--- Additional Comments From bjoern dot m dot haase at web dot de
2005-09-05 06:59 ---
IMO, one would not be able to handle the issue by changing CSE. E.g. I
presently don't see how to avoid using register notes for the following
situation. Imagine a target not having DImode operations
> compiler failed in mid-compile of mysql source tree, -same-temps output
> added as attachment
We need the *.i file, not the *.s file.
--
Eric Botcazou
On Sep 4, 2005, at 9:26 PM, Marek Mandre wrote:
# g++ -save-temps -DMYSQL_SERVER -DDEFAULT_MYSQL_HOME="/usr/local"
-DDATADIR="/usr/local/var" -DSHAREDIR="/usr/local/share/mysql"
-DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -I../innobase/include -I../include -I../regex
-I/usr/local/include-O3 -DDBUG_OFF-fno
--- Additional Comments From mkrisch at yahoo dot com dot au 2005-09-04
23:00 ---
never got any feedback from the gimp folk to provide a test case. so i will
just stick to compiling without -mfpmath=sse as a work around.
invalid doesn't seem to be the right sort of resolution state,
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
22:33 ---
Or even better add support for multiple sets in CSE and forget about adding
notes. That will improve
more targets than just AVR.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From bjoern dot m dot haase at web dot de
2005-09-04 22:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=9665)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9665&action=view)
Patch adding REG_EQUAL notes to the divmod4 expanders
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.
Prologue:
Purpose of this enhancement request is not only to resolve a missed
optimization issue for the avr port. It aims to show up ways for resolving a
general difficulty for the RTL optimizers that we are presently having for
double-set insn: A difficulty that shows up when dealing with s
--- Additional Comments From raghavan at cavs dot msstate dot edu
2005-09-04 21:36 ---
Subject: [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] error: ... cannot appear
in a constant-expression
Hi,
Is this bug fixed? I'm still unable to use a static constant in
an expression to declare another stati
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
21:26 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23321
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
20:50 ---
Fixed on mainline and 4.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
20:48 ---
Thomas, isn't this fixed by
2005-08-31 Steve Ellcey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR target/23556
* io/read.c (convert_real): Use memcpy to fill buffer.
?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
20:45 ---
Subject: Bug 23321
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-04 20:45:41
Modified files:
libgfortran: Change
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
20:45 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Mainline issues the following diagnostic for the code from
g++.dg/inherit/using4.C:
struct B {
void f();
};
struct D : B {
using B::f;
using B::f; // { dg-error "repeated" }
};
using4.C:7: error: repeated using declar
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
20:42 ---
Patch about that under review here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg00062.html
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
20:36 ---
Subject: Bug 23321
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-04 20:36:52
Modified files:
libgfortran: ChangeLog
libgfortran/io : t
--- Additional Comments From soete dot joel at tiscali dot be 2005-09-04
19:42 ---
Subject: Re: glibc-2.3.3 build failled with gcc-3.4.[012]
for parisc-linux
Hello pinskia,
mmm I don't know very accurately how are manage outdated br?
In fact the pr doesn't exist anymore to build glib
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
19:16 ---
No feedback in 3 months.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
19:13 ---
No feedback in 3 months (T-4 days).
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
19:11 ---
No feedback in 3 months (T-8 days).
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
19:10 ---
No feedback in 3 months.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
19:10 ---
No feedback in 3 months.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
19:09 ---
No feedback in 3 months.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
19:09 ---
No feedback in 3 months.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
19:08 ---
No feedback in 3 months.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
19:07 ---
No feedback in 6 months.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
19:06 ---
No feedback in 3 months.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
19:05 ---
No feedbacck in 3 months.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
18:48 ---
This is similar to PR 2288.
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn|
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
18:39 ---
The rejects valid is a regression so marking as such.
--
What|Removed |Added
Summ
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
18:34 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
That issue is PR 5786.
The first issue in this PR is fixed for 4.0.0 so closing this as fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
18:34 ---
Although members of anonymous namespaces can be made 'static' on every target,
they can all be given
the same name on targets with weak symbol support, since on other targets the
typeinfo is compared by
n
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
18:28 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> I believe this should also have keyword accepts-invalid, as shown by the
> following testcase, which should fail to compile but is accepted by current
> GCC
That looks like a dif
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
18:17 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> This diff gets us most of the way. However, as this is not a regression, it
> is
> now queued until non-regression bug fixes can be applied
Your message was back in December and
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
18:15 ---
*** Bug 23724 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
18:15 ---
This is not a bug as the overloaded set for f when the function call in the
template is parsed does not
contain the two argument function. This is required by the C++ standard to be
rejected.
If you ren
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2922
--- Additional Comments From sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr
2005-09-04 18:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=9664)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9664&action=view)
Program that reproduces the error message
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?i
The attached program fails to compile with the following error message :
pipo.C: In function 'void f(T) [with T = N::A]':
pipo.C:24: instantiated from here
pipo.C:15: error: no matching function for call to 'f(N::A&, N::T1)'
It works with g++ 4.0.1, 3.4.3 and 3.3.4, but
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
17:27 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > How does the C front end represent this expression?
