--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07
07:12 ---
This might either be a missed optimization or just the testcase being wrong, I
might look at to see if it
is either later today.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07
07:09 ---
I think this is invalid, the operand is wrong, you cannot pass a struct to an
operand of an asm, see PR
8788 for another example of where the problem can come into play.
Confirmed.
--
What
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07
06:57 ---
Reading the comment in the testcase it looks like it is hard to decide wether
or not to xfail it:
/* ??? Ug. This one may or may not fail based on how fold decides
that the && should be emitted (based o
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07
06:54 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18352
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18351
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18350
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18349
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18348
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |3.4.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18347
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18346
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18345
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18344
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18343
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18342
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18341
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18340
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18339
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18338
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18337
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18336
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07 06:42
---
Not (just) a simple copy-paste error.
Again, the error line is 316 and the typo line is 318.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
Compiling following:
/* movaps.c */
struct v4f { float f[4];} __attribute__ ((aligned (16),packed));
void foo (void)
{
struct v4f a = {{1.0f, 2.0f, 3.0f, 4.0f}};
__asm__ __volatile__ ("movaps %0, %%xmm0"::"X"(a));
}
with gcc -c -msse2 -masm=intel movaps.c
gives:
> movaps.c: In function `vo
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18333
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18332
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/loop-5.c scan-tree-dump-times int iter 1
It looks like the test has always failed on this target.
--
Summary: mmix-knuth-mmixware testsuite failure: gcc.dg/tree-
ssa/loop-5.c
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
With the message in the .log being:
XPASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20040204-1.c scan-tree-dump-times link_error 0
It looks like the test has always xpassed on this target.
--
Summary: mmix-knuth-mmixware testsuite failure: XPASS:
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-convert-1.c -O1 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-convert-1.c -O2 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-convert-1.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer (test for
excess errors)
FAIL:
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/visibility-1.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/visibility-1.c scan-hidden hidden[ \t_]*foo
FAIL: gcc.dg/visibility-2.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/visibility-2.c scan-hidden hidden[ \t_]*foo
FAIL: gcc.dg/visibilit
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|mmix-knuth-mmixware |mmix-knuth-mmixware
|testsuite failure: |testsuite failure:
|
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/uninit-H.c (test for bogus messages, line 24)
FAIL: gcc.dg/uninit-H.c (test for excess errors)
With the message in the .log being:
/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/uninit-H.c: In function 'load_PCB':
/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/uninit-H.c:24: w
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/uninit-C.c (test for excess errors)
With the message in the .log being:
/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/uninit-C.c: In function '__subvdi3':
/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/uninit-C.c:15: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
I see this work
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/trampoline-1.c execution test
With no clue in the .log, except that abort wasn't called.
Last known to work on: "Tue May 11 15:25:38 GMT 2004".
Known to fail on: "Fri Jul 9 02:34:14 GMT 2004".
--
Summary: [4.0 regr
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/intmax_t-1.c (test for excess errors)
With the message in the .log being:
/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/intmax_t-1.c:7:22: error: inttypes.h: No such file or
directory
(further errors withheld)
inttypes.h isn't a standard header, neith
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: gcc.dg/c99-intconst-1.c (test for excess errors)
With the message in the .log being:
WARNING: program timed out.
compiler exited with status 1
Last known to work on: "Tue May 11 15:25:38 GMT 2004".
Known to
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/builtin-return-1.c execution test
With the message in the .log being:
*** EXIT code 4242
(a call to abort)
It seems the test has never worked for this target.
--
Summary: mmix-knuth-mmixware testsuite failure: gcc.
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/builtins-20.c (test for excess errors)
With the message in the .log being:
/usr/tmp/ccPAFqze.o(.text+0x14c): In function `test1f':
builtins-20.c: undefined reference to `link_error'
/usr/tmp/ccPAFqze.o(.text+0x150):builtins-20.c
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/builtins-18.c (test for excess errors)
With the message in the .log being:
/usr/tmp/ccaPyofC.o(.text+0x7c): In function `main':
builtins-18.c: undefined reference to `cabsl'
/usr/tmp/ccaPyofC.o(.text+0x9c):builtins-18.c: undefin
(I'm lumping these two together.)
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/builtin-apply2.c execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/builtin-apply3.c execution test
With the message in the .log for both being:
*** EXIT code 4242
(a call to abort)
They seem to have always failed fo
(Despite the names and they both never having worked, but from
looking at the test code, I do not think this is the same bug
as PR 18338.)
