--- Comment #3 from Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de 2008-01-14 07:42
---
This fails with both -m32 and -m64 (but I'm not quite sure if it
still reproduces the original issue):
typedef unsigned long size_t;
template struct array { };
template
struct my_table: public array { };
templ
--- Comment #7 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 02:08 ---
So it seems this worked in 3.3, so it is a regression after all.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 01:45 ---
This should work, if it does not then it is a bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34772
--- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 01:35 ---
Actually. Winit-self was introduced in GCC 3.4 but the init-self trick was
probably introduced earlier. So this may actually be a regression from much
earlier. Anyway, documenting that it doesn't work seems the right th
--- Comment #4 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 01:27 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I think it would be better to fix the documentation to reflect the current
> behaviour for C++/ObjC++, and mark this bug as an enhancement request.
It is a bit misleading providing -Winit-sel
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 01:11
---
Patch submitted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2008-01/msg00170.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34556
--- Comment #8 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 01:01 ---
This is confirmed, isn't it?
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from olly at survex dot com 2008-01-14 00:58 ---
If by "delete this option from the C++ FE" you mean that `g++ -Winit-self
[...]' would give an error, I'm not sure that's the best approach if the option
is likely to be sorted out for C++ in the future. Removing it now wil
--- Comment #3 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 00:55 ---
The quoted paragraph does not apply to the first code example, because an
"inline definition" is defined in paragraph 6 as:
If all of the file scope declarations for a function in a translation
unit include the inline
--- Comment #2 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 00:42 ---
Good catch!
Well, there is something weird going on
$ cc1 -fdump-tree-original -O winit-self.c
{
int i = i;
int i = i;
return i;
}
$ cc1plus -fdump-tree-original -O winit-self.c
{
int i;
int i;
<>
--- Comment #2 from andry at inbox dot ru 2008-01-14 00:06 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> /cygdrive/e/Work/gcc_4_3_trunk_2008-01-13_build/./gcc/xgcc: No such file or
> directory
>
> figure out why the stage1 compile did not generate that.
>
Yes, may be i had know why :(
http://cygwin.
--- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 23:00 ---
See also notes/patch attempt in PR 32489.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20923
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 22:57 ---
Regression, caused by the fix for PR 32760.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 22:49 ---
match_variable is called for "istat" in the subroutine. For the first match, it
is FL_UNKNOWN and then - without PRIVATE - it is set to FL_VARIABLE. With
public/private, it remains FL_UNKNOWN.
As for ALLOCATE sym->at
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34776
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 4.1.0:
===
template struct A
{
T::X<0> x;
};
A a;
===
bug.cc:3: error: non-template 'X' used as template
bug.cc:3: note: use 'T::template X' to indicate that it is a tem
--- Comment #4 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 22:15 ---
Fixed, closing.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|
--- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 22:14 ---
Subject: Bug 34746
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Jan 13 22:13:52 2008
New Revision: 131514
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131514
Log:
2008-01-13 Thomas Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR li
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 22:10 ---
> It turns out this is not a gfortran bug. My apologies for any time wasted.
Closing then as invalid. Thanks for re-checking.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 21:54 ---
Jakub, is there any chance that it can still get fixed for 4.3.0?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33880
--- Comment #9 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 21:49 ---
Fixed on the trunk (4.3.0).
Thanks for the report!
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 21:49 ---
Fixed on the trunk (4.3.0).
Thanks for the report!
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 21:49 ---
Fixed on the trunk (4.3.0).
Thanks for the report!
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #8 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 21:36 ---
Subject: Bug 34665
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Jan 13 21:35:33 2008
New Revision: 131513
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131513
Log:
2008-01-13 Tobias Burnus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fort
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 21:30 ---
Subject: Bug 34763
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Jan 13 21:29:49 2008
New Revision: 131512
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131512
Log:
2008-01-13 Tobias Burnus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fort
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 21:29 ---
Subject: Bug 34759
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Jan 13 21:28:30 2008
New Revision: 131511
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131511
Log:
2008-01-13 Tobias Burnus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fort
--- Comment #7 from tbptbp at gmail dot com 2008-01-13 21:20 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] templates, enumerations, overflow, ice
On 13 Jan 2008 21:06:07 -, rguenther at suse dot de
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No idea, but I doubt so ;)
Fantastic.
Now i also see the ld
--- Comment #4 from pluto at agmk dot net 2008-01-13 21:07 ---
invalid testcase.
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfi
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-01-13 21:06 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] templates, enumerations,
overflow, ice
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, tbptbp at gmail dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #5 from tbptbp at gmail dot com 2008-01-13 19:47 ---
> Thanks a lo
--- Comment #5 from tbptbp at gmail dot com 2008-01-13 19:47 ---
Thanks a lot for your investigations.
May i ask if the apparent 'quenching' of sign mismatch - and related - warnings
(that is if you pile enough templates, due warning are never emitted), is in
any way related to this bug?
