Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "Ian" == Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Ian> This is a bug in C++ code in libjava.
>
> Thanks. We enabled -fwrapv for the interpreter but, I think, thought
> that perhaps the other C++ code was safe.
> Would the new warning have c
Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> > This patch appears to fix the problem. I'm running the libjava tests
> > now. Does this look OK to the java maintainers for 4.2 branch and
> > mainline? Mark, should I commit to 4.2 branch?
>
> If this (or a variant) is
> "Ian" == Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ian> This is a bug in C++ code in libjava.
Thanks. We enabled -fwrapv for the interpreter but, I think, thought
that perhaps the other C++ code was safe.
Would the new warning have caught this?
Ian> This patch appears to fix the proble
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> This patch appears to fix the problem. I'm running the libjava tests
> now. Does this look OK to the java maintainers for 4.2 branch and
> mainline? Mark, should I commit to 4.2 branch?
If this (or a variant) is approved by the Java maintainers, please do
apply the sa
David Daney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Kaz Kojima wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've noticed that some libjava tests fail for SH on trunk and
> > 4.2.0 RC3.
> >
> > New tests that FAIL:
> >
> > Divide_1 -O3 -findirect-dispatch output - bytecode->native test
> > Divide_1 -O3 output - bytecode->native t
Eric Botcazou writes:
> > According to
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2007-05/msg00132.html, this bug
> > isn't manifested on x86_64, either.
>
> Wrong choice, this is the 4.1 branch.
>
> > So, I have no hardware on which I can test the problem today.
>
> See http://gcc.gnu.o
> According to
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2007-05/msg00132.html, this bug
> isn't manifested on x86_64, either.
Wrong choice, this is the 4.1 branch.
> So, I have no hardware on which I can test the problem today.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2007-05/msg00093.html inste
David Daney writes:
>> I was hoping that 4.2.0 would be good, but very recently someone
> >> broke it. Don't people test for regressions before committing?
> > According to the testresults list, this broke between r124328 and
> > r124356. There were two commits to the branch in that interva
David Daney wrote:
David Daney wrote:
Kaz Kojima wrote:
Hi,
I've noticed that some libjava tests fail for SH on trunk and
4.2.0 RC3.
New tests that FAIL:
Divide_1 -O3 -findirect-dispatch output - bytecode->native test
Divide_1 -O3 output - bytecode->native test
Divide_1 -O3 output - source c
David Daney wrote:
Kaz Kojima wrote:
Hi,
I've noticed that some libjava tests fail for SH on trunk and
4.2.0 RC3.
New tests that FAIL:
Divide_1 -O3 -findirect-dispatch output - bytecode->native test
Divide_1 -O3 output - bytecode->native test
Divide_1 -O3 output - source compiled test
Divide_
Kaz Kojima wrote:
Hi,
I've noticed that some libjava tests fail for SH on trunk and
4.2.0 RC3.
New tests that FAIL:
Divide_1 -O3 -findirect-dispatch output - bytecode->native test
Divide_1 -O3 output - bytecode->native test
Divide_1 -O3 output - source compiled test
Divide_1 -findirect-dispatc
11 matches
Mail list logo
