--- Comment #4 from bo dot berggren at glocalnet dot net 2006-05-13 06:41
---
Subject: Re: Transfer of character to integer array and
vice versa still doesn't work
paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr skrev:
> --- Comment #3 from paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr 20
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-13 04:59 ---
The label comes from a switch table.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27531
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-13 04:25 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.1 - see #5
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-13 04:08 ---
I can confirm this, trying to figure out to reduce this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27531
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-13 03:52 ---
Confirmed,
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCO
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27581
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.1 |4.0.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27582
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27582
The following invalid testcase triggers an ICE since GCC 3.4.0:
===
struct A
{
template void foo();
};
template > struct B {};
B b;
===
bug.cc:8: error: type/value mismatch at argument 1 in template para
The following invalid testcase triggers an ICE since GCC 3.4.0:
===
struct A
{
template static void foo();
static void bar() { this->A::foo<0>(); }
};
===
bug.cc: In static member function 'static void A::
--- Comment #2 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2006-05-12 21:47
---
Subject: Re: New: no warning for the non-standard integral overloads of math
functions
"marc dot glisse at normalesup dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| As a solution to "bug" 3181, integral overloads o
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 21:19 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Yes, I am fully aware, that my snipplet is buggy, however an ignored warning
> should not cause a crash in the program.
Code that invokes undefined behavior at runtime cannot be turned int
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 21:18
---
Well, the testcase is valid F2003 but not valid F95. We have to get it working
(for F2003 mode), which probably means adding a simplification function for
MAXLOC. And the same is true for all the intrinsics allowe
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-05-12 21:13 ---
> Yes, I am fully aware, that my snipplet is buggy, however an ignored warning
> should not cause a crash in the program.
There are many ways an ignored warning can cause a program to crash.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 20:38 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the testcase from comment #5
identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=113081
r113081 | mmitchel | 2006-04-19 16:58:23 + (Wed, 19 Apr 2006)
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-05-12 20:12 ---
Really, there is no point in trying to implement that warning, given the
ongoing developments of the C++ standard: those overloads are already part of
the current draft of the next ("C++0x") standard (and are also in TR1).
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last re
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last re
--- Comment #18 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 19:27
---
Hmm, don't we now violate the C++ standard by providing these overloads?
(http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#213).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3181
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 19:13 ---
Actually this is any attribute on the pointer in the function prototype:
void readv (int *__attribute__((aligned(16) )) );
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 19:08 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Reduced testcase:
void readv (int *__attribute__((altivec(vector__))) );
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
As a solution to "bug" 3181, integral overloads of many math functions (like
sqrt) were introduced. Would it be possible to add a warning when such
overloads are instantiated? I don't know how to do that with g++ (if it is not
possible, then it would be a nice feature to add). It would help people
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 18:59 ---
extern ssize_t readv (int __fd, __const struct iovec
*__attribute__((altivec(vector__))), int __count);
That is invalid code.
Hmm, I wonder if someone uses __vector somewhere.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 18:52 ---
I can also reproduce this on a cross compiler to powerpc-linux-gnu. and it is
a front-end issue. Reducing.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 18:47 ---
I cannot remember if the C++ standard allows this to be an error.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27577
--- Comment #1 from edmar at freescale dot com 2006-05-12 18:42 ---
Created an attachment (id=11449)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11449&action=view)
File generated with --save-temps
This is the .ii file that causes ICE.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug
This problem started somewhere between april 17, and april 20. Afftects 4.2
only.
Here is the -v output of the compilation terminated with ICE:
/local/gnu_toolchain/build_area/obj_gcc-trunk_7450/./gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc
-B/local/gnu_toolchain/build_area/obj_gcc-trunk_7450/./gcc -nostdinc++
-L/lo
At least on x86 and x86_64 the following program crashes
8<--
#include
std::string foo()
{
}
int main()
{
foo();
}
8<--
When one compiles this snipplet with warnings turned on, then this warning
shows up:g++ -Wall m.c
m.c: In function `std
--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 17:43 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Created an attachment (id=11443)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11443&action=view) [edit]
> A simple program showing that initialization of BOZ constants
> fails in modul
--- Comment #6 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-05-12 17:36 ---
Subject: Bug number PR 27548
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-05/msg00511.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
In gcc/unwind-dw2-fde.h
/* The first few fields of a CIE. The CIE_id field is 0 for a CIE,
to distinguish it from a valid FDE. FDEs are aligned to an addressing
unit boundary, but the fields within are unaligned. */
struct dwarf_cie
{
uword length;
sword CIE_id;
ubyte version;
uns
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 17:11 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #6 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 17:05 ---
Note that the same bug is causing
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/941014-2.c execution, -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/941014-2.c execution, -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/941014-2.c execution, -Os
--
http://gcc.
--- Comment #5 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 17:04 ---
*** Bug 27539 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27538
--- Comment #1 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 17:04 ---
The exact same problem as PR rtl-optmization/27538 is happening.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 27538 ***
--
kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |A
--- Comment #2 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 17:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=11448)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11448&action=view)
With the translation result for this file, the testcase can be linked
This file provides a definition of main a
--- Comment #1 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 16:58 ---
Created an attachment (id=11447)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11447&action=view)
test case
Compiled for either sh-elf or i686-pc-linux-gnu, currrent mainline cc1plus does
not generate any debu
This program writes one word and then reads two words. g77 finds the error but
gfortran does not -
[dranta:~/tests/gfortran-D] dir% gfortran -o read01 read01.f
[dranta:~/tests/gfortran-D] dir% read01
[dranta:~/tests/gfortran-D] dir% cat read01.f
program test
integer i1,i2
open(un
Compilation with -O0 -g no longer creates debug information for all variables.
