--- Comment #8 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-12-18 07:53 ---
For -mregparm=2 the code is this:
pushl %ebx
movl8(%esp), %ebx
movl12(%esp), %ecx
imull %ebx, %edx
imull %eax, %ecx
addl%edx, %ecx
mull%ebx
--- Comment #7 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 07:43
---
Patch applied to trunk. I'm now going to test 4.2 and 4.1.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34456
--- Comment #7 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-12-18 07:43 ---
The generated code has changed a lot recently, though it still uses two spills:
pushl %esi
pushl %ebx
movl12(%esp), %ebx ; load alow
movl20(%esp), %esi ; load blow
--- Comment #6 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 07:40
---
Subject: Bug 34456
Author: rsandifo
Date: Tue Dec 18 07:40:17 2007
New Revision: 131033
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131033
Log:
gcc/
200x-xx-xx Kaz Kylheku <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #6 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 07:09 ---
Subject: Re: gfortran.dg/ltrans-7.f90 doesn't work
I have a patch for this. The problem is in the data dependence
analysis that uses conversion to arbitrary integer_type_nodes.
I'm not yet sure about this fix, but at
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 06:52 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Subject: Re: static variable not found for C++ OpenMP
>
> no, failed even when compiling with "-O2 -g". could you show me your
> compiler version and options? thanks.
Most likely it is s
--- Comment #1 from hailijuan at gmail dot com 2007-12-18 06:07 ---
Created an attachment (id=14789)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14789&action=view)
C++ OpenMP testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34517
testcase b.C attached to show the problem. "a.ai += addnum" refers to distinct
objects therefore a.ai finally equals to 7 rather than 28 (now it is!) when
reaching printf.
micro# g++ b.C -fopenmp
micro# ./a.out
constructor
constructor
constructor
constructor
constructor
ai: 28 exp: 7 af: 28.
--- Comment #15 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 05:38
---
Lawrence, was there any feedback on the core reflector about this issue?
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 05:36
---
We need input from a libstdc++ maintainer. Gaby was invited to comment, but
there's no comment from him in this PR. Paolo, do you have any further
thoughts?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31
--- Comment #20 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 05:34
---
I think Comment #17 still applies. This is indeed an accepts-invalid
regression, but it has no easy fix.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26266
--- Comment #40 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 05:15
---
Fixed on 4.2.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|
--- Comment #39 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 05:05
---
Subject: Bug 34003
Author: danglin
Date: Tue Dec 18 05:05:43 2007
New Revision: 131032
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131032
Log:
PR bootstrap/34003
* c-decl.c (merge_decls)
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 04:09 ---
I'll review the patch at least.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from hailijuan at gmail dot com 2007-12-18 03:24 ---
Subject: Re: static variable not found for C++ OpenMP
no, failed even when compiling with "-O2 -g". could you show me your
compiler version and options? thanks.
17 Dec 2007 18:13:37 -, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot o
--- Comment #3 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-12-18 03:09 ---
A proposal is posted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-12/msg00503.html
--
hjl at lucon dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #19 from ek dot kato at gmail dot com 2007-12-18 02:20 ---
OK. I've just sent a mail to gcc-patches.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30572
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 00:29 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 00:29 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #18 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2007-12-18
00:23 ---
Etsushi,
Why don't you go ahead and submit your patch with a ChangeLog entry to the
gcc-patches mailing list.? It is under the limit of lines for patches without
FSF paperwork (in case you don't have
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 00:15 ---
Subject: Bug 34488
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:15:32 2007
New Revision: 131025
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131025
Log:
PR c++/34488
* decl.c (grokdeclarator): Reject fr
--- Comment #7 from tiago at forked dot de 2007-12-18 00:14 ---
Created an attachment (id=14788)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14788&action=view)
trivial patch that fixes the problem
This is just a ping... Any chance of getting this fixed in the next release? It
se
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 00:13 ---
Subject: Bug 34490
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:13:29 2007
New Revision: 131023
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131023
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/34490
* simplify-rtx.c (simpl
--- Comment #1 from csm at gnu dot org 2007-12-17 23:27 ---
Jessie is not using NIO. At least, it shouldn't be. Something is calling
'getChannel' on an SSLSocket, which doesn't make sense (you cannot use SSL that
way).
