--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-05
06:49 ---
Dave --
I suspect that there is some PCH involvement here. In particular, the warnings
you're seeing while compiling header_cassert are very surprising, in that the
preprocessed source for that file does
--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-04-05
06:40 ---
This is the same bug as the first half of 20163, which
is fixed with
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg01694.html
Thomas
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20749
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-05
06:39 ---
Dave --
Thanks for clarifying that you are only seeing warning messages.
That indicates that I've probably fixed the original bug, but there is some kind
of secondary bug. I will see if I can reproduce.
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-05
06:25 ---
Jason --
Please apply the work-around; it's the best we've got at present.
Thanks,
-- Mark
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19317
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-05
06:03 ---
This is almost the same as the case discussed in DR 141.
In particular, we must determine whether "node.foo <" is the start of a
template, or not. [basic.lookup.classref] says that we look in the class of
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-05
05:23 ---
Subject: Bug 20421
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-05 05:23:18
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/i386: i
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-05
05:15 ---
Subject: Bug 19199
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-05 05:15:23
Modified files:
gcc: Change
--- Additional Comments From wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-05
04:22 ---
Yes, that is the same patch I independently wrote and started testing over the
weekend. It has already passed testing for the gcc-3.4 and gcc-4.0 branches. I
have yet to do mainline and gcc-3.3 testing. Al
--- Additional Comments From roger at eyesopen dot com 2005-04-05 04:22
---
The stricter version is mostly OK, except for one correction and one suggestion.
The correction is that in the case where the replacement wasn't a register, you
shouldn't be calling validate_change_maybe_volatile
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2005-04-05 04:15 ---
Fixed on mainline.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-05
04:09 ---
Subject: Bug 9963
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-05 04:08:57
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/i386: cy
--- Additional Comments From wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-05
04:04 ---
The patch seems to have been incompletely checked in. The ChangeLog entry
claims to be removing code from final.c, but the code is still there.
I laboriously tracked down the problem to the fact that cgraph
--- Additional Comments From ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-05 02:43
---
Patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-04/msg00453.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20580
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17667
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20070
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17687
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18992
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15838
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4720
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18382
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17982
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14552
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-05
01:44 ---
I wonder if this is causing PR 20584.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17577
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20584
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-05
01:42 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Is there a more recent patch version than that referred to in comment #4,
> taking account of Mark's comments on that patch version?
I was talking with Roger off the list and he s
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-04-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-05
01:33 ---
This is also a rejects valid with -Werror.
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
--- Additional Comments From kraai at ftbfs dot org 2005-04-05 01:02
---
Subject: Re: Ada Bootstrap problem because of -Werror
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 04:47:44AM -, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> --- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-0
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
23:44 ---
Fixed in 3.4.4.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESO
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
23:44 ---
Subject: Bug 20679
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-04 23:43:54
Modified files:
gcc/cp : Change
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-04-04 23:37
---
Hi. I suspect some of these issues are well known and general, not specific to
our implementation (e.g., the Std vs signed zeros, see N1612, available from:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/200
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
23:25 ---
:;
D.1897 = N - 1;
D.1898 = (unsigned int) D.1897;
N.23 = N;
N.24 = (long unsigned int) N.23;
D.1901 = D.1898 * N.24;
D.1902 = D.1901 * 8;
D.1903 = (double[0:(long unsigned int) (SAVE_EXPR - 1
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
23:18 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Isn't the unary operator- a necessary ingredient for the bug because it
> silently changes the sign of zero?
I was just quoting what the standard says.
The exact quote is:
Returns
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
23:14 ---
This has been approved by RTH here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-04/msg00428.html
Please apply to 4.0 and mainline. Thanks!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20625
--- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-04-04 23:01
---
Subject: Re: [Committed] PR c++/19199: Preserve COND_EXPR lvalueness in fold
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> If you find that reviewing patch proposals is wasting your time, I'm
> sorry.
Of course, untested patch
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
22:55 ---
HP, your waiting period is up. May we please have this patch for 4.0?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20527
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
22:47 ---
(Bugs should not be marked as FIXED, nor the target milestone moved, so long as
they are still open against 3.4 or later, unless it has been decided that they
will not be fixed there, so I've reopened this
Consider:
int
foo (int a, int b)
{
int c = a;
int d;
if (a == c)
d = a;
else
d = b;
return d;
}
Note that "a == c" always holds, so the whole function should collapse
down to return a;. However, copy-prop on TCB outputs
foo (a, b)
{
int d;
int c;
int D.1137;
:
c_3 = a
--- Additional Comments From mckinlay at redhat dot com 2005-04-04 22:31
---
Thanks, I've checked in your patch for this. Note that in theory, fastjar should
be target-neutral, so I don't think it makes much sense to call it
$(target)-fastjar... oh well.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
22:21 ---
Subject: Bug 20761
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-04 22:21:45
Modified files:
libjava: Change
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
22:19 ---
Subject: Bug 20761
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-04 22:19:03
Modified files:
libjava: ChangeLog configure.ac configure
Lo
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Component|java|libgcj
Ever Confirmed||1
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|fastjar not correctly |fastjar not correctly
|defined for cross compilers.|defined when compiling with
Compiler fails to build native compiler when using a cross compiler. Build tries
to use the java jar instead of $(target_noncanonical)-fastjar.
