_sub = TREE_OPERAND (ref, 1);

-  if (!up_bound || !locus || TREE_NO_WARNING (ref)
+  if (!up_bound || TREE_NO_WARNING (ref)
   || TREE_CODE (up_bound) != INTEGER_CST
   /* Can not check flexible arrays.  */
   || (TYPE_SIZE (TREE_TYPE (ref)) == NULL_TREE
@@ -4441,6 +4441,11 @@ check_array_bounds (tree *tp, int *walk_
   tree stmt = (tree)data;
   location_t *location = EXPR_LOCUS (stmt);

+  if (!EXPR_HAS_LOCATION (stmt)) {
+  *walk_subtree = FALSE;
+  return NULL_TREE;
+  }
+
   *walk_subtree = TRUE;

   if (TREE_CODE (t) == ARRAY_REF)


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34197

[Bug middle-end/32546] [4.3 Regression] 'warning: array subscript is above/below array bounds' on delete[]

2007-11-22 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-11-22 22:40 ---


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 34197 ***


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||DUPLICATE


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32546

[Bug middle-end/34197] array overflow warning without line number

2007-11-22 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #5 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-11-22 22:40 ---
*** Bug 32546 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


-- 

mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||gcc at abeckmann dot de


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34197

  1   2   >