[Bug c++/19614] Excessive memory consumption with a class with large (200) virtual (pure?) function and derived classes

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 06:45 --- This explains a lot: vtables = 917; vtable searches = 0 vtable entries = 0; vtable elems = 82020 (In reply to comment #4) > We could create one ADDR_EXPR for the pure virtual case which will both speed > up

[Bug middle-end/19609] [4.0 Regression] real and imaginary part interchanged when flags_complex_divide_method=1

--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 06:28 --- Please do. I seem to have screwed up the ia64 build as well (user error on my side), and won't see results until tommorow gmt-8. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19609

[Bug libstdc++/19535] Wrong return types for __pair_get<1>

-- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19535

[Bug target/19537] tic4x does not build -- ICE in libgcc

-- What|Removed |Added Keywords||build, ice-on-valid-code http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19537

[Bug c++/19532] cp/pt.c mentions a function that has been removed.

-- What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |minor Last reconfirmed|2005-01-19 15:39:33 |2005-01-25 06:18:03 date|

[Bug c/19513] [IMA] High memory usage when compiling multiple files at a time

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 06:17 --- Confirmed, mainly comment #6. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug java/19070] internal compiler error: in generate_bytecode_conditional, at java/jcf-write.c:1271

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 06:13 --- Subject: Bug 19070 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-25 06:12:40 Modified files: gcc/java : ChangeLog parse.y Log message:

[Bug target/19494] Building gcc-3.4.3 fails on gcc/unwind-dw2.c

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 06:13 --- This works for everyone else (really just RTH). But anyways, this cannot be a gcc bug as it looks like you changed the headers and it will fix the problem. -- What|Removed

[Bug fortran/5900] [g77 & gfortran] Lapack regressions since g77 2.95.2

--- Additional Comments From jvdelisle at verizon dot net 2005-01-25 06:00 --- Results on i686-pc-linux-gnu using -O0 -malign-double: CST:1 out of 4662 tests failed to pass the threshold DES:1 out of 3270 tests failed to pass the threshold DSX:1 out of 3500 tests faile

[Bug fortran/19619] LAPACK optimisation error

--- Additional Comments From billingd at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 05:02 --- -ffloat-store make one more case fail. Thanks for the reference. I remember it now. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19619

[Bug c++/19614] Excessive memory consumption with a class with large (200) virtual (pure?) function and derived classes

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 04:26 --- All of the memory seems to becoming from virtual functions, some from pure virtual functions (which we could optimizate a little better). /* You can't call an abstract virtual function; it's abst

[Bug fortran/19619] LAPACK optimisation error

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 04:09 --- The quotes from that email really makes it sound like this "bug". "The failures depend on the optimisation level on file chgeqz.f, independent of the optimisation used on the rest of LAPACK, and start at -O2

[Bug fortran/19619] LAPACK optimisation error

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 03:59 --- Hmm (even though you might not remember this, google does): http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2001-05/msg00754.html so does -ffloat-store fix the problem? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196

[Bug fortran/19619] LAPACK optimisation error

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 03:55 --- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > The problem is in optimization of routine chgeqz.f > > Hmm, could this be like the old PR 1645? (that was reduced from the same > routine :) ). Never

[Bug fortran/19619] LAPACK optimisation error

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 03:52 --- (In reply to comment #1) > The problem is in optimization of routine chgeqz.f Hmm, could this be like the old PR 1645? (that was reduced from the same routine :) ). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_

[Bug fortran/19619] LAPACK optimisation error

--- Additional Comments From billingd at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 03:37 --- The problem is in optimization of routine chgeqz.f -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19619

[Bug c++/19618] Does warn if bit-fields exceed the size of bool types

--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-01-25 03:24 --- (In reply to comment #1) An interesting question might be how wide is a bool type, I believe C defines it as having a rank less than char, and preumably at least as wide as an unsigned:1, so does that imply a

[Bug AWT/16722] AWT application leaks memory

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 03:22 --- Is this still true? -- What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2004-10-26 13:45:52 |2

[Bug objc/18408] [4.0 Regression] ICE compiling code that involves casting classes

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 03:18 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug objc/18408] [4.0 Regression] ICE compiling code that involves casting classes