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 19:38
---
In gfc_simplify_reshape, gfc_get_array_element is returning a NULL pointer.
This is due to a failure in expand_constructor. I am still tracing this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34556
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Version|unknown |4.3.0
http://gcc
--- Comment #3 from grobian at gentoo dot org 2008-01-13 19:30 ---
In bug #34775 I've attached a configuration patch that works for me.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30726
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 19:29 ---
Created an attachment (id=14938)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14938&action=view)
unincluded testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34774
--- Comment #2 from grobian at gentoo dot org 2008-01-13 19:29 ---
I'm sorry for the spam, this should have been reported in bug #30726
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 30726 ***
--
grobian at gentoo dot org changed:
What|Removed |Ad
--- Comment #2 from grobian at gentoo dot org 2008-01-13 19:29 ---
*** Bug 34775 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
grobian at gentoo dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 19:24 ---
Reduced testcase that is accepted by 3.3 and 3.4 w/o diagnostic but ICEs
starting with 4.0.
typedef unsigned int op_type_u_t;
typedef op_type_u_t op_type_t;
template
struct shift {
enum {
num_bits = op_type_u_
--- Comment #1 from grobian at gentoo dot org 2008-01-13 19:21 ---
Created an attachment (id=14937)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14937&action=view)
solaris x86_64 configuration
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34775
I will attach a patch that allows me to compile a compiler on Solaris 10/x86
that has a native bits size of 64 for produced code. I created the
configuration analogous to the sparcv9-sun-solaris2.* case.
With this patch I have successfully built a fully 64-bits environment
(toolchain, userland) t
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 19:17 ---
This is the same issue as PR31714 (which occurs only on the 4.1 branch).
#0 0x084c1ddd in operand_equal_p (arg0=0xb7d275b0, arg1=0xb7d275cc, flags=0)
at /home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/fold-const.c:3015
#1 0x084c4
--- Comment #6 from markus at unixforces dot net 2008-01-13 19:13 ---
still failing with the 4.1-20080107 snapshot
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28326
--
hp at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2008-01-13 18:50:30 |2008-01-13 18:50:
--
hp at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
--- Comment #1 from tbptbp at gmail dot com 2008-01-13 18:50 ---
Created an attachment (id=14936)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14936&action=view)
preprocessed offender
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34774
While trying to pinpoint an *intermitent* warning/error with g++ 4.3
"mf/unit.h:84: error: no integral type can represent all of the enumerator
values for `metafloat::core::helpers::details::aligner<7u,
metafloat::core::float_t<0l, 0l, 0ul, CAT_NRM> >::'" i finally
got it to ice with the attached
--- Comment #1 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 18:35 ---
Created an attachment (id=14935)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14935&action=view)
Preprocessed source corresponding to newlib vfprintf.c
Compile with -O2.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bu
See attachment vf.i.
The bug manifests in code roughly corresponding to the code snippet:
union double_union
{
double d;
__uint32_t i[2];
};
union double_union tmp; tmp.d = value;
if ((tmp.i[1]) & ((__uint32_t)0x8000L)) {
value = -value;
*sign = '-';
} else
*sign = '\000';
As manif
--- Comment #1 from olly at survex dot com 2008-01-13 18:23 ---
I've just noticed that Debian have a packaged 4.3 snapshot:
g++-4.3 (Debian 4.3-20080104-1) 4.3.0 20080104 (experimental) [trunk revision
131316]
Testing with this shows the same behaviour for C++.
--
olly at survex do
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 18:22 ---
This works for 'const' functions because they stick on the function type as
well.
The attributes are only on the DECL and do not get merged and transfered to the
resulting function type of the COND_EXPR.
So this aga
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 18:17 ---
34768 has a testcase.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 34768 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 18:17 ---
*** Bug 28289 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
The info manual says:
`-Winit-self (C, C++, Objective-C and Objective-C++ only)'
Warn about uninitialized variables which are initialized with
themselves. Note this option can only be used with the
`-Wuninitialized' option, which in turn only works with `-O1' and
above.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #6 from damian at rouson dot net 2008-01-13 17:59 ---
It turns out this is not a gfortran bug. My apologies for any time wasted.
--
damian at rouson dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 17:57 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> It indeed works on the 4.2 branch where the loads magically disappear with the
> first may_alias pass. Possibly because it doesn't pay attention to whether
> DECL_GIMPLE_REG is set or not.
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 17:49 ---
THis is related to PR 29382 and PR 13519. And I think this is exactly the same
issue as PR 28289.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34768
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 17:41 ---
Patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-01/msg00566.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34759
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 17:41 ---
Patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-01/msg00567.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34763
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 17:41 ---
> One has to be careful not to to get the same problem as with SHAPE in PR
> 34759,
> i.e. passing a rank-2 array A(:,:,5) defined as rank-3 assumed-shape array
> A(:,:,*).
