--- Comment #21 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 06:13
---
Hmm, in 32bits it does this:
Won't transform loop. Optimal transform is the identity transform
While in 64bits, it tries to transform it. It really does not matter which
order for the testcase in comment #18
--
--- Comment #20 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 06:08
---
(gdb) p debug_generic_expr (stmt)
minj_7 = PHI
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24309
--- Comment #19 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-10-11 05:58 ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> I'm appear to be seeing the same thing trying to build 445.gobmk from cpu2006
> on PowerPC.
Also fails on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, Revision: 129224. Compiles OK for
i686-pc-linux-gnu target.
--
--- Comment #26 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-10-11 05:48 ---
Updated patch URL to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-10/msg00593.html
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #25 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 05:39
---
Probably to be verified on original code.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #24 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 05:33
---
Subject: Bug 33638
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Thu Oct 11 05:33:04 2007
New Revision: 129226
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129226
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/33638
* dse.c (stru
The following:
print *, transfer(sqrt([100.]), 0_1)
produces
pr31608.f90:0: internal compiler error: in gfc_target_encode_expr, at
fortran/target-memory.c:225
and
print *, transfer(achar([100]), 0_1)
does this
gfortran: Internal error: Segmentation fault (program f951)
Paul
--
--- Comment #5 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-10-11 05:20 ---
Closed as fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #30 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 05:17 ---
(In reply to comment #21)
> print *, transfer(achar([0]), 0_1)
> end
> Reducing this testcase has opened Pandora's box, I'll try to fix them one
> after
> another.
FX,
This one is highly unpleasant and seems t
--- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 05:14 ---
Subject: Bug 33500
Author: uros
Date: Thu Oct 11 05:14:08 2007
New Revision: 129225
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129225
Log:
PR fortran/33500
* gfortran.fortran-torture/compile
--- Comment #5 from neil at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 03:45 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> We probably don't even get it right for all cases with DECIMAL_DIG digits for
> all long double formats (required by Annex F).
(In reply to comment #2)
> My reading of F.5#2 is that conversio
--- Comment #6 from spark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 03:07 ---
Never mind. I should pay attention to 1 vs l :(
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33662
Executing on host: /home/dave/gcc-4.3/objdir/gcc/xgcc
-B/home/dave/gcc-4.3/objdi
r/gcc/ /home/dave/gcc-4.3/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/longlong.c
-w
-O2 -fno-show-column -lm -o
/home/dave/gcc-4.3/objdir/gcc/testsuite/gcc/lo
nglong.x2(timeout = 300)
PASS: gcc.c-torture/execute
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-11
01:26 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 17_intro/headers/all_pedantic_errors.cc (test for excess
errors)
> Looking at the testresults, it appears to have been introduced between
> 128587 and 128594 in September. The only patc
--- Comment #5 from spark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 00:51 ---
What configure option should I use to enable -m1 option support ?
Looks like plain-vanilla configured sh4-elf compiler doesn't support -m1 flag.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33662
--- Comment #9 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 00:36 ---
Subject: Bug 33442
Author: danglin
Date: Thu Oct 11 00:36:08 2007
New Revision: 129224
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129224
Log:
PR boehm-gc/33442
* pthread_support.c (GC_PTR
--- Comment #7 from dannysmith at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 23:39
---
Subject: Bug 33578
Author: dannysmith
Date: Wed Oct 10 23:39:30 2007
New Revision: 129219
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129219
Log:
PR libstdc++/33578
* include/parallel/
--- Comment #5 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 23:01 ---
Fixed.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 22:59 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 23286 ***
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 22:59 ---
*** Bug 32590 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 22:28
---
I'm appear to be seeing the same thing trying to build 445.gobmk from cpu2006
on PowerPC.
run/build_base_gcc_64.> cat junk.c
int board_size;
void print_eye(int eye[400])
{
int m, n;
int mini, maxi;
i
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-10
21:39 ---
Subject: Re: 1938 unexpected fails in libjava testsuite
> I don't think this code is used on HP/UX? If it were, it might be good to
> test
> there.
HP/UX doesn't appear to have, pthread_getattr_np, so t
--- Comment #18 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 21:19 ---
Fixed for 4.2.3.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|js
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 21:10 ---
> I'm trying to build a GCC that will generate code for PPC405 but I'm doing
> this on a powerpc box that doesn't have a PPC405 CPU.