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 03:16 --- Subject: Bug 18408 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-25 03:16:48 Modified files: gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog Added files: gcc/t

[Bug objc/18408] [4.0 Regression] ICE compiling code that involves casting classes

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 03:13 --- Subject: Bug 18408 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-25 03:13:11 Modified files: gcc/objc : ChangeLog objc-act.c objc-act.h objc-

[Bug middle-end/19616] [4.0 regression] missed tail call

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 02:42 --- D'oh! Of course this affects i686 too, just need to set up the stack, e.g. void bar (double); void foo (double a) { bar (0.0); } Without patch: foo: pushl %ebp movl%esp, %ebp

[Bug c++/19618] Does warn if bit-fields exceed the size of bool types

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 02:30 --- Confirmed, werid. (compare_tree_int (w, TYPE_PRECISION (type)) > 0 && TREE_CODE (type) != ENUMERAL_TYPE && TREE_CODE (type) != BOOLEAN_TYPE) This changed way back in March of

[Bug middle-end/19332] [4.0 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-[12].c execution, -O2 and -O1

--- Additional Comments From danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 02:26 --- Fixed by patch . -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/19330] [4.0 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010605-2.c execution, -O1

--- Additional Comments From danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 02:24 --- Fixed by patch. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESO

[Bug middle-end/19332] [4.0 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-[12].c execution, -O2 and -O1

-- Bug 19332 depends on bug 19330, which changed state. Bug 19330 Summary: [4.0 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010605-2.c execution, -O1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19330 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug fortran/19619] New: LAPACK optimisation error

I have an LAPACK testuite failure with 20050124 gfortran on i686-pc-cygwin. gcd.out has the failure CGV drivers: 64 out of 1092 tests failed to pass the threshold with -O2 but not with -O0. I have narrowed down the input file (below) to find a case that fails for a 2x2 matrix. I will work

[Bug fortran/5900] [g77 & gfortran] Lapack regressions since g77 2.95.2

-- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||19619 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5900

[Bug middle-end/19330] [4.0 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010605-2.c execution, -O1

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 02:06 --- Subject: Bug 19330 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-25 02:05:43 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog expmed.c Log message:

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2005-01-25 01:57 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) > >> * tree-data-ref.c (analyze_overlapping_iterations): chrecs that > >> are equal overlap on every iteration. > >> >

[Bug middle-end/19609] [4.0 Regression] real and imaginary part interchanged when flags_complex_divide_method=1

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-25 01:53 --- Great! In case you like me to double check a bit, only tomorrow, given my timezone... Thanks again! -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19609

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2005-01-25 01:52 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) > Do remember that this bug is about bad behavior with deeply nested loops > and we already have other algorithms that are quadratic in

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 01:42 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) >> >> * tree-data-ref.c (analyze_overlapping_iterations): chrecs that >> are equal overlap on every iteration. >> >> This stuff is just sim

[Bug c++/19618] New: Does warn if bit-fields exceed the size of bool types

The following code will compile without warning. This isn't exactly a bug, but it is inconsistant from how other types are treated. struct bset{ bool bit: 93111; }; -- Summary: Does warn if bit-fields exceed the size of bool types Product: gcc Version: 3.3.3

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 01:28 --- Do remember that this bug is about bad behavior with deeply nested loops and we already have other algorithms that are quadratic in the loop nest depth. So I really wouldn't consider this to be a very seri

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2005-01-25 01:24 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) > > Which one? I cannot find anything relevant in changelog. > > > > > * tree-data-ref.c (analyze_subscript_affine_affine): I

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 01:15 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) > Which one? I cannot find anything relevant in changelog. > * tree-data-ref.c (analyze_subscript_affine_affine): Implement a solution f

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 01:11 --- Which one? I cannot find anything relevant in changelog. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18595

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 00:52 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) > See autovec branch. You could also look at recent patches posted by sebastian and i for the autovect branch that have been adding this support. --

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 00:50 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) On Mon, 25 Jan 2005, rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz wrote: > > --- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff d

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2005-01-25 00:49 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) > Uh, symbolic references are or will be used to do data dependence when > MEM_REF and ARRAY_REF couldn't be generated from th

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 00:39 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) Uh, symbolic references are or will be used to do data dependence when MEM_REF and ARRAY_REF couldn't be generated from the pointers. >>> >>>