This is actually already properly handled.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfi
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 17:00 ---
We enter that function with:
{4294967288B, +, 4}_1
unit size
align 32 symtab 0 alias set 2 canonical type 0x2acbd9dc1540
precision 32 min max
pointer_to_this >
sizes
--- Comment #9 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 16:55 ---
Fixed by patch.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-01-13 16:55 ---
> Please provide preprocessed source, as this test pulls in system headers.
Do you need the system headers for Darwin9?
# 1 "/opt/gcc/_gcc_clean/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-25.c"
# 1 ""
# 1 ""
# 1 "/o
--- Comment #8 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 16:53 ---
Subject: Bug 34762
Author: danglin
Date: Sun Jan 13 16:53:02 2008
New Revision: 131508
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131508
Log:
PR middle-end/34762
* reload.c (find_reloads_
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33810
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 16:45 ---
It simply vectorizes all loops in the testcase. It looks like there may be a
non-canonical sizetype constant (just wild guesses).
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #2 from john at michalakes dot us 2008-01-13 16:43 ---
Subject: RE: Incorrect array indexing through pointer when array does not
start at 1
Will do. Thanks for the quick response. -John
> -Original Message-
> From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTE
--- Comment #5 from damian at rouson dot net 2008-01-13 16:40 ---
I was trying to demonstrate multiple instances of the bug. Based on comment
#4, I realize that the compiler performed correctly in at least 3 of the 4
instances. I will now attempt to verify whether the 4th instance is ac
--
damian at rouson dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34765
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 16:32 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from hjl at lucon dot org 2008-01-13 16:31 ---
This bug may only happen when you compile for 32bit on 64bit host.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34769
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 16:31 ---
Subject: Bug 34601
Author: rguenth
Date: Sun Jan 13 16:30:51 2008
New Revision: 131506
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131506
Log:
2008-01-13 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #3 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2008-01-13 16:31 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> i'd ask why the first code is invalid?
> class Y looks pretty complete so why typedef expression throws an error?
A class is complete at the closing brace. You use it before that.
W.
--
--- Comment #2 from hjl at lucon dot org 2008-01-13 16:26 ---
Revision 131429 is the cause.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34769
--- Comment #1 from hjl at lucon dot org 2008-01-13 16:25 ---
Revision 131429:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-01/msg00367.html
--
hjl at lucon dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 16:17 ---
I can reproduce it in GCC/gfortran 4.1.3 and 4.2.1, but it works in 4.3.0.
Could you try with a newer GCC? http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GFortranBinaries
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|R
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 16:13 ---
This works with -funit-at-a-time, where we don't expand.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34601
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 16:04 ---
The m68k and m68hc11 are not the same backend.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
(c) and c
are regarded as the same for character variables; for other types (z) and z are
not the same.
gfc_get_parentheses (gfc_expr *e)
{
gfc_expr *e2;
/* This is a temporary fix, awaiting the patch for various
other character problems. The resolution and translation
of substring
Have put together a small test program demonstrating the error, which has to do
with indexing of a pointer when the array it points to starts at an index other
than '1'. The test program, gfortran behavior, and the correct (ifort)
behavior
of the program is listed below.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ ca
--- Comment #23 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 15:47
---
This works for me on the branch. Uros, what is exactly failing?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #15 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 15:44
---
Adjusting target milestone.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Tar
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 15:43
---
Unclear status of this bug. Removing target milestone.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 15:42 ---
Non-regression shouldn't have a target milestone.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 15:40
---
Non-regressions should not have a target milestone set.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 15:39 ---
Adjusting target milestone.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On Linux/Intel64, with revision 131442, I got
Executing on host: /export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/xgcc
-B/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/
/export/gnu/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c
-ftree-vectorize -fno-vect-cost-model -msse2 -O2 -fdump-tree-vect-
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 15:30 ---
I am closing this bug as INVALID based on the doubious testcase.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 15:27 ---
There are questions pending.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 15:25 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 15:24 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 15:23 ---
Testcase?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONF
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 15:22 ---
Please provide preprocessed source, as this test pulls in system headers.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at verizon dot net 2008-01-13 15:18 ---
Subject: Re: Rejects valid with bogus error message:
parameter initalization
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 08:49 ---
> (In reply to commen
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 08:49 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
This is similar to 34432 is some ways. I think we are not matching the (\ \)
correctly. I don't think gfc_match_expr has the tooling for it yet.
The erro
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 15:15 ---
This was caused by
+2007-12-19 Richard Sandiford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+
+ * rtl.def (SUBREG): Update comments.
...
+ (set_reg_attrs_for_decl_rtl): New function, split out from
+ set_decl_incoming_
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 15:11 ---
Confirmed. We leak
(gdb) call debug_tree (t)
used unsigned SI file t.i line 3 col 10
align 32 context
(reg:SI 58)>
to
#2 0x08218782 in set_reg_attrs_for_decl_rtl (t=0xb7cb2108, x=0xb7caee60)
a
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 14:58 ---
How is the status now?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #23 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 14:56
---
Closing as fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Sta
1 - 100 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