You cannot bootstrap if you use --with-cpu=405 as the 405 has some string
instruct
--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-10-10 20:58 ---
Revision 129215 does not fail anymore. I'll add a testcase to the testsuite.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33500
--- Comment #6 from haubi at gentoo dot org 2007-10-10 20:47 ---
Because 'grep -o' is not portable, what about this patch, done against
gcc-4.1.1:
--- gcc-4.1.1/gcc/configure.ac.orig Wed Oct 10 08:44:23 2007
+++ gcc-4.1.1/gcc/configure.ac Wed Oct 10 09:03:22 2007
@@ -2061,7 +2061,7 @@
--- Comment #17 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 20:46 ---
Subject: Bug 25309
Author: jsm28
Date: Wed Oct 10 20:46:11 2007
New Revision: 129216
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129216
Log:
PR c/25309
* c-common.c (complete_array_type): D
I'm seeing the following bootstrap error with 4.2:
build/genmddeps ../gcc-4.2/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.md > tmp-mddeps
/bin/sh: line 1: 3635 Illegal instruction build/genmddeps
../gcc-4.2/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.md >tmp-mddeps
make[3]: *** [s-mddeps] Error 132
I'm trying to build a GCC that
--- Comment #3 from haubi at gentoo dot org 2007-10-10 20:40 ---
Have restarted with gcc-4.2.1 now.
There is a second location where arguments to nm causes build error, after
gcc-4.2.1/gcc/configure being hacked to "test -x" only the first word of
$NM_FOR_TARGET.
In gcc-4.2.1/gcc/Makefi
--- Comment #7 from Hans dot Boehm at hp dot com 2007-10-10 20:26 ---
Based only on code inspection, this looks fine to me. The gc7 code is
different, but seems to do the same thing as the patched version.
I don't think this code is used on HP/UX? If it were, it might be good to test
--- Comment #1 from fang at csl dot cornell dot edu 2007-10-10 20:24
---
This was probably fixed for 4.1.3 and higher, see PR 31449.
--
fang at csl dot cornell dot edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from fang at csl dot cornell dot edu 2007-10-10 20:20
---
However, it shouldn't warn for RAII-managed uses of new, e.g.
std::auto_ptr ip(new int);
The operator delete() is done by the destructor upon end-of-life, thereby being
exception safe.
This might allude to a mo
--- Comment #4 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 20:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=14337)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14337&action=view)
A small cleanup patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33499
--- Comment #3 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 20:12 ---
The problem is that at the time we enter resolve_entries cx_radc has type
BT_UNKNOWN. I have no idea why that's the case. Removing the interface fixes
this. It's also a QOI issue that an error message about the maste
I just tried to compile the following C++ source code
with the GNU C++ compiler version 4.3 snapshot 20071005.
static extern c;
The compiler said
testProg.cc:3: error: ISO C++ forbids declaration of 'c' with no type
testProg.cc:3: error: conflicting specifiers in declaration of 'c'
testProg.cc:3
--- Comment #6 from dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net 2007-10-10
19:26 ---
Fixed.
--
dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from nightstrike at gmail dot com 2007-10-10 18:44 ---
Changed the title to better reflect what was transpiring.
This problem has since been fixed, so I am closing it.
--
nightstrike at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #9 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 18:31 ---
Fixed for 4.2.3.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|jsm
--- Comment #8 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 18:24 ---
Subject: Bug 32295
Author: jsm28
Date: Wed Oct 10 18:24:29 2007
New Revision: 129215
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129215
Log:
PR c/32295
* c-typeck.c (default_conversion): Cal
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33680
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33673
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33670
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 18:10
---
And, if profiling data is required, then we should issue an error saying that,
not fall over.
--
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=33645
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33644
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33624
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33589
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33562
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33545
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33544
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33509
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33500
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33461
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33458
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33434
--- Comment #7 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 17:58
---
We really need to fix this class of problems. Every release of GCC over the
past couple of years has had serious aliasing issues that caused real-world
programs to fall over. We can fix this by making the compile
--- Comment #10 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-10 17:57 ---
I don't have a fix ;) Everything seems rather ugly and not worth the trouble...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33633
--- Comment #11 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 17:57
---
I understand that we don't know whether this is a problem in GCC or in Perl.
However, until we know, I think this should be P1 -- having GCC releases that
don't work with SPEC, without an explanation, undermines
--- Comment #9 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 17:56 ---
Sweet, thanks. Any chance you could put in the
23_containers/vector/bool/capacity/29134.cc
23_containers/vector/bool/modifiers/insert/31370.cc
fix too? My sources are in pre-deprecate mode right now...
best,
benjam
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33368
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33319
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 17:53
---
Dave --
Is this fixed with Jan's patch? If so, please close.
Thanks,
-- Mark
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33318
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33315
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 17:52
---
The original submitter says the problem has disappeared.
--
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=33168
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33100
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32921
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32653
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32590
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32086
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31090
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30801
--- Comment #34 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 17:43
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] reassoc2 can more extra calculations into a loop
On 10 Oct 2007 08:58:00 -, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #33 from steven at gcc
On 10 Oct 2007 08:58:00 -, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #33 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 08:57
> ---
> What happened with the suggestion to only do this in reassoc2 (see comment
> #27)?