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2005-01-25 00:27 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) > >>> Other part is that scev tries to be too clever. Without need to > >>> represent nonaffine induction variables (that we do not use

[Bug middle-end/19330] [4.0 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010605-2.c execution, -O1

--- Additional Comments From danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 00:24 --- Patch here . -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19330

[Bug middle-end/19616] [4.0 regression] missed tail call

-- What|Removed |Added Component|target |middle-end GCC target triplet||x86_64-*-* Target Milestone|---

[Bug fortran/17202] ice-on-valid-code, trans-array.c:217: gfc_conv_descriptor_dtype Assertion failed

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 00:20 --- *** Bug 19617 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/19617] ICE, allocated array

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 00:19 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 17202 *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/5900] [g77 & gfortran] Lapack regressions since g77 2.95.2

--- Additional Comments From billingd at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 00:15 --- I forgot to mention that today's LAPACK results are with -O0. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5900

[Bug fortran/19617] New: ICE, allocated array

An ICE occurs when compiling this routine. The printed line number is incorrect - lies outside the routine, so I don't know which line. the diagnostic is: alloc.F90: In function 'dealloc_s1': alloc.F90:1186: internal compiler error: in gfc_conv_descriptor_data, at fortran/trans-array.c:181 SUBROU

[Bug target/19616] [4.0 regression] missed tail call

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 00:08 --- Testing a patch: Index: calls.c === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/calls.c,v retrieving revision 1.377 diff -u -3 -p -r1.377 calls.c --- cal

[Bug c++/19614] Excessive memory consumption

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 00:07 --- cp/class.c:7224 (build_vtbl_initializer)6525792: 2.6% 0: 0.0% 22705120:17.7% 0: 0.0% 913466 cp/class.c:7600 (add_vcall_offset) 9266784: 3.7% 0:

[Bug target/19616] [4.0 regression] missed tail call

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 23:44 --- check_sibcall_argument_overlap_1 returns 1 for (insn 11 0 0 (set (reg:DF 21 xmm0) (float_extend:DF (mem/u/i:SF (symbol_ref/u:DI ("*.LC0") [flags 0x2]) [3 S4 A32]))) -1 (nil) (expr_list:REG_E

[Bug middle-end/19609] [4.0 Regression] real and imaginary part interchanged when flags_complex_divide_method=1

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-24 23:33 --- > Yes, I see that. My eyes crossed while transcribing the algorithm to trees, > and I failed to notice that a computation is (b - (a * ratio)) in one branch > and ((a * ratio) - b) in the other. And so incorrectl

[Bug middle-end/19609] [4.0 Regression] real and imaginary part interchanged when flags_complex_divide_method=1

--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 23:23 --- Yes, I see that. My eyes crossed while transcribing the algorithm to trees, and I failed to notice that a computation is (b - (a * ratio)) in one branch and ((a * ratio) - b) in the other. And so incorrectly b

[Bug target/19616] [4.0 regression] missed tail call

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 23:21 --- For amd64 we have the following .expand dump for the call (you can get it with -fdump-rtl-expand-details): ;; Function foo (foo) ;; Generating RTL for tree basic block 0 ;; bar (0.0) [tail call]

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 23:12 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) On Mon, 24 Jan 2005, rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz wrote: > > --- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff d

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2005-01-24 23:09 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) > > Other part is that scev tries to be too clever. Without need to > > represent nonaffine induction variables (that we do not use any

[Bug middle-end/19609] [4.0 Regression] real and imaginary part interchanged when flags_complex_divide_method=1

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-24 23:01 --- Hi Richard. It seems to me that the problem is in the implemented formula. Looking at Goldberg, when |d| >= |c| in its paper,that is |bi| > |br| in the Gcc code, we should have, at the end of the calculation: (

[Bug target/19616] [4.0 regression] missed tail call

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 22:59 --- This is on x86-64 of course. i686 passes the double on the stack so it can't do the tail call. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/19616] New: [4.0 regression] missed tail call

.p2align 4,,15 .globl foo .type foo, @function foo: .LFB3: xorpd %xmm0, %xmm0 jmp bar .LFE3: .size foo, .-foo - GCC 4.0 20050124 produces a real call instead

