--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-25 06:07 ---
bl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29189
--- Comment #26 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-25 05:53
---
Paul,
OK here too. i686-linux
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20541
--- Comment #25 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2006-09-25
05:09 ---
Paul,
The current patch builds fine on Darwin PPC and shows no regressions
in the gfortran testsuite at either -m32 or -m64.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20541
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-25 04:31 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #10 from fang at csl dot cornell dot edu 2006-09-25 03:46
---
Subject: Re: variadic template support
> | For the record, personally and for what is worth my personal opinion
> | in the compiler area, I have nothing against adding to the compiler
> | -std=c++0x
>
> We shoul
--- Comment #9 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2006-09-25 03:38
---
Subject: Re: variadic template support
"pcarlini at suse dot de" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| For the record, personally and for what is worth my personal opinion
| in the compiler area, I have nothing agai
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-25 03:23 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-25 03:19 ---
reduced testcase:
template struct s
{
charT imp() const;
};
template charT s::imp() const
{
static const int masks[20] = {0};
}
__extension__ extern template char s::imp() const;
int regcompA(void)
{
s t
--- Comment #38 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-25 01:27
---
Subject: Re: ACATS c974001 c974013 hang with struct aliasing
On 24 Sep 2006 18:23:41 -, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #37 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
On 24 Sep 2006 18:23:41 -, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- Comment #37 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 18:23
---
> No, really, you don't seem to understand.
> If you respect these DECL_NONADDRESSABLE_P or
> TYPE_NONALIASED_COMPONENT
--- Comment #4 from sigra at home dot se 2006-09-24 23:57 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> some functions require non zero pointers and those should crash instead of
> having null pointer checks on them. And using references is not always the
> answer as some functions need to be able to b
--- Comment #4 from tausq at debian dot org 2006-09-24 23:49 ---
Fixed in gcc-4.x
--
tausq at debian dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #3 from randolph at tausq dot org 2006-09-24 23:48 ---
Subject: Re: [hppa] Missing address increment
optimization for fp load/stores
>> gcc starting from 4.0 produces this:
>>
>> .L3:
>> fldds -16(%r26),%fr22
>> fldds -8(%r26),%fr23
>> fldds 0(%r26)
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 23:37 ---
This would require dataflow to get correct and it is not that useful as some
functions require non zero pointers and those should crash instead of having
null pointer checks on them.
And using references is not alway
--- Comment #2 from sigra at home dot se 2006-09-24 23:29 ---
Sorry, accidentally hit commit too early. Try again:
There should be a warning about unchecked use of pointers in C++. For example:
void f(T * const x) {
x->something... // x might be 0, warn.
}
void f(T * const x) {
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 23:29 ---
What do you mean by unchecked use of pointers?
You example is useless as the function does nothing and even does not compile
as T is undeclared.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Rem
There should be a warning about unchecked use of pointers in C++. For example:
void f(T * const x) {
}
--
Summary: C++: Warn about unchecked use of pointers
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
P
[forwarded from http://bugs.debian.org/364819]
when run on hppa-linux-gnu, gij produces unaligned memory accesses on
hppa-linux-gnu (compiling the ecj.jar file), on alpha-linux-gnu compiling the
libdb4.4 jar file(s) (Falk, please add the details).
gij-4.1 \
-classpath build/bootstrap/
[forwarded from http://bugs.debian.org/387875 ]
[forwarded from http://bugs.debian.org/388505 ]
gcj-dbtool segfaults on hppa-linux-gnu and arm-linux-gnu; arm doesn't have
libjava support yet; the patches available from
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/2006-08/msg00123.html were used.
rechecked both wi
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-09-24
22:15 ---
Subject: Re: [hppa] Missing address increment optimization for fp load/stores
> For this test case:
>
> void f(double *pds, double *pdd, unsigned long len) {
> while (len >= 8*sizeof(double)) {
> re
--- Comment #1 from falk at debian dot org 2006-09-24 19:52 ---
For this test case:
void f(double *pds, double *pdd, unsigned long len) {
while (len >= 8*sizeof(double)) {
register double r1,r2,r3,r4;
r1 = *pds++;
r2 = *pds++;
r3 = *pds++;
r4 = *pds++;
*pdd++ =
--- Comment #9 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 18:48 ---
Just checked in a patch.
