--- Comment #12 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-01-18 07:12 ---
Part of problems described here is caused by PR 23322.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #35 from ian at airs dot com 2008-01-18 06:37 ---
The bug should certainly be fixed. But it's unfortunately a lot of work for a
small payoff--most people are not in your situation. I think Joseph is correct
in lowering the priority. It's pointless for us to describe this b
--- Comment #1 from ian at airs dot com 2008-01-18 06:11 ---
Here is a standalone test case.
template struct __are_same { enum { __value = 0 }; };
template struct __are_same<_Tp, _Tp> { enum { __value = 1 }; };
template struct __enable_if { };
template struct __enable_if<_Tp, true> { ty
bash-3.2$ cat x.c
#include
#include
#include
#ifndef ALIGNMENT
#define ALIGNMENT 16
#endif
typedef int aligned __attribute__((aligned(ALIGNMENT)));
int global;
void
check (int *i)
{
*i = 20;
if ptrdiff_t) i) & (__alignof__(aligned) - 1)) != 0)
{
printf("\nUnalign add
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 05:25 ---
Looking at Andreas's log. I'd have to say that it is the same
problem. I'm guessing that memory is getting stomped on, but
I can't find the bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34828
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 04:18
---
I think this is the same bug Steve found on FreeBSD system, I have access to
that one so I will try to isolate this
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
My copy of top of trunk, which was updated today, ICEd with this piece of code:
--
#include// fails with vector and set
void
test()
{
typedef int a;// must be locally defined
std::vector::iterator x; // element must be pointer to
--- Comment #13 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 04:05
---
Fixed on trunk.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
S
--- Comment #1 from armcc2000 at yahoo dot com 2008-01-18 03:57 ---
Bug is invalid: branches in mips16 don't have delay slots. The cause of the
problems I was seeing was found elsewhere. Sorry for the noise...
--
armcc2000 at yahoo dot com changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #13 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2008-01-18 03:22
---
I don't think thats possible given the fact that an optimization pass modifies
code to be able to well "optimize" it. Implications and merits of -fwrapv is
discussed deeply before, you might want to Google for it.
--- Comment #12 from sergstesh at yahoo dot com 2008-01-18 03:20 ---
Regarding
"
About the dependency on optimization level, signed integer overflow is
undefined in C standard so its not a good idea to depend on it. What GCC does
is exploiting this fact for optimizations which is fine.
--- Comment #11 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2008-01-18 03:10
---
Actually the only bug here is that -Wstrict-overflow should issue a warning for
that line.
About the dependency on optimization level, signed integer overflow is
undefined in C standard so its not a good idea to
--- Comment #10 from sergstesh at yahoo dot com 2008-01-18 03:05 ---
Ismail, the problem, as I see it, is not the failure itself, but rather
dependency on optimization level.
My point is that if the code is buggy WRT signedness, it should be the same
way buggy for any level of optimizat
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2008-01-18
03:04 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] /usr/ccs/bin/ld:
Unsatisfied symbols: dwarf2out_switch_text_section
I think dwarf2out_switch_text_section() is defined if DWARF2_DEBUGGING_INFO
is defined. So, it app
--- Comment #9 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2008-01-18 02:45
---
File lossy_comp_test.c starting line 761 :
sum_abs = abs (sum_abs + abs (abs (data [k]) - 256)) ;
if (sum_abs < 1.0)
{
printf ("\n\nLine %d: Signal is all zeros (%d, 0x%X).\n", __LINE__, sum_abs,
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 02:24 ---
*** Bug 34837 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 02:24 ---
WRITE (label,'(I4,A)') 2**2.0
This is what is crashing.
I fixed this with PR 29982 over a year ago :).