[Bug fortran/5900] [g77 & gfortran] Lapack regressions since g77 2.95.2

--- Additional Comments From billingd at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 22:48 --- Here are gfortran-20050125 results for LAPACK on i686-pc-cygwin, after the fix for PR 19551 went in. Broadly comparable to previous releases. csep.out: CST drivers: 1 out of 11664 tests failed to p

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 22:25 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) > > Other part is that scev tries to be too clever. Without need to > represent nonaffine induction variables (that we do not use anywhere) > we could use m

[Bug middle-end/19609] [4.0 Regression] real and imaginary part interchanged when flags_complex_divide_method=1

-- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org | Status|NEW

[Bug middle-end/19551] [3.4/4.0 Regression] pure (complex types) function call removed as dead (LAPACK routine claic1.f bug)

--- Additional Comments From billingd at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 22:18 --- I can confirm that the original problem is fixed in CVS. All the LAPACK CLS Driver tests now pass on i686-pc-cygwin. Thanks you Jakub for the quick fix. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2005-01-24 22:16 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) > > Still there remain some inefficiences within the scev analysis itself. > > > > Zdenek, have you tried to revert the patch that cac

[Bug tree-optimization/18133] computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all

--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-01-24 21:59 --- Subject: Re: computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 21:50 +, stevenb at suse dot de wrote: > It can h

[Bug tree-optimization/18133] computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all

--- Additional Comments From stevenb at suse dot de 2005-01-24 21:50 --- Subject: Re: computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all On Monday 24 January 2005 22:37, law at redhat dot com wrote: > Out of curiosity, does thi

[Bug middle-end/19609] [4.0 Regression] real and imaginary part interchanged when flags_complex_divide_method=1

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 21:49 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW E

[Bug tree-optimization/18133] computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2005-01-24 21:47 --- Subject: Re: computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all On Jan 24, 2005, at 4:37 PM, law at redhat dot com wrote: > Out of curiosity,

[Bug middle-end/19609] real and imaginary part interchanged when flags_complex_divide_method=1

-- What|Removed |Added CC||pcarlini at suse dot de http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19609

[Bug bootstrap/19364] [4.0 Regression] embedded sparc does not bootstrap

-- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19364

[Bug other/19615] Strange syntax in generated file insn-attrab.c

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 21:39 --- return a(),b; is legal C. There is a comma operator in C which we use here. -- What|Removed |Added --

[Bug tree-optimization/18133] computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all

--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-01-24 21:37 --- Subject: Re: computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 20:59 +, stevenb at suse dot de wrote: > --- A

[Bug tree-optimization/18595] [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)

--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr 2005-01-24 21:36 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3) > > Still there remain some inefficiences within the scev analysis itself. > Zdenek, have you tried to revert the patch that caches the instant

[Bug bootstrap/19364] [4.0 Regression] embedded sparc does not bootstrap

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 21:35 --- See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg01532.html -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug other/19615] New: Strange syntax in generated file insn-attrab.c

More a question than a bug. In i386.md, around line 243, we can find : (symbol_ref "/* Update immediate_length and other attributes! */ abort(),1"))) These lines generate the following code in insn-attrab.c return /* Update immediate_length and other attri

[Bug bootstrap/19364] [4.0 Regression] embedded sparc does not bootstrap

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 21:32 --- Subject: Bug 19364 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-24 21:31:52 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog config.gcc gcc/con

[Bug c++/19610] default constructor not called for static template member of template class

--- Additional Comments From jamesp at trdlnk dot com 2005-01-24 21:19 --- I've tried what you suggested, and it did work, but now I'm confused. Why was the constructor for aa2 called in the original example? Based on what you have said, it sounds like that should not have happened until

[Bug tree-optimization/18133] computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all

--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-01-24 21:08 --- Subject: Re: computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 20:56 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote: > ---

[Bug c++/19614] Excessive memory consumption

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 21:07 --- For me on the mainline on powerpc-darwin this takes a max of 500MB, at -O0 and -O2. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19614

[Bug c++/19614] Excessive memory consumption

--- Additional Comments From dmartin at cliftonlabs dot com 2005-01-24 21:00 --- Created an attachment (id=8056) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8056&action=view) A file requiring 1.4G of virtual memory to process on g++ 3.4.3 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_

[Bug tree-optimization/18133] computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all

--- Additional Comments From stevenb at suse dot de 2005-01-24 20:59 --- Subject: Re: computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all > Some people do not want to see DOM getting bigger and bigger, That includes me, but ...