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/bitfld-3.c execution test
With the message in the .log being:
*** EXIT code 4242
(a call
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/bitfld-4.c execution test
With the message in the .log being:
sizeof short failed
__alignof__ short failed
sizeof signed short failed
__alignof__ signed short failed
sizeof unsigned short failed
__alignof__ unsigned short failed
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/array-quals-1.c scan-assembler-not \\.data(?!\\.rel\\.ro)
With no further clue in the .log. This test seems never to have worked
on this target. See also PR 12165.
--
Summary: mmix-knuth-mmixware testsuite failure
The testcase is just buggy; it assumes the target supports stabs,
but should not do so. It should use some dg-require-stabs function
alt. xfail all non-stabs targets (like this one; dwarf2 only)
alt. compile on just a known set of stabs targets.
For the record, the .log message is:
/gcc/testsuite
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07
03:30 ---
The line for gcc.dg/20040625-1.c which is most likely causing the problem is:
x = x < 70 ? x : 70;
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18331
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07 03:28
---
Another failure,
FAIL: gcc.dg/20040625-1.c (test for excess errors)
also has the corresponding ICE message.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18331
On Nov 6, 2004, at 10:13 PM, John Ellson wrote:
This file compiled OK with gcc4 from gcc4-4.0.0-0.5.i386.rpm
John Ellson
$ gcc4 --version
gcc (GCC) 3.4.2 20041017 (Red Hat 3.4.2-8)
Copyright (C) 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-debug
Target Milestone|--- |3.4.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-1.c -gdwarf-2 -O scan-assembler xyzzy
FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-1.c -gdwarf-2 -O3 scan-assembler xyzzy
FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-1.c -gdwarf-23 -O scan-assembler xyzzy
FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-1.c -gdwarf-23 -O3 scan-as
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07
02:37 ---
Confirmed, it does look a copy and paste error.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UN
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.dg/cpp/assert4.c (test for excess errors)
With the message in the .log being:
/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/cpp/assert4.c:316:4: error: #error
This test seems never to have worked on this target.
There's a copy-paste-typo on line 318; s/m
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07
02:29 ---
#if LLONG_MAX != 9223372036854775807LL && __LONG_LONG_MAX__ !=
9223372036854775807LL
# error Need 64-bit long long
#endif
Seems something is wrong here.
--
What|Removed
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
WARNING: Could not compile gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1 generator
With the message in the .log being:
/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1_generate.c:44: #error Need 64-bit
long long
That's bogus; both long and long long are 64 bit
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07
02:16 ---
Here is the reduced testcase:
double
test_islessequal(double x, double y, double a, double b)
{
return __builtin_islessequal(x, y)?a:b;
}
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18331
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07
02:13 ---
Confirmed, this is a bug in the rtl optimizers.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UN
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07
01:56 ---
Confirmed, reduced testcase:
typedef struct {
unsigned char dir;
int data[];
} AiDefaultRailBlock;
static const AiDefaultRailBlock _raildata_ai_0 = { 1, { 0, 4 } };
: Search converges between 2004-09-2
This test has never worked on this target, where the port lacks vector insns
(the target actually has them, but the point is that the open-code variant
should work alternatively the test should not try to execute.)
It used to be a compilation failure, for example with
"Fri Jul 4 22:17:01 GMT 2003"
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07
01:43 ---
I think we generate different trees now this which is where the problem comes
from. When expanding
from trees to RTL the back-end is not expecting things like this.
--
What|Removed
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/fp-cmp-8.c compilation, -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/fp-cmp-8.c compilation, -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/fp-cmp-8.c compilation, -O3
-fomit-frame-pointer
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/fp
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=
With LAST_UPDATED "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/comp-goto-2.c execution, -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/comp-goto-2.c execution, -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/comp-goto-2.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/comp-goto-2.c execut
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18329
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/920501-7.c execution, -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/920501-7.c execution, -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/920501-7.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/920501-7.c execution, -O3 -
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07 00:17
---
I'm going to assume by the looks of the tests and time of regression that the
following execution failures are due to the same bug:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-1.c execution, -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/ex
--
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |3.4.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18327
--- Additional Comments From wolf at pld-linux dot org 2004-11-07 00:09
---
Created an attachment (id=7485)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7485&action=view)
Preprocessed sources
gccbug script is, as can be seen, buggy. It doesn't allow to create attachments
and lose
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07
00:08 ---
Hmm, I cannot reproduce this on a cross from powerpc-darwin (but it might be a
local patch which is
causing it to pass which I doubt it).