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 29982 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 02:17
---
Subject: Bug 34556
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Jan 18 02:16:48 2008
New Revision: 131624
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131624
Log:
2007-01-18 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |blocker
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34844
$ mipsel-linux-gnu-gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: mipsel-linux-gnu
Configured with:
/home/andre/toolchain/bs_build_4.3-20080111/gcc-4.3-20080111/configure
--prefix=/usr/local/mipsel_amd64/4.3-20080111-bare --target=mipsel-linux-gnu
--enable-languages=c --enable-checking=no --with-gnu-as --wit
--- Comment #57 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-18 02:10
---
Subject: Re: Inordinate compile times on large
routines
lucier at math dot purdue dot edu wrote:
> --- Comment #56 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2008-01-18 01:38
> ---
> gcc is now 5-6 times
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 02:09
---
Subject: Bug 34556
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Jan 18 02:08:22 2008
New Revision: 131623
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131623
Log:
2008-01-17 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
gcc -D_XOPEN_UNIX -D_XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED -D_INCLUDE__STDC_A1_SOURCE
-D_INCLUDE
_XOPEN_SOURCE_500 -static-libgcc -o gnat1 ada/b_gnat1.o ada/adadecode.o
ada/ada
int.o ada/cstreams.o ada/cio.o ada/targtyps.o ada/decl.o ada/misc.o ada/utils.o
ada/utils2.o ada/trans.o ada/cuintp.o ada/argv.o ada/rais
--- Comment #8 from sergstesh at yahoo dot com 2008-01-18 01:52 ---
With CFLAGS='-O2 -Wstrict-overflow' still no warnings in 'make_check.log' and
"
[EMAIL
PROTECTED]:/mnt/sda8/sergei/gcc4.2.x-O2_bug/gcc-4.2.2-O2/libsndfile-1.0.17>
grep -i warn make.log
sndfile.c:491: warning: the addre
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 01:46 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Did you mean CFLAGS='-O2 -fwrapv -Wstrict-overflow' or, rather,
> CFLAGS='-O2 -Wstrict-overflow' ?
The latter, you will only get the warning if -fwrapv is off as it warns when
the optimize
--- Comment #1 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2008-01-18 01:46
---
Created an attachment (id=14964)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14964&action=view)
Preprocessed source code for unicodeobject.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34843
unicodeobject.c from Python 2.5 assumes signed integer overflow in the
following code in unicode_expandtabs function :
i and j are signed integers (defined as ssize_t) :
[...]
else {
j++;
if (*p == '\n' || *p == '\r') {
i += j; <=== Possible overfl
--- Comment #6 from sergstesh at yahoo dot com 2008-01-18 01:43 ---
I've tried CFLAGS='-O2 -fwrapv -Wstrict-overflow' and I see no warnings at all
in 'make_check.log' file - I tried "grep -i warn make_check.log".
OTOH:
"
[EMAIL
PROTECTED]:/mnt/sda8/sergei/gcc4.2.x-O2_bug/gcc-4.2.2-O2/
--- Comment #2 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 01:39 ---
Works with the 4.2.2 release.
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Know
--- Comment #56 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2008-01-18 01:38
---
gcc is now 5-6 times faster than it was nearly two years ago when this was
first reported; many changes have made significant improvements in cpu time.
But Steven Bosscher's patch from December still improved t
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 01:36 ---
So I think this is just a case of the source depending on signed integers
overflow being defined. Can you try to see if there are any warnings with
-Wstrict-overflow ? If so it might be best if the source gets fixe
--- Comment #4 from sergstesh at yahoo dot com 2008-01-18 01:33 ---
"-O2 -fwrapv" fixes the problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34841
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 01:32 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I have installed
> gcc version 4.3.0 20071231 (experimental) [trunk revision 131236] (GCC)
> and the error goes away. I can turn it on and off by switching between
> the two, though it is no
--- Comment #13 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 01:29 ---
Subject: Bug 33375
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Jan 18 01:29:11 2008
New Revision: 131621
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131621
Log:
2008-01-17 H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/33375
--- Comment #3 from sergstesh at yahoo dot com 2008-01-18 01:28 ---
With "-O2 -fno-strict-aliasing" the failure is still there, I'll check with
"-O2 -fwrapv" right away.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34841
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 01:18 ---
Can you try -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing or -O2 -fwrapv ? This might not be a GCC
issue but the source could be dependent on undefined behavior.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34841
--- Comment #2 from skinner at milkyway dot gsfc dot nasa dot gov
2008-01-18 00:49 ---
Subject: Re: gfortran crashes and asks for bug report
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 22:45
> ---
> Thanks for the bug r
--- Comment #1 from sergstesh at yahoo dot com 2008-01-18 00:40 ---
The tarball: http://www.filelime.com/upload/files/gcc4.2.x-O2_bug.tar.gz .
