gcc segfaults in print_filtered_help when invoked with --target-help option:
Starting program: /export/home/uros/gcc-build/gcc/cc1 --target-help
Target specific options:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x0838547b in print_filtered_help (flag=4194304)
at ../../gcc-svn/tru
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 07:18 ---
Subject: Bug 26074
Author: pault
Date: Tue Feb 14 07:18:44 2006
New Revision: 110960
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110960
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 07:18 ---
Subject: Bug 25088
Author: pault
Date: Tue Feb 14 07:18:44 2006
New Revision: 110960
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110960
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 07:18 ---
Subject: Bug 25083
Author: pault
Date: Tue Feb 14 07:18:44 2006
New Revision: 110960
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110960
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 07:18 ---
Subject: Bug 20871
Author: pault
Date: Tue Feb 14 07:18:44 2006
New Revision: 110960
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110960
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 07:18 ---
Subject: Bug 25103
Author: pault
Date: Tue Feb 14 07:18:44 2006
New Revision: 110960
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110960
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 07:18 ---
Subject: Bug 20861
Author: pault
Date: Tue Feb 14 07:18:44 2006
New Revision: 110960
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110960
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran
--- Comment #8 from amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2006-02-14 06:11
---
I think David indentified the wrong patch in comment #4. My guess is that rev
83504, rs6000_eliminate_indexed_memrefs, (and followup rev 92567) is the real
fix for this problem.
--
amodra at bigpond dot net d
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 04:39 ---
Why are you doing "--prefix=/usr"?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25698
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 04:10 ---
What do you think it will do to 1000^2 expressions?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25647
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 03:51 ---
Can you try:
#include
jmp_buf jb_error;
void jump(void){
longjmp(jb_error,1);
}
void func1(void){
return;
}
int main(void){
if(setjmp(jb_error))
return 0;
func1();
jump();
}
I am wo
--- Comment #2 from mugita at jsdkk dot com 2006-02-14 03:37 ---
h8300-elf-gcc(3.4.3) makes this object.
0x1a0 : 6d f6 mov.w r6,@-e7
- 0x1a2 : 0d 76 mov.w r7,r6
0x1a4 : 79 00 1d 4a mov.w #0x1d4a
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 03:31 ---
Confirmed based on:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-02/msg00688.html
Plus I think I have a fix so mine.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Add
--- Comment #4 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2006-02-14 03:07 ---
This has now been fixed on mainline.
--
roger at eyesopen dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 02:04 ---
Also affects sparc64-sun-solaris2.10, backported to 4.0 and 3.4.
--
ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 01:59 ---
Subject: Bug 24901
Author: ghazi
Date: Tue Feb 14 01:59:16 2006
New Revision: 110953
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110953
Log:
Backport:
2006-02-01 Steve Ellcey <[EMAIL PROTE
--- Comment #5 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 01:51 ---
Subject: Bug 24901
Author: ghazi
Date: Tue Feb 14 01:51:28 2006
New Revision: 110952
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110952
Log:
Backport:
2006-02-01 Steve Ellcey <[EMAIL PROTE
--- Comment #8 from mark at codesourcery dot com 2006-02-14 01:21 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] ICE in reload_cse_simplify_operands,
at postreload.c:391
Joern RENNECKE wrote:
> No, it is just a matter of what is desired for the branch. Mark, would
> you like
> me to backport
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 01:08
---
*** Bug 26273 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 01:08 ---
This was just fixed today.