--
kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Stat
--- Comment #8 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 18:47 ---
Subject: Bug 28911
Author: kazu
Date: Sun Sep 24 18:47:25 2006
New Revision: 117181
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=117181
Log:
gcc/
PR target/28911
* config/m68k/m68k.md (negsf2,
--- Comment #37 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 18:23
---
> No, really, you don't seem to understand.
> If you respect these DECL_NONADDRESSABLE_P or
> TYPE_NONALIASED_COMPONENT flags, you are going to make them unaliased.
> Your whole bug report is that they are not al
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 17:34 ---
Reducing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29202
--- Comment #24 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 17:31 ---
Created an attachment (id=12320)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12320&action=view)
Patch + testcases for allocatable components
This version has all the known issues fixed and includes a number o
Currently, when installing two versions/copies of GCC into the same prefix,
using suitable --libdir, --infodir and --program-suffix options, the *only*
conflict, that is, the only file the second copy of GCC will overwrite, is
lib/pkgconfig/libgcj.pc.
One approach would be putting this into a vers
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 17:01 ---
This is not a bug as asms can be duplicated even if they are volatile.
The way to fix this is to use .1 and 1f lables.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #12 from kreckel at ginac dot de 2006-09-24 16:51 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> This is a TER bug then and I really doubt it can be fixed easy.
It doesn't disappear with -fno-tree-ter, as I would assume if it were a TER
bug.
--
kreckel at ginac dot de changed:
(sid)129:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~/delta/bin] gcc-3.4 -c -O3 mini.c
(sid)130:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~/delta/bin] gcc-4.0 -c -O3 mini.c
(sid)131:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~/delta/bin] gcc-4.1 -c -O3 mini.c
/tmp/cciWV4B7.s: Assembler messages:
/tmp/cciWV4B7.s:25: Error: symbol `L26' is already defined
/tmp/cciWV4B7.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #8 from sayle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 15:56 ---
Subject: Bug 29132
Author: sayle
Date: Sun Sep 24 15:55:51 2006
New Revision: 117180
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=117180
Log:
PR debug/29132
Backport from mainline
*
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 14:55 ---
Ooops, I forgot to clear this.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-09-24 12:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=12319)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12319&action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29202
$ g++ posix_api.ii -c -gdwarf-2 -g2 -feliminate-dwarf2-dups -finline-functions
internal compiler error: in output_pubnames, at dwarf2out.c:7380
--
Summary: ICE in output_pubnames, at dwarf2out.c:7380
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-09-24 12:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=12318)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12318&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29201
ICE with -O3:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcc -c -O3 metacity-window.c
metacity-window.c: In function 'meta_window_move_resize_internal':
metacity-window.c:106: internal compiler error: in create_recovery_block, at
haifa-sched.c:3692
Please submit a full bug report,
with preproc
In gcc/objc/objc-act.c there is this code:
warning (0, "multiple %s named %<%c%s%> found",
methods ? "methods" : "selectors",
The strings substituted for the first %s are not available for translation, so
this can not be properly translated. Even if they were, compos
--- Comment #16 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 10:11 ---
Actually looks like SCEV derives the wrong range.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 10:08 ---
Significant difference:
n_15: [0, +INF] EQUIVALENCES: { } (0 elements) without -fwrapv
n_15: [1, 65534] EQUIVALENCES: { } (0 elements) with -fwrapv
With -fwrapv this results in:
Folding predicate n_15 != 0 to 1
--- Comment #14 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 10:05 ---
Value ranges after VRP without -fwrapv:
e_1: VARYING
n_2: VARYING
e_3: VARYING
tn_4: VARYING
D.1875_5: [0, 65535] EQUIVALENCES: { } (0 elements)
bb_6: VARYING
D.1876_7: [0, +INF] EQUIVALENCES: { } (0 elements)
n_8
--- Comment #13 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 09:58 ---
VRP bug.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #1 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-24 08:19 ---
The choice to do things the way gcc does has been discussed many times over,
and the conclusion always has been that either all warnings should be done in
the front end, or dataflow analysis has to be used. The latte
The man page of gcc states:
-Wuninitialized
Warn if an automatic variable is used without first being initial-
ized or if a variable may be clobbered by a "setjmp" call.
These warnings are possible only in optimizing compilation, because
they req
45 matches
Mail list logo
