Re: "stable" version bootstrapping

2013-04-05 Thread NightStrike
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 5:08 AM, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Which version has currently been picked, and where can such information > reliably (thinking of a permanent weblink) be found? If I were you, I'd use the latest 4.4 compiler. Not only is it the RHEL6 system compiler, but because of some cr

gcc-4.6-20130405 is now available

2013-04-05 Thread gccadmin
Snapshot gcc-4.6-20130405 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.6-20130405/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.6 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches

Re: DR 1402 generalization

2013-04-05 Thread François Dumont
Looks like this problem is not having a lot of success :-) I finally had a regression with my little modification of gcc/cp/call.c to generalize DR 1402 to copy semantic. In testsuite/23_containers/unordered_set/55043.cc, in debug mode the following static assertion fails: static_assert(!st

GCC 4.6.4 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

2013-04-05 Thread Jakub Jelinek
GCC 4.6.4 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org The first release candidate for GCC 4.6.4 is available from ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.6.4-RC-20130405 and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from SVN revision 197511. I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release

Re: Documentation for fp-contract

2013-04-05 Thread Richard Biener
David Edelsohn wrote: >Richi, > >The GCC documentation for fp-contract is a little confusing and I'm >not sure what was intended. The last sentences says: > >"-ffp-contract=on enables floating-point expression contraction if >allowed by the language standard. This is currently not implemented >a

Re: Intentional or accidental backward-incompatibility w.r.t. process attributes?

2013-04-05 Thread Dave Korn
On 04/04/2013 08:48, Kai Tietz wrote: Hi Kai, > That change is intentional and would be called __thiscall.  To mix > stdcall and regparam is no more supported AFAIK. Why are stdcall and regparam not allowed together any more? They seem entirely orthogonal to me, and the overall result is

Documentation for fp-contract

2013-04-05 Thread David Edelsohn
Richi, The GCC documentation for fp-contract is a little confusing and I'm not sure what was intended. The last sentences says: "-ffp-contract=on enables floating-point expression contraction if allowed by the language standard. This is currently not implemented and treated equal to -ffp-contrac