Here is the patch.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] libjava]$ cvs status configure.ac
===
File: configure
--- Additional Comments From eabaltz at sophont dot net 2005-04-04 22:00
---
Created an attachment (id=8533)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8533&action=view)
preprocessed source
Preprocessed source file illustrating the bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
gcc -v:
Configured with: ../gcc-3.4.3/configure --prefix=/u/ki/eabaltz/usr/i386
Thread model: posix
gcc version 3.4.3
command line:
gcc -Wall --save-temps bug.c
this works:
./a.out 1
matrix[0][]:1.0 -2.0 -3.0
matrix[1][]:2.0 4.0 -6.0
matrix[2][]:3.0 6.0 9.0
matrix[0][]:1.0 -2
--- Additional Comments From kreckel at ginac dot de 2005-04-04 21:52
---
Subject: Re: operator-(const T&, const complex&) vs
operator-(const complex&, const complex&)
I don't see how you can trigger wrong behaviour with
operator-(const complex &lhs, const T &rhs):
template
inl
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
21:45 ---
Neither of the patches are correct.
The correct way is:
complex(lhs) -= rhs;
Note this has to be done for operator - (const complex &lhs, const T &rhs)
also.
Should be done for all three "operator -" as 26
--- Additional Comments From kreckel at ginac dot de 2005-04-04 21:42
---
*** Bug 20759 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20758
--- Additional Comments From kreckel at ginac dot de 2005-04-04 21:42
---
Sorry, silly repost of form data.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 20758 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--
Here are three ways to express complex(-4.,0.):
// complex operator-(const double&, const complex&)
complex a1 = 1.
- complex(5.0, 0.0);
cout << a1 << endl; // (-4,-0)
// complex operator-(const complex&, const
complex&)
complex a2 = complex(1.0, 0.0)
--- Additional Comments From kreckel at ginac dot de 2005-04-04 21:40
---
Created an attachment (id=8532)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8532&action=view)
Avoid using operator-, version 2.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20758
--- Additional Comments From kreckel at ginac dot de 2005-04-04 21:39
---
Created an attachment (id=8531)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8531&action=view)
Avoid using operator-, version 1.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20758
--- Additional Comments From fitzsim at redhat dot com 2005-04-04 21:39
---
Yes, eventually we'll install the same compatibiliy symlink forest we currently
install in java-gcj-compat. For now though I only expect distributions
packaging java-gcj-compat to use this option. For example,
--- Additional Comments From wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
21:38 ---
See also a thread on the gcc list
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-03/msg00234.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19180
Here are three ways to express complex(-4.,0.):
// complex operator-(const double&, const complex&)
complex a1 = 1.
- complex(5.0, 0.0);
cout << a1 << endl; // (-4,-0)
// complex operator-(const complex&, const
complex&)
complex a2 = complex(1.0, 0.0)
--- Additional Comments From mckinlay at redhat dot com 2005-04-04 21:27
---
Yeah, in the case where java-gcj-compat is merged into libgcj (ie libgcj is set
up to look like a JVM) then this option makes sense.
libgcj would install its .jars and whatever other JVMish files applications
e
The following methods are missing java.aawr:
java.awt.FontMetrics.getMaxCharBounds(java.awt.Graphics)
java.awt.FontMetrics.getStringBounds(java.lang.String, int, int,
java.awt.Graphics)
java.awt.FontMetrics.getStringBounds(java.lang.String, java.awt.Graphics)
java.awt.FontMetrics.getStringBo
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
20:51 ---
Without a fix for PR rtl-optimization/20756, there are new regressions.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20695
--- Additional Comments From fitzsim at redhat dot com 2005-04-04 20:48
---
I should also mention; currently java-gcj-compat is separate from libgcj because
it depends on ecj. Once gcjx lands we can use it as our bytecode compiler, and
distributions will likely want to merge java-gcj-co
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
20:48 ---
Created an attachment (id=8530)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8530&action=view)
proposed patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20756
--- Additional Comments From fitzsim at redhat dot com 2005-04-04 20:44
---
The advantage is that we can then eliminate the java wrapper script completely
and symlink the java command directly to gij.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20750
consider these insns from compile/951116-1.c:
(note:HI 2 0 6 NOTE_INSN_DELETED)
(note:HI 6 2 9 NOTE_INSN_FUNCTION_BEG)
(note:HI 9 6 41 0 [bb 0] NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK)
(insn/f 41 9 42 0 (set (mem:SI (pre_dec:SI (reg/f:SI 15 r15)) [0 S4 A32])
(reg/f:SI 14 r14)) -1 (nil)
(expr_list:REG
--- Additional Comments From aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
20:18 ---
Subject: Re: [Committed] PR c++/19199: Preserve COND_EXPR lvalueness in fold
On Apr 4, 2005, Roger Sayle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My apologies yet again for not being more explicit about all of the
> t
--- Additional Comments From mckinlay at redhat dot com 2005-04-04 20:03
---
Whats the advantage to setting these at configure time? Couldn't java-gcj-compat
just set them when it invokes gij?