The JDK returns 'null' if you call getChannel on an SSLSocket, but J
--- Comment #17 from echristo at apple dot com 2007-12-17 23:25 ---
I rather like this patch... someone should ping Paolo about it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30572
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 22:53 ---
The first part of this PR is fixed with:
Index: gcc/fortran/expr.c
===
*** gcc/fortran/expr.c (revision 130811)
--- gcc/fortran/expr.c (working copy)
*
--- Comment #8 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 22:34 ---
Mine. Got a patch, but one more error message to fix ...
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 22:30 ---
If you have added it to (*cough*) "your compiler", why don't you just submit
it?
Oh wait. Apple. Right...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34516
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 22:27 ---
And why don't you submit it
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34516
--- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 22:23 ---
I think the problem is that we don't insert bounds checking
in gfc_conv_expr_descriptor.
Another test case:
$ cat index.f90
module bar
contains
subroutine foo(a)
real, dimension(:) :: a
a = 3.
end subrouti
--- Comment #7 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 22:20 ---
Changing this into a normal error leads to double
errors and assorted strangeness.
Unassigning myself for now.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2007-12-17 22:14
---
Between http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/20_util/shared_ptr.html
and http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/ext/concurrence.html and the
shared_ptr code, which has been simplified and commented, I think th
Please implement http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-06/msg01047.html
This is useful because previously, gcc-4.0.1 didn't warn about this case:
void f(void *last, ...) __attribute__((sentinel(0,1)));
main() {
f((void*)0);
}
but gcc-4.2 does. We have APIs that make use of the null being in
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 21:38 ---
retval[idx--] |= val >> (4 - pos - 1);
val <<= 32 - (4 - pos - 1);
if (idx < 0)
For the first warning, even though the warning is correct, I don't think we
should warn here as the expressions are
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 21:34 ---
Hmm:
if (bits == 0) { register int cnt; if (quot == 0) cnt = 32; else do {
USItype __cbtmp; __asm__ ("bsrl %1,%0" : "=r" (__cbtmp) : "rm" ((USItype)
(quot))); (cnt) = __cbtmp ^ 31; } while (0); exponent -= cnt
--- Comment #2 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2007-12-17 20:42
---
s/for warning/first warning
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34515
--- Comment #1 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2007-12-17 20:42
---
Created an attachment (id=14787)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14787&action=view)
Preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34515
strtod_l.c from glibc-2.7 produces following warnings and Ian Lance Taylor said
at the least for warning should only be issued with -Wstrict-overflow=3.
strtod_l.c:1009: warning: assuming signed overflow does not occur when changing
X +- C1 cmp C2 to X cmp C1 +- C2
strtod_l.c:1358: warning: assumi
--- Comment #8 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 20:03 ---
Patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2007-12/msg00219.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34438
--- Comment #22 from linux at schildmann dot info 2007-12-17 19:53 ---
Hello,
when compiling the package
package Integer_Test is
type Int_Type is new Integer;
end Integer_Test;
the ICE occures when the GNAT node that represents
the lower bound of the integer type is conver
--- Comment #38 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 19:33 ---
Applying df_hack3 and df_double_queue_worklist is pointless for your test cae.
