--- Comment #25 from giovannibajo at libero dot it 2007-09-05 06:47 ---
Daniel, can we backport this patch to 4.2, please? It's a P1 regression!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32328
--- Comment #2 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 06:17 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I think I'll let Kaveh fix this one...
To what exactly do I owe this honor? :-)
AFAICT, this is a -Wwrite-strings error caused by a patch by FX:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-08/ms
--- Comment #4 from ian at airs dot com 2007-09-05 06:03 ---
I haven't looked further at this since this message:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-08/msg01166.html
Testing DECL_EXTERNAL_LINKAGE_P does not make any difference: the compiler
still crashes. The decl in question is
--- Comment #26 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 05:46 ---
This is just one bug, present in GCC 4.1 and onwards, no need to have
several bug ids.
tree-ssa-alias.c just uses ipa_type_escape_field_does_not_clobber_p
incorrectly, it asks an unrelated question and based on the an
--- Comment #15 from ian at airs dot com 2007-09-05 05:34 ---
Fixed.
--
ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |R
--- Comment #14 from ian at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 05:31 ---
Subject: Bug 33029
Author: ian
Date: Wed Sep 5 05:31:37 2007
New Revision: 128119
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128119
Log:
PR middle-end/33029
* lower-subreg.c (resolve_clobbe
--- Comment #5 from belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru 2007-09-05
05:10 ---
Fixed.
--
belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from prj-bugzilla-gcc at multivac dot cwru dot edu
2007-09-05 04:49 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> I'd certainly like to see this fixed in 4.2.2
Will someone be reviewing and committing this before 4.2.2? I posted it to
gcc-patches with a ChangeLog entry, but there wa
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33299
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 02:24
---
Since a patch has been checked in, can this issue be closed?
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33263
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33237
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33213
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33207
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33203
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33199
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33185
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33184
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33146
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33140
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33138
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33133
--- Comment #1 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 01:50 ---
I think I'll let Kaveh fix this one...
On hpux and in libiberty, putenv takes a const char * while on other os's
it takes a char *. xputenv doesn't do anything that would affect the
constantness of its argument.
T
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32552
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33118
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33107
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 01:31
---
I'm all for removing optimization options if we don't ever want to turn them
off. Fewer options would be better...
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32841
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32643
--- Comment #10 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 01:28
---
To answer Jakub's question:
> So, what can be done to speed up acceptance of this?
Jim is a GWP maintainer, so once he's happy the patch can go in. Testing on
IA64 definitely seems like a good step. :-)
--
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31849
--- Comment #13 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-09-05 01:24
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] ICE with -O2 -fsee
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #12 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 23:37
> ---
> Fixed.
>
>
>
jakub
thanks for doing
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33239
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33238
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 01:10
---
It would be nice to fix this on the 4.2 branch, but certainly not a priority.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33195
--- Comment #25 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 01:08
---
It's not clear to me what's going on in this PR. At one point, Jakub seems to
be saying that 4.2 does a better job than 4.1, which would suggest that this is
just a 4.1.x PR? Can we split this into one PR for 4.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33099
/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/./prev-gcc/
-B/opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-4.3.0/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/bin/ -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -W
-Wall
-Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes
-Wold-style-definition
-Wmissing-format-attribute -pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wno-variadi
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 01:00
---
Ian, I know that we talked about this on the mailing list at one point. Did
this get resolved? Does changing the assert to check DECL_EXTERNAL_LINKAGE_P
instead of DECL_EXTERNAL help?
--
mmitchel at gcc dot g
--- Comment #13 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 00:58
---
Do we have any way to work out whether this is still a problem? Richard seems
to think the bug has been fixed, but Pascal is still seeing the problem,
apparently.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #20 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 00:51
---
Subject: Bug 33225
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Sep 5 00:51:18 2007
New Revision: 128114
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128114
Log:
2007-03-04 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32694
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32575
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32544
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 00:11
---
I have been waiting for this to emerge. We knew there was a problem somewhere.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 23:37 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 23:35 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #11 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 23:31 ---
Subject: Bug 32300
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 4 23:31:11 2007
New Revision: 128108
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128108
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/32300
* see.c (see_copy_insn
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 23:30 ---
Subject: Bug 33017
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 4 23:29:58 2007
New Revision: 128107
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128107
Log:
PR tree-optimization/33017
* tree-data-ref.c (spl
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 22:00 ---
This works on the trunk (which is 4.3.0).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33308
--- Comment #1 from t_nissie at yahoo dot co dot jp 2007-09-04 21:54
---
Created an attachment (id=14157)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14157&action=view)
compile: gfortran reshapetest.f90
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33308
I got ICE on i686-pc-linux-gnu, x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu and
ia64-unknown-linux-gnu with gfortran 4.2.1.