It seems a little awkward to hardcode paths like "java-1.4.2-gcj-1.4.2.0" into
libgcj when thi
--- Additional Comments From rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
19:53 ---
Patch applied to mainline and 4.0. I forgot to add the PR number
to the initial mainline commit (now corrected) which is why it
didn't show up in the PR.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
19:45 ---
Subject: Bug 19537
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-04 19:45:14
Modified files:
gcc: Change
This is strange. With gfortran -2.500E-03 get printed two different ways
depending upon what is in the print list before it. g77 looks ok.
[dranta:~/tests/gfortran] dir% g77 -o print03 print03.f
[dranta:~/tests/gfortran] dir% print03
-1.000E-02 -2.000E-02 1.000E-02 2.000E-02 -1.000E-03 0
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ACATS c940013 fails at |ACATS c940013 segfault at
|runtime on hppa-linux |runtime on hppa-linux
http://gcc.gn
4.1.0 20050404 (experimental) (hppa-unknown-linux-gnu)
,.,. CXG1005 ACATS 2.5 05-04-04 05:06:11
CXG1005 Check that the subprograms defined in the package
Generic_Complex_Elementary_Functions provide correct
results.
* CXG1005 Incorrect result from Function
4.1.0 20050404 (experimental) (hppa-unknown-linux-gnu)
,.,. CE3810B ACATS 2.5 05-04-04 04:57:28
CE3810B CHECK THAT FIXED_IO PUT CAN OPERATE ON STRINGS. ALSO CHECK
THAT LAYOUT_ERROR IS RAISED WHEN THE STRING IS
INSUFFICIENTLY LONG.
Segmentation fault
4.1.0 20050404 (experimental) (hppa-unknown-linux-gnu)
,.,. CB41002 ACATS 2.5 05-04-04 04:42:54
CB41002 Check that the message string input parameter in a call to
the Raise_Exception procedure is associated with the
raised exception occurrence, and that the
4.1.0 20050404 (experimental)
,.,. C940013 ACATS 2.5 05-04-04 04:31:48
C940013 Check that queues on protected entries are handled FIFO and
that 'count is correct.
free(): invalid pointer 0x6ea80!
free(): invalid pointer 0x71e00!
free(): invalid pointer 0x77100!
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
19:15 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20725
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
19:14 ---
Fixed in 4.0, 4.1.
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression]|[
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20703
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-04-04 19:13
---
Same failure on 4.1.0 20050404 (experimental) (hppa-unknown-linux-gnu)
seen by J. David Anglin
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20548
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
19:11 ---
Subject: Bug 20679
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-04 19:11:08
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog parser.c
gcc/tests
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|java|libgcj
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20750
For java-gcj-compat, we need to define these system properties:
java.home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-1.4.2.0/jre
sun.boot.class.path=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-1.4.2.0/jre/lib/rt.jar
A --with-java-home configure option would allow these properties to be set.
--
Summary: libgcj need
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
19:09 ---
Fixed
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
19:09 ---
Fixed
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
19:09 ---
Subject: Bug 20679
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-04 19:09:10
Modified files:
gcc/cp : Change
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
19:02 ---
Subject: Bug 20703
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-04 19:02:18
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree-ssa-pre.c
gcc
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
19:02 ---
Subject: Bug 20725
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-04 19:02:18
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree-ssa-pre.c
gcc
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
19:00 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com 2005-04-04
18:20 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] internal compiler
error: in subreg_regno_offset, at rtlanal.c:3042
On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> On hppa64-hp-hpux*, I think we still have
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|fortran |libfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20749
Using a fresh build of gfortran from the cvs archive (old versions of gfortran
hit the now fixed - Internal Error: Recursive library error) I get an error
trying to open a direct access file (g77 and Absoft f77 are happy with it and
gfortran works ok if status='SCRATCH' is used instead of the vari
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
17:45 ---
Subject: Bug 20746
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-04 17:45:17
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog method.c
gcc/tests
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20746
--- Additional Comments From yanliu at ca dot ibm dot com 2005-04-04 17:37
---
Could you tell me which gcc level has the fix? thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20746
--- Additional Comments From nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
17:24 ---
2005-04-04 Nathan Sidwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR c++/20746
* method.c (use_thunk): Protect covariant pointer return
adjustments from NULL pointers.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-04
17:21 ---
Target removed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RE
1 - 100 of 156 matches
Mail list logo