With df_hack3 the worklist algorithm never runs.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34400
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 19:30 ---
Subject: Bug 32765
Author: janis
Date: Mon Dec 17 19:30:08 2007
New Revision: 131012
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131012
Log:
2007-12-17 Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR target/
--- Comment #6 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 19:15 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] verify_ssa failed with -ftree-loop-linear
Patch is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-12/msg00735.html
test result on amd64-linux is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007
--- Comment #3 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-12-17 19:08 ---
Valgrind reports:
==20091== Invalid read of size 8
==20091==at 0x964769: htab_traverse_noresize (hashtab.c:749)
==20091==by 0x747B6B: reorg_structs_drive (ipa-struct-reorg.c:3547)
==20091==by 0x584BF1: execute_one
--- Comment #2 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-12-17 19:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=14786)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14786&action=view)
Dump files.
Here are dump files. I think there may be some memory corruptions:
GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=10
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 19:01 ---
In words of the standard (esp. last sentence):
"If an initialization expression includes a specification inquiry that depends
on a type parameter or an array bound of an entity specified in the same
specification-par
integer :: n = 4
dimension :: n(3)
end
What should this give? Best to follow NAG f95 and ifort and print:
"Array attributes for this symbol occurred after the data initializers."
or
"Dimensions specified for N after initialisation"
--
Summary: Accepts invalid: Dimensions specified f
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 18:45 ---
Example why it should be forbidden also for -std=gnu/legacy:
implicit none
dimension :: i1(5)
integer :: i1 = transfer([1,2,3,4,5], i1)
integer :: i2 = transfer([1,2,3,4,5], i2)
dimension :: i2(5)
print *, i1 ! print
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 18:13 ---
This works with optimization turned on.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34513
--- Comment #12 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 18:05
---
Changing the summary as it wrongly indicated that this is only an issue with
4.1 and 4.2.
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from hailijuan at gmail dot com 2007-12-17 17:37 ---
Created an attachment (id=14785)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14785&action=view)
openmp testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34513
g++ miss static variable for C++ OpenMP while gcc working well. testcase a.c
attached to show the problem. static variable shrd is not found during linking.
micro# g++ a.c -fopenmp
Undefined first referenced
symbol in file
main::shrd
--- Comment #37 from stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com 2007-12-17 16:55
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] bad interaction between DF and SJLJ exceptions
Compiling with checking disabled might give a less unfair comparison.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34400
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 16:43 ---
*** Bug 34460 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34443
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 16:43 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 34443 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 16:43 ---
*** Bug 34512 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34443
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 16:43 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 34443 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #36 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-12-17 16:33
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] bad interaction between
DF and SJLJ exceptions
ludovic at ludovic-brenta dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #35 from ludovic at ludovic-brenta dot org 2007-12-17 16:16
> ---
>
--- Comment #35 from ludovic at ludovic-brenta dot org 2007-12-17 16:16
---
Created an attachment (id=14784)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14784&action=view)
Results of gnat1 -ftime-report [...] g-catiio.adb with SJLJ exceptions
$ time ../../gnat1 -ftime-report -d
--- Comment #34 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-12-17 16:01
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] bad interaction between
DF and SJLJ exceptions
ludovic at ludovic-brenta dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #33 from ludovic at ludovic-brenta dot org 2007-12-17 15:35
> ---
>
Since at least 3.4, the GCC manual says:
Use the `section' attribute with an _initialized_ definition of a
_global_ variable, as shown in the example. GCC issues a warning
and otherwise ignores the `section' attribute in uninitialized
variable declarations.
but this doesn't s
--- Comment #7 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-12-17 15:48 ---
re. comment #5, like this?
Index: gcc.c
===
--- gcc.c (revision 128902)
+++ gcc.c (working copy)
@@ -4685,6 +4685,8 @@ do_spec_1 (const char *spec,
--- Comment #33 from ludovic at ludovic-brenta dot org 2007-12-17 15:35
---
Here are the numbers; there is a spectacular improvement, but 4.3 is still an
order of magnitude slower than 4.2:
With df_hack3 alone:
real1m5.705s
user1m5.184s
sys 0m0.412s
With df_double_queue_wo
--- Comment #2 from w6ws at earthlink dot net 2007-12-17 15:33 ---
Here is an additional variant of this bug:
program init_bug
implicit none
integer :: i
character(11), parameter :: string="hello world"
! This compiles:
character, parameter :: up_string(len (string)) = &
--- Comment #1 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 15:26 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 32528 ***
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 15:26 ---
*** Bug 34479 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from olga at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 15:15 ---
Thank you a lot for debugging!