>
> Using a COMPOUND_LITERAL_EXPR which should solve this and PR 23172.
And PR 20103.
--
ht
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
17:22 ---
Hmm, there is one issue with this proposal is that the classes better have the
same elements, otherwise
this will not work. This also very runtime dependent so the code for the GNU
runtime will be differ
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
17:12 ---
I will look at this. Is this by any chance a regression?
--
What|Removed |Added
Ass
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
17:08 ---
Fixed in 4.0.2.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOL
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
17:07 ---
Subject: Bug 23108
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-04 17:07:46
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : Change
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
17:05 ---
Subject: Bug 23108
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-04 17:05:41
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
libobjc: C
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
16:40 ---
Yes your patch fixes the issue on ppc-darwin also, I am going to commit today.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23108
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
16:37 ---
pinskia posted a patch for the =0 "bug"
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-03/msg01054.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20408
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
16:25 ---
For
struct Foo {};
void foo(const Foo&);
void bar(Foo);
void fooc(void)
{
foo(Foo());
}
void barc(void)
{
bar(Foo());
}
we get different initializers for the Foo& and the Foo case:
void f
--- Additional Comments From danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
15:13 ---
Proposed fix:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg00205.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23720
--- Additional Comments From falk at debian dot org 2005-09-04 15:08
---
Backing out
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/toplev.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.944.2.4&r2=1.944.2.5
from Mark's patch to PR 21828 makes the problem go away.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
15:05 ---
These fails are also present in 4.0.2.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23720
--- Additional Comments From danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
14:55 ---
Fixed by patch.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESO
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
14:54 ---
It worked with "4.1.0 20050622".
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23357
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
14:52 ---
Subject: Bug 23721
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-04 14:52:00
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/pa : p
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
14:45 ---
Worked with 20050622.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23723
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
14:44 ---
Confirmed, it started to fail before 20050808.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNC
gcc version 4.1.0 20050819 (experimental)
Target: alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/ecc% cat main.ii
struct S { };
S const s = S();
int main(){}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/ecc% g++ main.ii
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/ecc% g++ main.ii -g
/tmp/ccAquXQn.o:(.debug_info+0x150): undefined reference to
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-09-04 14:10
---
By the way, the error message I get with mainline (or current 4_0-branch):
reduced_2005_09_04.cc: In function 'int main()':
reduced_2005_09_04.cc:66: error: '(((int)X<0>::n_primes) == 256)' is not a valid
template
An example:
int f()
{
if (1)
{
return 1;
else
{
}
}
the else should cause us to close the } block and we should only have one error
message. Right now we
have two:
t.c: In function f:
t.c:6: error: expected expression before else
t.c:9: error: expected declaration or statement
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04 12:29
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
12:26 ---
Subject: Bug 23661
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-04 12:25:46
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: Change
--- Additional Comments From mark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04 12:20
---
*** Bug 16281 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From mark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04 12:20
---
This is addressed by the patch for bug #19512 Optional JNI error checking. Which
(among others) includes the following:
- Check that '.' is not used in method and field descriptors.
*** This bug has been mark
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
12:09 ---
Subject: Bug 23661
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-04 12:08:53
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog io.c
gcc/testsuite
--- Additional Comments From mark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04 11:40
---
There is a proposed patch (from January):
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2005-q1/msg00162.html
But I have not had time to forward port it to the lasted CVS head or do any
performance tests (Bryce suggested
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
11:36 ---
I cannot reproduce on SPARC/Solaris as of
hikaru% cat ~/cvs/gcc/LAST_UPDATED
Sat Sep 3 23:56:02 CDT 2005
Sun Sep 4 04:56:02 UTC 2005
Moreover, an inspection of the back-end didn't uncover any smoking g
--- Additional Comments From bjoern dot m dot haase at web dot de
2005-09-04 11:28 ---
I just realized that the patch posted here had just posted had a <= where
should have been a < for two comparisons. The patch on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
is already correct.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugz
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-09-04
11:19 ---
Roger, want to have a look at this?
--
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Additional Comments From bjoern dot m dot haase at web dot de
2005-09-04 10:35 ---
Indeed IMHO the problem stems from the patch:
+2005-01-22 Roger Sayle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+
+ PR middle-end/19378
+ * config/avr/avr.c (avr_hard_regno_mode_ok): Rewrite.
--- Additional Comments From jblomqvi at cc dot hut dot fi 2005-09-04
09:49 ---
Removing mmap improves performance, patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg00176.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21820
--- Additional Comments From jblomqvi at cc dot hut dot fi 2005-09-04
09:47 ---
This patch improves performance 20-fold for the case where the file already
exists:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg00176.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23363
72 matches
Mail list logo