>
>
Yeah, i'm not sure why we just m
--- Comment #8 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-10 17:36 ---
The moveable.cc fails are now fixed. Otherwise, a couple of fails are also
trivial
23_containers/vector/bool/capacity/29134.cc
23_containers/vector/bool/modifiers/insert/31370.cc
_S_word_size in the wrong namespace.
And
--- Comment #6 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 17:08 ---
Hans,
Is the attached patch correct?
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-10
17:04 ---
Subject: Re: 1938 unexpected fails in libjava testsuite
The attached patch fixes the problem.
Dave
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-10
17:04 ---
Created an at
--- Comment #7 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-10 15:52 ---
Yes, time to fix the moveable.cc tests in debug-mode. Thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33633
--- Comment #6 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 15:49 ---
Fixed.
Current debug mode results (ie, with make CXXFLAGS="-D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG" check)
FAIL: 20_util/pair/moveable.cc execution test
FAIL: 23_containers/deque/moveable.cc execution test
FAIL: 23_containers/headers/bits
--- Comment #29 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-10-10 15:47 ---
Subject: Re: wrong types in character array/scalar binop
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, pault at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #28 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 15:44
> ---
> The patch below f
--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 15:45 ---
This should be fixed now. Please confirm and close.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #28 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 15:44 ---
The patch below fixes the lot. It was not necessary in the end to touch
trans-intrinsic.c. Once the appropriate, offending bit of trans-array.c was
fixed, all the casting occurred correctly. The fixes to iresolve.c
--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 15:24 ---
Subject: Bug 33633
Author: bkoz
Date: Wed Oct 10 15:23:59 2007
New Revision: 129210
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129210
Log:
2007-10-10 Benjamin Kosnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstd
--- Comment #4 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 14:40 ---
OTOH this works:
program array_char
implicit none
character (len=2) :: x
character (len=1) :: z
x = "a "
z = x(1:len(trim(x)))
end program array_char
So the problem is with array constructors.
--
http://gcc.gnu.or
I have a block of code:
struct LatLon : public Coord
{
std::string lat;
std::string lon;
inline LatLon() : lat(""), lon("") {}
};
Coord* coord;
coord = new LatLon();
static_cast(coord)->lat = static_cast(other.coord)->lat;
static_cast(coord)->lo
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-10 14:38 ---
Note that the (IMHO) valid code:
program array_char
implicit none
character (len=2) :: x, y
character (len=2) :: z(2)
x = "a "
y = "cd"
z = (/y(1:len(trim(x))), x(1:len(trim(x)))/) ! causes segfault
print *, z
end p
--- Comment #2 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 14:34 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> There's a disabled check in bounds_check_10.f90 (to be submitted) which
> depends
> on this bug, please enable it after fixing.
Scratch that, of course after the first runtime error the test
--- Comment #1 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 14:25 ---
There's a disabled check in bounds_check_10.f90 (to be submitted) which depends
on this bug, please enable it after fixing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33727
--- Comment #3 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 14:23 ---
The failure from #2 is now PR 33727.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33254
pb-d-128-141-24-81:~/src/pr tobi$ cat t.f90
program array_char
implicit none
character (len=2) :: x, y
character (len=2) :: z(2)
x = "a "
y = "cd"
z = [y(1:len(trim(y))), x(1:1)] ! causes segfault
end program array_char
pb-d-128-141-24-81:~/src/pr tobi$ ../hggcc/build/gcc/f951 t.f90
MAIN__
t.f90:
--- Comment #2 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-10-10 13:54 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
>
> STACK_BOUNDARY <= PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY <= INCOMING_STACK_BOUNDARY
>
But for backward compatibility, we can only do it with a command line
option.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug
--- Comment #1 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-10-10 13:52 ---
There are
-- Macro: STACK_BOUNDARY
Define this macro to the minimum alignment enforced by hardware
for the stack pointer on this machine. The definition is a C
expression for the desired alignment (measured i
--- Comment #10 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 13:42
---
Testcase fixed.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
S
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 13:41
---
Fixed.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSI
--- Comment #9 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 13:41
---
Subject: Bug 33391
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Wed Oct 10 13:40:50 2007
New Revision: 129209
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129209
Log:
PR testsuite/33391
* gfortran.dg/do_3.F9
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 13:39 ---
The C FE strips qualifier in building the ARRAY_REF. I have a patch.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 13:38
---
Subject: Bug 33636
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Wed Oct 10 13:38:38 2007
New Revision: 129208
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129208
Log:
PR fortran/33636
* expr.c (find_array_se
--- Comment #4 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-10 13:33
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Wrong register allocation
on SH
kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #3 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 13:28
> ---
> Not fixed by r129192.
--- Comment #3 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 13:28 ---
Not fixed by r129192. I see
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr33669.c execution, -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr33669.c execution, -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr33669.c execution, -Os
on sh4-unknown-linux-gn
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