As I have not hpux system, and cannot reproduce this dug on x86 or ppc machine,
would you please help me to debug it?
In gcc/gcc/ipa-struct-reorg.c file, please comment out line 3915 tha
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 15:08 ---
C testcase:
extern void abort (void);
extern void *memset (void *s, int c, __SIZE_TYPE__ n);
struct S
{
char s[25];
};
void __attribute__((noinline))
foo (struct S *x)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < sizeof (x->s); +
--- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 15:02 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I guess this warning was never implemented in the new parser.
>
It is a pedwarn in class.c (note_name_declared_in_class). The following invokes
it:
class foo {
public:
typedef int bar;
};
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 14:40 ---
Fixed on the trunk so far.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 14:35 ---
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/2ad94287d7f8a6f0/
Related for non parameters:
real :: pi = transfer(123,pi)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34495
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 14:17 ---
Subject: Bug 34506
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Dec 17 14:16:42 2007
New Revision: 131008
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131008
Log:
PR c/34506
* c-parser.c (c_parser_omp_all_clauses
--- Comment #1 from olga at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 14:08 ---
Unfortunately I cannot reproduce this failure on x86_64-linux system I have,
so I'll highly appreciate your help in debugging it.
If you could please comment out the following line from
wo_prof_malloc_size_var.c file:
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 14:07 ---
And related to PR22293. Testing a fix.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #32 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-12-17 13:21
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] bad interaction between
DF and SJLJ exceptions
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #31 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 10:55
> ---
> You coul
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 12:17 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 11:57 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I think this is related to PR 32643.
>
How is it related? There is no overflow here, is there? It is related in the
sense that build_binary_op is playing tricks with bitwise AND ?
--
ht
--- Comment #5 from dorit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 11:14 ---
Subject: Bug 34445
Author: dorit
Date: Mon Dec 17 11:13:56 2007
New Revision: 131006
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131006
Log:
PR tree-optimization/34445
* tree-vect-trasnform.
--- Comment #31 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 10:55 ---
You could apply both, but numbers for the patch of comment #28 in isolation
would also be welcome.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34400
--- Comment #30 from ludovic at ludovic-brenta dot org 2007-12-17 10:52
---
(In reply to comment #28)
> Created an attachment (id=14778)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14778&action=view) [edit]
> Change worklist solver to double queue algorithm
I would like to try
--- Comment #29 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 10:46 ---
(In reply to comment #28)
> Open regression with no activity since February 14. Ping?
>
The last thread about this was in:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-07/msg00523.html
Summarising:
* C++ front-end sets
-- RM 12.6(10):
-- If a generic unit has a subprogram_default specified by a box, and
-- the corresponding actual parameter is omitted, then it is
-- equivalent to an explicit actual parameter that is a usage name
-- identical to the defining name of the formal.
package pak1 is
procedure p1;
en
-- RM 4.6(21,23.1):
--
--If there is a type that is an ancestor of both the target type and the
--operand type, or both types are class-wide types, then at least one of
--the following rules shall apply:
--
--...
--
---- The operand and target types shall both be class-wide types and
--
--- Comment #36 from mmokrejs at ribosome dot natur dot cuni dot cz
2007-12-17 10:08 ---
I am getting this with 4.2.2 on ARM926EJ-S processor during bootstrap.
rm -rf libbackend.a
ar rc libbackend.a double-int.o tree-chrec.o tree-scalar-evolution.o
tree-data-ref.o tree-cfg.o tree-dfa.o
package pak1 is
pragma elaborate_body;
subtype myint is integer range 1..10;
type T1(n: myint) is
record
s: string(1..n);
end record;
max: constant myint;
pragma import(C, max);
subtype T2 is T1 (max);
end pak1;
package body pak1 is
function f1 return T2 is
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 09:49 ---
NOTE: The Fortran 2003 has the specific function (of generic REAL) FLOAT and
SNGL for which BOZ are not allowed.