--
sergstesh at yahoo dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 00:30 ---
Fixed on the trunk (4.3.0).
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 00:29 ---
Subject: Bug 34686
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Jan 18 00:28:28 2008
New Revision: 131620
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131620
Log:
2008-01-18 Richard Sandiford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR f
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 00:06 ---
Fixed already by:
r131596 | ebotcazou | 2008-01-17 04:42:20 -0800 (Thu, 17 Jan 2008) | 3 lines
* gcc.c-torture/compile/20080114-1.c: U
I got
20080114-1.s: Assembler messages:
20080114-1.s:34: Error: Wrong number of input operands
20080114-1.s:56: Error: Wrong number of input operands
The problem is nop on ia64 is "nop 0", not "nop".
--
Summary: gcc.c-torture/compile/20080114-1.c doesn't work on ia64
Prod
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 00:03 ---
I think this is fixed by the patch in PR 34817 though I currently cannot test
it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34838
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
I've noticed the problem while building libsndfile-1.0.17 from source after
switching from SUSE 10.2 to SUSE 10.3, and thus from gcc-4.1.2 to gcc-4.2.1.
I have built myself a number of 'gcc' versions: 3.4.6, 4.2.0, 4.2.1, 4.2.2.
With gcc-3.4.6, gcc-4.1.2 default build of
--- Comment #2 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-17 23:21 ---
The behavior is correct. First the default constructor is used in resize, then
(you can't see it with the snippet) the copy constructor binds to that default
constructed element, used in 3 placement new; finally the destruc
--- Comment #11 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 23:09 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> > Since this topic came up, I've seen various suggestions for how to guarantee
> that a function gets inlined -- e.g., make it a varargs function, or include
> an
> empty asm statement.
I ass
--- Comment #1 from facorread at gmail dot com 2008-01-17 23:01 ---
The same behavior when changing resize() for assign().
--
facorread at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
iled-mem-stats
> Thread model: posix
> gcc version 4.3.0 20080117 (experimental) [trunk revision 131610] (GCC)
>
> The maximum memory I observed in top was 10.2 GB.
>
> Kenny, I can't tell whether your patch from
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34400#c50
&g
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-01-17 22:53 ---
Confirmed and this is a regression as the code works with gfortran 4.3.0
20080102.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34838
I am sorry for not being able to investigate further about this bug.
Please compile and run the following program:
using namespace std;
#include
#include
class MyClass {
public:
MyClass () { cout << "Object created." << endl; };
~MyClass() { cout << "Obj
--- Comment #1 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2008-01-17 22:45 ---
shorter version:
Logical*1 :: bmp(1),bmpv(1)
bmp(1)=.false.
bmpv(1)=.true.
if ( ANY(bmp(1:1) .NEQV. bmpv(1:1)) ) then
print*,"hello"
endif
end
"Logical", "Logical*2" and "Logi
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 22:45 ---
Thanks for the bug report; however, I fail to reproduce the bug with either of
4.1.3, 4.2.2 and 4.3.0 on x86-64-linux.
Your version "4.2.0 (experimental)" is relatively old. (Even 4.1.3 might
contain a bug fix, which
six
gcc version 4.3.0 20080117 (experimental) [trunk revision 131610] (GCC)
The maximum memory I observed in top was 10.2 GB.
Kenny, I can't tell whether your patch from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34400#c50
has been committed; will that improve the situation, too?
--- Comment #53 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-17 22:37
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] bad interaction between
DF and SJLJ exceptions
seongbae dot park at gmail dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #52 from seongbae dot park at gmail dot com 2008-01-17 22:31
> ---
))) ) then
1
Can't convert LOGICAL(1) to LOGICAL(1) at (1)
this is with
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: /projects/tob/gcc/configure --enable-languages=c,fortran
--prefix=/projects/tob/gcc-trunk
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.3.0 2008011
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 22:32 ---
I have a patch, which needs to be regression tested. Watch this place!
