On 18/02/2010 10:20, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Piotr Wyderski wrote:
>> Richard Guenther wrote:
>>
>> I don't know, what is considered to be a showstopper,
>> but bad things happen inside 4.5 (x86-32/Cygwin + a
>> lot of SSE). In the last weekend I was able to:
>
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Piotr Wyderski
wrote:
> Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>> Note that all regressions from 4.4 that are visible with release
>> checking and valid input should be considered P1 first
>
> I don't know, what is considered to be a showstopper,
> but bad things happen inside
Richard Guenther wrote:
> Note that all regressions from 4.4 that are visible with release
> checking and valid input should be considered P1 first
I don't know, what is considered to be a showstopper,
but bad things happen inside 4.5 (x86-32/Cygwin + a
lot of SSE). In the last weekend I was able
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 7:46 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> Steven Bosscher wrote:
>
>> Mark just made an ICE in the compiler with non-default options a P1
>> bug for GCC 4.5 (xf.
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2010-02/msg01695.html).
>>
>> Can someone please explain why this kind of bug should be
Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Mark just made an ICE in the compiler with non-default options a P1
> bug for GCC 4.5 (xf.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2010-02/msg01695.html).
>
> Can someone please explain why this kind of bug should be of
> release-blocking priority?
As I wrote in the PR, I want
Hi,
Mark just made an ICE in the compiler with non-default options a P1
bug for GCC 4.5 (xf.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2010-02/msg01695.html).
Can someone please explain why this kind of bug should be of
release-blocking priority?
Thanks,
Ciao!
Steven