FLOAT takes the same code path as REAL (w/o kind argument). With -std=f2003 a
BOZ in FLOAD should be re
package pak1 is
type T1(<>) is tagged limited private;
private
type T1(D: integer) is tagged limited null record;
end pak1;
package pak1.pak3 is
type T3 is new pak1.T1 with null record; -- legal, but rejected
x2: T3 := (pak1.T1 with null record); -- legal, but rejected
end pak1.
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 09:43 ---
Similarly for the GNU Extension DFLOAT: One should also allow only a default
integer. Similarly to FLOAT is I expect it to be a specific function.
[As FLOAT and SNGL may not be used as actual argument (they are marke
--- Comment #19 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 09:33 ---
If the question was more general, not just about this particular PR (yeah, I
know I have over 35 PRs still open for 4.2 and/or 4.1 that have been fixed
already on the turnk), yes, there is some chance, but ATM I'm swa
--- Comment #1 from ludovic at ludovic-brenta dot org 2007-12-17 09:30
---
The initial test case was incorrect regarding the lines marked "ERROR".
Here's a corrected version:
package pak1 is
type T1(<>) is tagged limited private;
private
type T1(D: integer) is tagged limited null
--- Comment #18 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 09:28 ---
Given that this patch introduced a regression (which has since been fixed), I'd
try to be very careful. As it is just a missed-optimization, I think I'd feel
safer to only fix this on the trunk.
--
http://gcc.gn
package pak1 is
type T1(<>) is tagged limited private;
private
type T1(D: integer) is tagged limited null record;
end pak1;
with pak1;
package pak2 is
type T2 is new pak1.T1 with null record; -- ERROR: invalid constraint
x1: T2 := (pak1.T1 with null record); -- line 5
end pak2;
pack
OpenMP 2.5 in 2.1 has:
#pragma omp directive-name [clause[ [,] clause]...] new-line
and for Fortran
sentinel directive-name [clause[[,] clause]...]
While for Fortran the optional commas are accepted, the C/C++ parser rejects
them.
Working on a patch.
--
Summary: gcc disallows comma b
Per "13.6 Specific names for standard intrinsic functions" (Fortran 2003)
FLOAT is a specific function of REAL which takes as argument
only a default-kind integer.
SNGL is a specific function of REAL which takes as argument
only a double precision real.
Current implementation is that
--- Comment #17 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-12-17 09:24 ---
Jakub, is there any chance of backporting your patch(es) to 4.2?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29749
--- Comment #1 from ludovic at ludovic-brenta dot org 2007-12-17 09:19
---
Confirmed on GCC 4.1.2 and 4.2.2.
--
ludovic at ludovic-brenta dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-- Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
-- From: "Peter C. Chapin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-- Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 07:20:46 -0500
-- Subject: Q about finalization and interfaces.
--
-- I'm trying to understand the interaction between controlled types,
-- interfaces, and class-wide dispatching. Accor
--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 08:42 ---
I am working on a new implementation of CPROP for GCC 4.4, which tries to solve
the abovementioned issues. The new implementation is also using the DF scan
information instead of compute_sets() and CUIDs.
--
http
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 08:41 ---
find_avail_set() uses a list search to find an available set. If it is called
multiple times for the same register, quadratic behavior results. This is part
of the issue for bug 19097. One fix would be to compute b
--- Comment #4 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-17 08:38 ---
The global cprop pass prefers constants over copies. Thus, when a copy is
found but a REG_EQUAL note for a constant is found on the same instruction,
only the constant is recorded. This results in missed copy-propag
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