This is a dup of bug 26222.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26222 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Bootstrap fails with configure and build:
../configure --prefix=/pkgs/gcc-mainline --with-gmp=/sw/ --with-mpfr=/sw/
--with-as=/usr/local/odcctools-20060123/bin/as
--with-ld=/usr/local/odcctools-20060123/bin/ld; make -j 8 bootstrap
STAGE1_CFLAGS='-O2 -g' >& build.log
/Users/lucier/programs/gcc/m
--- Comment #2 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 00:51 ---
Without further information (use of pc) loop-invariant has no way how to know
that this insn cannot be moved; so I think your patch should be correct.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26272
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 00:37 ---
I am going to test the following patch (but I would like to know if this is the
correct approach):
Index: config/rs6000/darwin.md
===
--- config/rs6000/
--- Comment #6 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 00:34 ---
I think your patch is the Right Thing. It fixes all regressions I've seen with
-fmove-loop-invariants on trunk for x86 cross sh4-*-linux-gnu. Thanks for
looking into this issue!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 00:19 ---
IIRC this was fixed by a latter rewrite of c-decl.c and most likely not going
to be fixed for 3.4.x.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24097
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 00:17 ---
This is valid code besides the extra semicolon and converting between between
function pointer types and void*.
This is a dup of bug 24097.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 24097 ***
--
pinskia at
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 00:17 ---
*** Bug 26271 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.2 Regresssion] gcc.c-|[4.2 Regresssion] gcc.c-
|torture/execute/built-in-
[dandelion:~/src/gcc/local] pinskia% /Volumes/temp/gcc/local/bin/gcc -O2
gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/built-in-setjmp.c
[dandelion:~/src/gcc/local] pinskia% !./
./a.out
Bus error
[dandelion:~/src/gcc/local] pinskia% /Volumes/temp/gcc/local/bin/gcc -O2
gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/exec
Because of a mistaken preprocessor macro I ended up compiling a program like
this:
static void foo() {};
void *bar() {
extern void foo();
return foo;
}
int main() {
return bar()==foo;
}
Of course this was not what I intended to do (I don't even know whether it's
legal C) but gcc 3.4.4 com
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 00:00 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|norma
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 23:59 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> f1 in the following is optimized to f2
> but f3 isn't seen as equivalent to f4
These are because fold is not recalled on the full expression a < CST0 && a +
CST1 < CST0.
Confirmed.
--
--- Comment #1 from amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2006-02-13 23:53
---
f1 in the following is optimized to f2
int
f1 (unsigned long offset)
{
return offset < 0x100 && offset + 4 < 0x100;
}
int
f2 (unsigned long offset)
{
return offset < 0xfc;
}
but f3 isn't seen as equivalent
f1 in the following could be optimized to generate the same code as f2.
(Taken from rs6000.c:rs6000_legitimate_offset_address_p.)
int
f1 (unsigned long offset, int x)
{
unsigned long extra = 0;
if (x)
extra = 4;
return offset < 0x100 && offset + extra < 0x100;
}
int
f2 (unsigned long
--- Comment #4 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 23:36 ---
Here's what 3.4 does for the testcase:
(insn 38 204 205 0 (set (reg:HI 19 %r19)
(mem:HI (plus:SI (reg/v/f:SI 3 %r3 [orig:97 w ] [97])
(const_int 256 [0x100])) [4 S2 A16])) 52 {*pa.md:2878} (n
--- Comment #10 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 23:19
---
Subject: Bug 26235
Author: rakdver
Date: Mon Feb 13 23:19:49 2006
New Revision: 110939
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110939
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/26235
* loop-invariant.
--- Comment #49 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 22:59
---
I've approved this for 4.1 and mainline.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg01031.html
Please do not apply to 4.0 or 3.4, as an ABI change along a release branch is
even worse than an ordinary ABI chan
Compiling the invalid code snippet
==
void foo()
{
i;
int i;
}
==
yields the following error message (since GCC 3.4.5):
bug.cc: In function 'void foo()':
bug.cc:3: error: 'i' was not declared in this scope
bug.cc:4: error: redeclaration of 'int i'
bug.cc:3
--- Comment #48 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 22:42
---
I'm going to comment on the behavior issue raised in the comments from David
Moore, and then review the patch itself.
First, the C standard has nothing to say about this issue; even were it not for
the fact that
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 22:25 ---
Marking as fixed.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 22:18
---
(I'd love to see these #pragmas go away; as indicated in the manual, they have
very little utility. But, that's another conversation for another day.)