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Summary|mmix-knuth-mmixware |[4.0 regression] mmix-knuth-
|tes
Public note of failure. The test succeeded with
LAST_UPDATED "Fri Nov 5 02:43:31 GMT 2004".
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040629-1.c execution, -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040629-1.c execution, -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/2004062
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-07
00:04 ---
Confirmed, for some reason we are trying to take the subreg of:
(const_double:SF 0.0 [0x0.0p+0])
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06
23:55 ---
The reason why -O3 passes is because we do optimization before RTL where the
wrong code comes
from.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18325
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18325
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06
23:52 ---
Can you read http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html and attach the preprocessed source?
Also what version of
gcc is this?
--
What|Removed |Added
[0:38 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/qqq/openttd-0.3.4]% g++ ai.c -c
In file included from ai.c:48:
table/ai_rail.h:36: internal compiler error: in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3318
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Environment:
System: Linux bajzel 2.6.9 #3 Tue Oct 19 12:
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||18324
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18325
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06
23:47 ---
I think this execution problem is the same as PR 18325.
--
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDepen
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||18324
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18326
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06
23:43 ---
I think this and PR 18326 are one in the same bug (the reason why PR 18326
shows up at higher
optimzation is because PR 18326 has function which is marked as no inline).
They both have packed
structs in
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06
23:40 ---
For the compiler problem, it does not make sense why there is __lshrti3 there
in the first place.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06
23:30 ---
One where we only depend on no extern functions:
int baz(int k2)
{
int i, j, *p, k = 1, k1 = 0;
if (k2)
p = &j;
else
p = &i;
if (k1)
*p = 0 , p = &k;
*p = 1;
return k;
}
In fact this
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06
23:24 ---
Here is a C example which is not undefined:
void bar(int*);
int foo1(void);
int baz()
{
int i, j, *p = &i, k, k1 = 0;
if (foo1()) p = &j;
if (k1)
{
*p = 0 ;
p = &k;
}
b
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06
23:01 ---
Subject: Bug 10908
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: java-gui-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-06 23:01:13
Modified files:
libjava: Chang
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18326
--- Additional Comments From rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06 22:39
---
Fixed in mainline:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-11/msg00513.html
--
What|Removed |Added
---
Public note of failure. The test passed around 2004-10-09 on the 3.4 branch.
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040625-1.c execution, -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040625-1.c execution, -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040625-1.c execution
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06 22:34
---
Subject: Bug 16830
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-06 22:34:01
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/mips: m
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|mmix-knuth-mmixware |mmix-knuth-mmixware
|testsuite failure: gcc.c- |testsuite failure: gcc.c-
Public note of failure. The test results have changed,
so test needs revisit and/or 20020227-1.x needs tweaking.
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020227-1.c compilation, -O2
XPASS: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020227-1.c execution, -O3 -fomit-fra
--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06 22:13
---
Here's a C testcase:
inline int foo() { return 0; }
void bar(int*);
void baz()
{
int i, j, *p = &i+1;
if (foo())
{
bar(p);
p = &j;
}
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18324
Public note of failure. The test apparently passed with
code from around 2004-11-05 02:00 GMT.
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004" I get:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010518-2.c execution, -O0
With the message in the .log being:
*** EXIT code 4242
(i.e. an ordinary abort call at e
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06 21:38
---
*** Bug 18319 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06 21:38
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 16417 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06 21:35
---
This case where the types are really done weridly:
D.1610 = Blksize (this);
D.1611 = D.1610 + 4;
D.1612 = operator new [] (D.1611);
D.1608 = (struct A[(long unsigned int) Blksize (this) - 1] *) D.161
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18323
See also PR 16567.
Public note of failure. Failed since testcase was ever added.
Public note of failure. The test has failed ever since it was added.
With LAST_UPDATED "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004", the result is:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/nested-1.c -O0 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.c
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06 21:32
---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
The diagnostic for use of __func__ outside a function, as tested in
gcc.dg/func-outside-*.c, wrongly has line number 0 instead of the
line number of the bad use of __func__.
func-outside-1.c:0: warning: '__func__' is not defined outside of function scope
This is a regression from 3.2.x.
When fix
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18321
Public note of failure (apparently since test case was added):
With LAST_UPDATED "Sat Nov 6 19:25:03 GMT 2004",
gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20031023-1.c: In function 'bar':
gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20031023-1.c:38: internal compiler error: in
change_address_1, at emit-rtl.c:1821
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-06 21:18
---
*** Bug 18320 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
1 - 100 of 178 matches
Mail list logo