$ gfortran -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.2.1
$ cat reshapetes
--- Comment #3 from doko at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 21:32 ---
Subject: Bug 33278
Author: doko
Date: Tue Sep 4 21:32:41 2007
New Revision: 128104
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128104
Log:
2007-09-05 Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libgcj/
--- Comment #7 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 21:03 ---
This one should be fairly straightforward.
Mine :-)
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 20:18 ---
Subject: Bug 31419
Author: jason
Date: Tue Sep 4 20:18:05 2007
New Revision: 128102
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128102
Log:
PR c++/31419
* call.c (reference_binding): Don't
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gmx dot de 2007-09-04 20:00 ---
Created an attachment (id=14156)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14156&action=view)
Demo code
Use with the file "gfcbug69.nml" from the bug description (3 lines),
and compare with a run with the first line
The attached program exhibits a strange problem with gfortran
when repeatedly trying to position within an input file,
and which I have been hunting for a long time.
The program is supposed to work as follows:
- open input file
- do
- rewind
- repeatedly search for lines containing a special t
--- Comment #22 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 19:14 ---
Done.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from dorit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 19:14 ---
(by the way, fast-math should not be required here, but that's a different
bug... will fix that soonish)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33299
--- Comment #3 from dorit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 19:11 ---
I'm testing this patch:
Index: tree-vect-transform.c
===
*** tree-vect-transform.c (revision 128037)
--- tree-vect-transform.c (working copy)
--- Comment #9 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 19:11 ---
By the way, nint_2.f90 also fails at -O0 on AIX.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33271
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2007-09-04 19:08 ---
Subject: Re: ICE in fold_const.c (fold_convert) when reordering USE statements
On 4 Sep 2007 19:03:39 -, ubizjak at gmail dot com
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> and c never generates RECORD_TYPEs
Yes it does. Structs
--- Comment #4 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-09-04 19:03 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Uros, do you think we could, in the fold_convert() switch on TREE_CODE(type),
> add a case for RECORD_TYPE similar to VECTOR_TYPE: assert that both
> RECORD_TYPEs have the same size, and that th
--- Comment #8 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 18:37 ---
Subject: Bug 31411
Author: jason
Date: Tue Sep 4 18:37:33 2007
New Revision: 128100
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128100
Log:
PR c++/31411
* except.c (initialize_handler_parm)
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 18:17 ---
A fix for this one is coming with that for PR31564 - within 48 hours.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 18:16 ---
To my surprise, I have a fix for this one. I'll post it to the list in the
next 48 hours.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 18:10 ---
Confirmed on i386-pc-solaris2.10. This is a mainline regression. A reghunt
revealed that this patch
2007-08-06 H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR target/31868
--- Comment #19 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 18:00 ---
Subject: Bug 27908
Author: aph
Date: Tue Sep 4 18:00:31 2007
New Revision: 128098
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128098
Log:
2007-09-04 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR java/27908
--- Comment #18 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 17:58 ---
Subject: Bug 27908
Author: aph
Date: Tue Sep 4 17:57:52 2007
New Revision: 128097
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128097
Log:
2007-09-04 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR java/27908
--- Comment #17 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 17:55 ---
Subject: Bug 27908
Author: aph
Date: Tue Sep 4 17:54:56 2007
New Revision: 128094
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128094
Log:
2007-09-04 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR java/27908
--- Comment #9 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-04 17:53 ---
Humm, no, anonymous enums are clearly legal, sorry about the stupid mistake.
Still, it's not completely clear to me the discussion in 7.2/5 of empty
enumerator-lists, evidently, we must assume those are illegal *only* when
--- Comment #8 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-04 17:47 ---
Hummm, with reference to the patch in Comment #9: I don't think 'enum { };' is
flagged in the standard as ill-formed because of the empty enumerator-list
(that possibility is explicitly discussed in 7.2/5), but because the
Bootstrapping current mainline as of 20070903 fails on alpha-dec-osf5.1b
building the stage 1 libgcc:
/vol/gccsrc/obj/gcc-4.3.0-20070903/5.1b-gcc/./gcc/xgcc
-B/vol/gccsrc/obj/gcc-4.3.0-20070903/5.1b-gcc/./gcc/
-B/vol/gcc/alpha-dec-osf5.1b/bin/ -B/vol/gcc/alpha-dec-osf5.1b/lib/ -isystem
/vol/gcc/a
--- Comment #7 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-04 16:51 ---
On it.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot g
As noted in PR33304, empty macro arguments can cause problems for ISO C90
compilers (solaris cc) as well as for older gcc versions like 2.8.1. Therefore
I'd like to see cpp warn about these constructs either with -pedantic in C90
more and/or its own flag.