If you remove the lbasename calls, won't you see other proble
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 22:17 ---
This is a module related problem; the same function works fine when internal.
program TestStringTools
character(len=50) :: txt
character(len=1), dimension(50) :: chararr
txt = chararray2string(char
--- Comment #2 from mckinlay at redhat dot com 2006-02-13 22:02 ---
libgcj is not yet using Classpath's locale database, so classes (including
Calendar) that rely on the old locale information are yet to be merged. I'm
working on a patch for the trunk that will switch libgcj to use Class
--- Comment #7 from joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2006-02-13 22:02
---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] ICE in reload_cse_simplify_operands, at
postreload.c:391
Andrew Pinski wrote:
> Confirmed, fixed at least on the mainline, this might be too hard to fix on
> the
> 4.1 branch.
--- Comment #11 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:48 ---
Subject: Bug 26246
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:48:22 2006
New Revision: 110931
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110931
Log:
2006-02-13 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Jakub
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:42 ---
Fixed for 4.2.0 and 4.1.0 at least.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:41
---
Fixed. Thanks Jabuk for taking care of my patch.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:40 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.1.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:39 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.1.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:39 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.1.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:38 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.1.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:38 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.1.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:37 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.1.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:35 ---
Subject: Bug 25088
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:35:09 2006
New Revision: 110930
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110930
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:35 ---
Subject: Bug 25103
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:35:09 2006
New Revision: 110930
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110930
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:35 ---
Subject: Bug 25083
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:35:09 2006
New Revision: 110930
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110930
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:35 ---
Subject: Bug 26074
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:35:09 2006
New Revision: 110930
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110930
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:35 ---
Subject: Bug 20861
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:35:09 2006
New Revision: 110930
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110930
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:35 ---
Subject: Bug 20871
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:35:09 2006
New Revision: 110930
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110930
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #7 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:32 ---
Reporter says this is fixed, and nobody seems to disagree.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:31 ---
Subject: Bug 26246
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:31:18 2006
New Revision: 110929
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110929
Log:
2006-02-13 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Jakub
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:29 ---
Subject: Bug 26092
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:29:13 2006
New Revision: 110928
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110928
Log:
PR middle-end/26092
* gimplify.c (gimplify_call_e
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:28 ---
Subject: Bug 26092
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:28:03 2006
New Revision: 110927
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110927
Log:
PR middle-end/26092
* gimplify.c (gimplify_call_e
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:23 ---
Subject: Bug 25103
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:22:55 2006
New Revision: 110926
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110926
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:23 ---
Subject: Bug 25088
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:22:55 2006
New Revision: 110926
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110926
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:23 ---
Subject: Bug 20871
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:22:55 2006
New Revision: 110926
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110926
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:23 ---
Subject: Bug 25083
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:22:55 2006
New Revision: 110926
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110926
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:23 ---
Subject: Bug 26074
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:22:55 2006
New Revision: 110926
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110926
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 21:23 ---
Subject: Bug 20861
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 21:22:55 2006
New Revision: 110926
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110926
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 20:58 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 20:58 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 20:29 ---
And I should say 4.1.0 is correct to reject this code.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26266
--- Comment #3 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 20:27 ---
Subject: Bug 26247
Author: rakdver
Date: Mon Feb 13 20:27:44 2006
New Revision: 110924
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110924
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/26247
PR rtl-optimization
--- Comment #3 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 20:27 ---
Subject: Bug 26248
Author: rakdver
Date: Mon Feb 13 20:27:44 2006
New Revision: 110924
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110924
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/26247
PR rtl-optimization
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 20:27 ---
*** Bug 26268 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26267
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 20:27 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26267 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
While compiling:
template
struct Type2Type {
typedef T Type;
};
template
inline void foo(Type2Type const&) {
int x = NOT_HERE;
}
int main(int, char *) {
// std::cout << "Hello world!" << std::endl;
}
g++ gives an error about NOT_HERE being declared. Rightly so, but the function
`foo' i
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 20:25 ---
I should say this is rejected in 4.1.0:
../include/row.hh: In member function row::operator const row()
const [with T = unsigned int]:
../include/powerset.hh:1027: instantiated from row > powerset::ranges(row) [
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 20:24 ---
This has nothing to do with implicity instatiating the template function.