[Bug libgcj/19613] java.util.prefs should work like the JDK

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 20:58 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |minor

[Bug c++/19614] New: Excessive memory consumption

Processing the attached file causes g++ to consume about 1.4G of virtual memory on x86_64. The same file caused problems on x86 in an earlier release - see bug #15320. Also, on my project's mailing list I have seen the implication that similar issues exist on powerpc: http://www.cliftonlabs.com/s

[Bug libgcj/19527] libgij fails to install in a temporary directory

--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 20:56 --- I believe this was fixed by this patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg01702.html I haven't checked to verify it however. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19527

[Bug tree-optimization/18133] computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all

--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-01-24 20:56 --- Subject: Re: computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all Hi Jeff, > Interesting approach. I'm not sure if your approach is easier > than

[Bug libgcj/19613] New: java.util.prefs should work like the JDK

The current java.util.prefs.Preferences.userRoot defaults to a memory-based back end. Instead we should have a file-based back end that default to reading from $HOME/.java/.userPrefs and is compatible with the JDK. -- Summary: java.util.prefs should work like the JDK Produ

[Bug tree-optimization/18133] computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all

--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-01-24 20:46 --- Subject: Re: computed gotos are not folded back to regular gotos when it is found that they are not computed gotos at all On Sun, 2005-01-23 at 21:09 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote: > ---

[Bug target/19492] can not build crosscompiler for solaris2.8 (when building libstdc++ - error wcslen...:Link tests are not allowed after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES)

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 20:41 --- Not a bug explained by that email. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libgcj/19611] create 'sources.zip' for use in eclipse

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 20:40 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancemen

[Bug libgcj/19612] gjdoc in libgcj

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 20:40 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancemen

[Bug c++/19610] default constructor not called for static template member of template class

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24 20:38 --- I think this is invalid because you are just specializing them and nothing else (note the aa2 can be done the non specialized way too but I showed the specialized way): // declare space for them template A

[Bug libfortran/19595] eor and advance="yes" should not mix

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-24 20:37 --- *** Bug 19596 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19595

[Bug libfortran/19596] eor generates false error message with advance='NO'

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-24 20:37 --- Two cases for the same error. Thomas *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19595 *** -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug target/19558] openssl speed compiled with 20051020 gcc-4.0 (HEAD) segfaults

--- Additional Comments From gj at pointblue dot com dot pl 2005-01-24 20:37 --- so if it is binutils, how do you explain that gcc 3.3.5 got that right, and it isnt' ok with 4.0 ? I have the very same version of binutils in both cases. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?i

[Bug libgcj/19612] New: gjdoc in libgcj

It would be good to incorporate gjdoc into libgcj. First, it would make our system more complete. second, it would make it simpler for us to generate javadoc pages at release time (and install them on gcc.gnu.org -- we ought to do this). One wrinkle is that gjdoc is GPL. Perhaps some segregation

[Bug libgcj/19611] New: create 'sources.zip' for use in eclipse

It would be handy for the libgcj build to create a 'sources.zip' holding all the sources to libgcj. Eclipse could then use this to let the user easily view core library sources. Perhaps this could be optional so that it isn't built by default; not everybody cares about this. -- Summary

[Bug c++/19610] New: default constructor not called for static template member of template class

I've run into a problem where a static template member of a template class is not being created properly. --- Begin Sample Code --- #include using namespace std; template class A { public: A() { cout << "A created" << endl; } }; template class AA { public: AA( int i = 0 ) { cout << "A

[Bug target/19492] can not build crosscompiler for solaris2.8 (when building libstdc++ - error wcslen...:Link tests are not allowed after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES)

--- Additional Comments From yiye242 at hotmail dot com 2005-01-24 20:07 --- (In reply to comment #9) > Andrew, any comments?.. Have you tried this??? http://lists.resellerhostingbox.com/redhat-archive/msg21.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19492

[Bug libfortran/19451] Read after a write with a read only file

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-24 20:03 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

  1   2   >