We should use this warning during bootstr
I'm getting bootstrap failure with mainline on sparc-sun-solaris2.10 using cc
for stage1. The failure occurs due to empty macro arguments. They occur in
two places, one of which I've posted a patch for:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-08/msg01131.html
The second occurance is in c-common.c
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last recon
--- Comment #20 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 15:43 ---
Subject: Bug 14032
Author: jason
Date: Tue Sep 4 15:43:00 2007
New Revision: 128090
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128090
Log:
PR c++/14032
* pt.c (most_specialized_class): Su
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 15:25 ---
> integer array(5), i1, i2
> print *, size(array,(/i1,i2/))
13.7.112 SIZE (ARRAY [, DIM, KIND])
ARRAY may be of any type. It shall not be scalar.
DIM (optional) shall be scalar and of type integer
KIND (optional)
I think __GFORTRAN__ is undocumented - at least I could not find any .texi
where it is documented.
I think it should be documented in doc/cpp.texi, possibly also in
fortran/*texi.
--
Summary: Document __GFORTRAN__
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status:
--- Comment #5 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-04 15:01 ---
Fixed for 4.3.0.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #12 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-04 14:28 ---
Fixed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #11 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 14:27 ---
Subject: Bug 14178
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Sep 4 14:27:05 2007
New Revision: 128085
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128085
Log:
2007-09-04 Emmanuel Thome <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR c++/
This is a follow-up on bug 33291. It uses the same testcase (repeated here) but
with some additional optimization flags.
---
struct Clock {
void f();
void add(unsigned n) { a += n; }
int a;
};
struct CPU : Clock {
virtual ~CPU();
unsigned char readSlow
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #16 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 14:00 ---
Subject: Bug 27908
Author: aph
Date: Tue Sep 4 14:00:06 2007
New Revision: 128082
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128082
Log:
2007-09-04 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR java/27908
--- Comment #6 from toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl 2007-09-04
13:04 ---
Quoting spread_generic.c:
145 for (n = 0; n < ncopies; n++)
146{
147 memcpy (dest, sptr, size);
148 dest += rdelta;
149}
The C 99 Standard has the following to say
This testcase: gfortran.dg/g77/990115-1.f
ICEs when compiled with vectorization enabled:
gfortran 990115-1.f -O -pedantic-errors -S -O2 -ftree-vectorize -msse2
-fdump-tree-vect-details -g -o 990115-1.s
990115-1.f: In function 'zgelsx':^M
990115-1.f:3: internal compiler error: in vectorizabl
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last recon
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 12:34
---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (1) at least it should go the "enhancement" with the addition of " This check
> can be disabled with the option -fno-range-check"
We can do that, indeed. Reopening and marking enhanceme
--- Comment #19 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 12:28 ---
Subject: Bug 14032
Author: jason
Date: Tue Sep 4 12:27:38 2007
New Revision: 128077
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128077
Log:
PR c++/14032
* pt.c (most_specialized_class): Su
--- Comment #18 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 12:27 ---
Subject: Bug 14032
Author: jason
Date: Tue Sep 4 12:27:21 2007
New Revision: 128076
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128076
Log:
PR c++/14032
* pt.c (most_specialized_class): Su
--- Comment #11 from eres at il dot ibm dot com 2007-09-04 12:18 ---
The patch was committed to r128075.
Revital
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28684
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 12:13 ---
Yes please.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33291
--- Comment #7 from wouter dot vermaelen at scarlet dot be 2007-09-04
12:11 ---
Thanks for looking into this so quickly!
I confirm the problem is solved for the reduced testcase. However in my
original code the dead-store is not eliminated. Do you want me to file a
separate bug report
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-09-04 12:05 ---
I don't think the PR is invalid:
(1) at least it should go the "enhancement" with the addition of " This check
can be disabled with the option -fno-range-check" as in
print *, huge(0), -2147483648
--
dorit at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dorit at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from dorit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 11:44 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Confirmed. It looks like the vectorizer forgets to update the PHI node for
> stmp_var:
yes. I suspect I didn't expect at the time that there would be two
loop-closed-ssa-form phi-nodes at t
1 - 100 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