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #52 from seongbae dot park at gmail dot com 2008-01-17 22:31
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] bad interaction between DF and SJLJ exceptions
I just talked to Kenny on the phone, and my suggestion is wrong
since it changes the return value - doing my naive suggestion
would
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 22:30 ---
Subject: Bug 34814
Author: janis
Date: Thu Jan 17 22:29:46 2008
New Revision: 131611
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131611
Log:
PR target/34814
* gcc.target/powerpc/ppc32-abi-df
--- Comment #9 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 22:25 ---
>From comment #6:
> What are the problems with the old implementation? Would it make
> sense to resurrect it as natProcessNoThread.c or something?
See PR 11801 for the problems with the old implementation.
Resurrec
> gfortran -c makeplot.f90
makeplot.f90: In function 'MAIN__':
makeplot.f90:103: internal compiler error: in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at
expr.c:6517
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
__
gfortran -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-apple-darwin
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 22:09 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> > + if (ts->kind != -1)
> > I think this has been removed in the commit.
> Indeed. Thanks for the check, Dominique. Thus: Ignore that comment.
Gents,
I tried to deal with the useful commen
zoekt u een goede hosting server met nederlands support??
ons team helpt u met alles, 24/24 support
www.prosel.be
--- Comment #12 from amacleod at redhat dot com 2008-01-17 21:54 ---
Bah. I missed getting the PR in the checkin message.
Committed the proposed patch and the testcase as revision 131610. Bootstrapped
and regression tested on x86_64-linux-gnu
Follow on conversations about const funct
--- Comment #53 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2008-01-17 21:53
---
Subject: Re: Inordinate compile times on large routines
On Jan 17, 2008, at 4:46 PM, zadeck at naturalbridge dot com wrote:
> just between you and me this is most likely a regression,
I, too, believe it is
--- Comment #4 from ddaney at avtrex dot com 2008-01-17 21:48 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] ICE on gcc.dg/pr34233.c for
MIPS
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 21:40
> ---
> Yes, I can read. It says
>
>
--- Comment #52 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-17 21:46
---
Subject: Re: Inordinate compile times on large
routines
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #51 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 21:43
> ---
> As this isn't even marked a
--- Comment #51 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 21:43
---
As this isn't even marked at a regression, you can fix it whenever you like ;)
Only regressions have a target milestone before they are actually fixed,
though.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 21:40 ---
Yes, I can read. It says
FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34233.c (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34233.c (test for excess errors)
so, what is the ICE message?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34831
The messages in function readonly_error in gcc/cp/typeck2.c are not possible to
translate properly. A part of the sentence, which might be "assignment" or
"increment" for example is passed to the function as an argument. This
argument is then composed with the error message using a %s substitutio
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 21:34 ---
I have a one line fix for this, which will be applied as obvious tomorrow
morning.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #51 from seongbae dot park at gmail dot com 2008-01-17 21:31
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] bad interaction between DF and SJLJ exceptions
In df_live_transfer_function:
Doesn't look like we need df_live_scratch - can't we do:
bitmap_and (out, gen, bb_lr_info->out);
bi
--- Comment #50 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-17 21:20
---
Subject:
Mark,
Am I allowed to set the target milestone for a patch or is that your job?
26854 is not going to get fixed for 4.3. We made a lot of progress on it
with the patches to 34400, but largest remainin
--- Comment #2 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 21:19 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> What ICE?
>
As noted in the original comments, the ICE in this testsuite run:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-01/msg00204.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 21:17 ---
What ICE?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #50 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-17 21:06
---
Subject: [4.3 regression] bad interaction between DF
and SJLJ exceptions
This is the second of three patches to fix 34400. This patch also makes
some progress on 26854 but more work is required that is not goi
--- Comment #10 from fche at redhat dot com 2008-01-17 21:04 ---
Is the mailing-list suggested workaround of adding
asm ("");
into the not-to-be-inlined test function satisfactory?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34563
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gmx dot de 2008-01-17 20:37 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Now, what Harald wants is (IIUC) a -ffake-lack-of-integer-kind-1 option, that
> would make gfortran behave as if it had no integer(kind=1).