--
Summary: MIssing debug info at -O0
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
As
--- Comment #3 from sebor at roguewave dot com 2006-05-12 16:30 ---
Created an attachment (id=11446)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11446&action=view)
Corrected test program exercising SFINAE.
After modifying the test program from comment #1 to correct these problem
--- Comment #2 from sebor at roguewave dot com 2006-05-12 16:27 ---
EDG points out to me that both the original test case and the one from comment
#1 are ambiguous because only the declaration of the signature of the function
(and thus only the declaration of its return type and its argu
--- Comment #15 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 16:05 ---
looks like there is agreement that the problem is fixed.
--
bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27571
--- Comment #10 from eweddington at cso dot atmel dot com 2006-05-12 15:10
---
Subject: Re: Wrong code generation when cross compile for
attiny2313
p dot mateja at sh dot cvut dot cz wrote:
> In other words: Is there any way how to say to gcc that const arrays shoud
> stay
> just i
--- Comment #2 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 14:53
---
Here's a shorter testcase:
==
template class> struct A;
template struct B
{
template void foo(T);
};
template<> template class T> void B<
--- Comment #3 from paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr 2006-05-12
14:50 ---
Created an attachment (id=11445)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11445&action=view)
Patch for bug (not regtested)
The problem turned out to be less severe than I imagined. The attach
--- Comment #5 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 14:46 ---
Can also be reproduced on i686.
Patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-05/msg00511.html
--
rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
gfortran-4.2-HEAD -fopenmp -fprofile-generate -c
/src/gfc-4.2/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.fortran/omp_parse1.f90
omp_parse1.f90:3: internal compiler error: in expand_omp_parallel, at
omp-low.c:2396
smallish testcase:
program test_omp
implicit none
integer i,j,k,omp_get_num_threads,omp_get_thread_n
--- Comment #21 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 14:00
---
This looks related to PR26726 as IVOPTs produces now
:
i = minLen + 1;
D.1588 = (int *) (unsigned int) (i * 4);
ivtmp.34 = limit + D.1588 - 4B;
ivtmp.40 = base + D.1588;
goto ();
:;
D.1595 = (int *)
--- Comment #5 from paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr 2006-05-12
13:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=11444)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11444&action=view)
Corrected version of patch
This version of the patch survives regtesting!
--
paul dot richard d
--- Comment #23 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 13:42
---
The patch from comment #14 is not really useful as it f.i. warns for
int sink;
void bar()
{
int j;
sink = j;
}
t.c: In function 'bar':
t.c:5: warning: 'j' is used uninitialized in this function
t.c:4: not
--- Comment #30 from karol at mikronika dot com dot pl 2006-05-12 13:40
---
Strange... I don't know why 3.3.x will not be updated. Currently line 3.3.x is
used in many stable/production environments like stable: Debian (sarge),
Slackware 10, Suse 10.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #5 from guilloteau at obs dot u-bordeaux1 dot fr 2006-05-12
13:05 ---
Created an attachment (id=11443)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11443&action=view)
A simple program showing that initialization of BOZ constants fails in modules.
The test program sho
--- Comment #4 from paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr 2006-05-12
11:42 ---
Created an attachment (id=11442)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11442&action=view)
Patch to effect compile time checking
Thomas,
The attached patch corrects the problem and is prese
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 11:27 ---
-fbounds-check is completely useless option, it is so buggy that you can't use
it for anything real.
E.g. it doesn't handle assumed size or allocatable arrays.
Try running make check-gfortran RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_boa
--- Comment #1 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-05-12 09:47 ---
Subject: Bug number PR c++/27572
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-05/msg00502.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
The C++ frontend currently chokes on invalid typedefs in parameter
declarations for both functions and templates.
One can generate ICEs in many different places like the following
examples show:
==
void foo(typedef) {}
==
bug
--- Comment #1 from paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr 2006-05-12
09:23 ---
I find this to be "surprising":
$ cat pr24168.f90;rm a.exe;/irun/bin/gfortran -fdump-tree-original pr24168.f90;
./a
program bug
implicit none
integer, parameter :: nx=2,ny=2
real, dimension(nx,ny) ::
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-05-12 08:51 ---
This is a (new) feature, not a bug, see libstdc++/11705 and in general search
about stream orientation in the C standard (C99, 7.19.2). In a nutshell you
cannot mix byte oriented and wide oriented I/O. For now, due to the *
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-05-12 08:47 ---
Created an attachment (id=11441)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11441&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27571
ICE in get_attr_usegp, at config/alpha/alpha.md:171 using gcc 4.2.0 20060508:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcc -c -O1 mini.c
mini.c: In function 'r7to_double':
mini.c:36: error: unrecognizable insn:
(jump_insn 50 49 51 (addr_diff_vec:SI (label_ref:DI 49)
[
(l
#include
int main()
{
//std::cout << "Hello!" << std::endl;
std::wcout << L"Wello!" << std::endl;
std::cout << "Hello!" << std::endl;
return 0;
}
//
$ g++ test.cpp
$ ./a.out
Wello!
There is no output from std::cout, but if
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 08:27 ---
f is marked addressable and assigned a stack slot. That the stores are not
optimized away later is probably due to aliasing issues - an open-coded memcpy
must behave like the -fno-strict-aliasing case, so I guess we
64 matches
Mail list logo