NOT_HERE is not dependent so it is looked up as the template function is parsed
and not at instatiation time.
This is not a bug and this beha
While compiling:
template
struct Type2Type {
typedef T Type;
};
template
inline void foo(Type2Type const&) {
int x = NOT_HERE;
}
int main(int, char *) {
// std::cout << "Hello world!" << std::endl;
}
g++ gives an error about NOT_HERE being declared. Rightly so, but the function
`foo' i
--- Comment #5 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 19:53 ---
I have submited my patch, as it is useful regardless of whether the new hook
will be added or not. I am not sure whether it is reasonable to introduce a
new target hook just to handle this special case; if you think
--- Comment #2 from igodard at pacbell dot net 2006-02-13 19:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=10841)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10841&action=view)
source code (compressed)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26266
--- Comment #1 from igodard at pacbell dot net 2006-02-13 19:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=10840)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10840&action=view)
compiler output
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26266
--
Summary: ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: igodard at pacbell dot net
http://gc
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 19:37 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.1.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 19:36 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.1.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 19:35 ---
fixed on trunk and 4.1.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 19:32 ---
Subject: Bug 26038
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 19:32:02 2006
New Revision: 110921
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110921
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 19:32 ---
Subject: Bug 25070
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 19:32:02 2006
New Revision: 110921
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110921
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 19:32 ---
Subject: Bug 25059
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 13 19:32:02 2006
New Revision: 110921
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110921
Log:
2006-02-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-02-13
19:23 ---
Subject: Re: [3.4/4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] ICE: cp_expr_size, at
cp/cp-lang.c:308
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > I believe that this error occurs because vax.h defines
> > PCC_STATIC_STRUCT_RETURN.
> > Remo
--- Comment #3 from bo dot berggren at glocalnet dot net 2006-02-13 19:22
---
Created an attachment (id=10839)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10839&action=view)
Adding the result keyword to the functions makes them compile cleanly.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
--- Comment #2 from bo dot berggren at glocalnet dot net 2006-02-13 19:21
---
Created an attachment (id=10838)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10838&action=view)
This is the source file that fails to compile.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26265
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 19:20 ---
*** Bug 26265 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 19:20 ---
This is a dup of bug 26246.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26246 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
ffortran build 2006-02-12,
Compiling a small module containing two simple functions gives the following
result:
bobo> gfortran -Wall -c basic.F90
/tmp/ccOmbUEh.s: Assembler messages:
/tmp/ccOmbUEh.s:36: Error: symbol `..__result' is already defined
--
Summary: gfortran produces ille
--- Comment #7 from James dot Juran at baesystems dot com 2006-02-13 19:15
---
Point granted; I guess __builtin_stdarg_start could just be removed without
warning or notice.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26264
--- Comment #3 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 19:08 ---
Regarding comment #2, while it's possible that removing
the SECONDARY_MEMORY_NEEDED_RTX define has had an effect,
we have never had support in pa.md to load an HImode value
into a floating-point register. The other
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 19:08 ---
Subject: Re: Extraneous warning with __builtin_stdarg_start and optimization
> --- Comment #5 from James dot Juran at baesystems dot com 2006-02-13
> 19:06 ---
> Yes, that does seem to be the case based o
> --- Comment #5 from James dot Juran at baesystems dot com 2006-02-13
> 19:06 ---
> Yes, that does seem to be the case based on the ChangeLog I quoted. And of
> course the easy workaround for a developer is just to use __builtin_va_start
> instead. But is the deprecation of __builtin_s
1 - 100 of 167 matches
Mail list logo