Right.
> Though it would
> help the porting process in t
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 20:23 ---
Testing a patch.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|u
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 20:19 ---
Confirmed.
>From the ChangeLog it looks like the intent was to only reject
aggregate types.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #49 from spark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 20:03 ---
Subject: Bug 34400
Author: spark
Date: Thu Jan 17 20:02:56 2008
New Revision: 131608
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131608
Log:
2008-01-17 Seongbae Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR rtl-o
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-17 19:10 ---
On it.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot g
--- Comment #10 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 19:08 ---
GNU tar 1.14 is listed as a general prerequisite for installing GCC
http://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html
This is a general issue on many platforms, not specifically AIX, which is why
the requirement is listed
splay-tree.h has
#ifndef _WIN64
typedef unsigned long int libi_uhostptr_t;
typedef long int libi_shostptr_t;
#else
typedef unsigned long long libi_uhostptr_t;
typedef long long libi_shostptr_t;
#endif
...
/* Use typedefs for the key and data types to facilitate changing
these types, i
The following code is accepted by g++ (4.1, 4.3), while I think it is invalid.
-
template
struct A {};
template <> // This line should be removed
template
struct A {};
int main()
{
A a;
A b;
}
--
Note that the Comeau compiler rejects it with
--- Comment #9 from jkenisto at us dot ibm dot com 2008-01-17 18:52 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > Testing of stuff like kprobes in Linux would be a lot easier if nolinline
> > worked reliably. See this thread, for example:
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kern
--- Comment #35 from stsp at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-01-17
18:43 ---
(In reply to comment #34)
> We should possibly split this bug into two, one for the inconsitencies that
> can be observed with accepted asms comparing -O0 to -O and one for the
Done.
I opened Bug 34830, Bug
--- Comment #1 from stsp at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-01-17 18:39
---
Created an attachment (id=14962)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14962&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34833
Hi.
Opening per suggestion in Bug 23200.
Not entirely sure if this is really a bug,
but it looks like the one.
The following program:
---
static char var;
int main()
{
asm volatile ("" :: "i"(&var));
return 0;
}
---
gives this when compiled with -fpic -m32:
---
asvar1.c: In function 'mai
--- Comment #8 from dtemirbulatov at gmail dot com 2008-01-17 18:34 ---
This regression happens after the SSA was merged in to the mainline
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22141
--- Comment #4 from eres at il dot ibm dot com 2008-01-17 18:28 ---
A patch was committed to trunk -r131604
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34826
--- Comment #1 from stsp at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-01-17 18:24
---
Created an attachment (id=14961)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14961&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34832
Hi.
Opening per suggestion in Bug 23200.
The following program:
---
int main()
{
static const int i = 1;
asm volatile ("" :: "i"(i));
return i;
}
---
gives this when compiled without -O2:
---
asc1.c: In function 'main':
asc1.c:4: warning: asm operand 0 probably doesn't match constrai
--- Comment #3 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 18:22 ---
Subject: Bug 34612
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Jan 17 18:21:28 2008
New Revision: 131607
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131607
Log:
2008-01-17 H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libffi/34612
--
daney at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||3.4.3
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gc
Between r131315 and r131326 I started getting an ICE on mipsel-linux for
gcc.dg/pr34233.c.
See:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-01/msg00144.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-01/msg00204.html
This testcase does not ice on gcc 3.4.3:
$ mipsel-linux-gcc -c -O3 pr34233.c
$
--- Comment #2 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-17 18:18 ---
Because of a system problem, I won't be able
to commit this over the next few days.
If anybody wants to do this, be my guest.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34817
--- Comment #1 from stsp at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-01-17 18:16
---
Created an attachment (id=14960)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14960&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34830
--- Comment #2 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-17 18:15 ---
On it.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot g
1 - 100 of 151 matches
Mail list logo
