--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 06:52 ---
I should note that when GCC emits the annotations for profiling, it actually
emits the counter updates and all and other optimizations don't need to know
about them except if they want to know the information about w
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 06:50 ---
For reference see:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg01205.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-03/msg00200.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-12/msg00215.html
And most likely a couple others too.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35540
--- Comment #7 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-03-12 06:42 ---
Fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from xinliangli at gmail dot com 2008-03-12 06:40 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > This model won't work well when -O4 (ipo) is in place. If instrumentation
> > and
> > annotation happens at the same phase in the compiler pipeline, I don't see a
--- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 06:37 ---
Subject: Bug 35540
Author: uros
Date: Wed Mar 12 06:37:10 2008
New Revision: 133135
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133135
Log:
PR target/35540
* config/i386/i386.md (paritysi2, p
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 06:28 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> This model won't work well when -O4 (ipo) is in place. If instrumentation and
> annotation happens at the same phase in the compiler pipeline, I don't see a
> reason why such restriction is
--- Comment #2 from xinliangli at gmail dot com 2008-03-12 06:24 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> This is by design, you need to use the same options for -fprofile-use as you
> do
> for -fprofile-generate.
>
This model won't work well when -O4 (ipo) is in place. If instrumentation and
a
--- Comment #2 from xinliangli at gmail dot com 2008-03-12 06:22 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Subject: Re: New: value profiling support for memOps such as memcpy
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 11, 2008, at 22:32, "xinliangli at gmail dot com"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wr
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 06:07 ---
Jump threading happened by we did not prop the call correctly:
ap = (struct A *) D.2075;
ap->_vptr$A = &_ZTV1A[2];
OBJ_TYPE_REF(*ap->_vptr$A;ap->0) (ap);
...
this = (struct B *) D.2076;
this->D.2018._vptr$
--- Comment #1 from victork at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 06:05 ---
We don't recognize REALPART_EXPR and IMAGPART_EXPR in vectorizer.
These should be recognized as load operations:
CR.39_21 = REALPART_EXPR ;
CI.40_22 = IMAGPART_EXPR ;
CR.41_23 = REALPART_EXPR ;
CI.42_24 = IM
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 06:04 ---
This is by design, you need to use the same options for -fprofile-use as you do
for -fprofile-generate.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
In the following example, virtual calls via ap should be speciallized -- there
is one dominatating call target, but compiling the program at -O3 with
-fprofile-use, it does not happen.
g++ -O1 -fprofile-generate devirt.cc
./a.out
g++ -fprofile-use -O3 -fdump-tree-optimized devirt.cc
// devirt.cc
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2008-03-12 05:51 ---
Subject: Re: New: value profiling support for memOps such as memcpy
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 11, 2008, at 22:32, "xinliangli at gmail dot com"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Value profiling on the length paramete
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 11, 2008, at 22:32, "xinliangli at gmail dot com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
Value profiling on the length parameters of memset, memcpy, memmove,
strncmp,
strncpy, memcmp, etc can be guide the inline expansion strategy for
those
calls. As an example, very lar
In the following example, profile data generated by -O0 binary run can not be
used for profile-use at -O2. This is either a bug or design flaw if not
supported.
g++ -fprofile-generate devirt.cc
./a.out
g++ -fprofile-use -O2 devirt.cc
==>
devirt.cc: In function 'int main()':
devirt.cc:45: error: c
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 05:38
---
This is a "won't fix". Thank you for the report. gfortran will compile g77
code so please give it a try. Please let us know if you have a problem with it.
Look here for binaries if not available from your distr
Value profiling on the length parameters of memset, memcpy, memmove, strncmp,
strncpy, memcmp, etc can be guide the inline expansion strategy for those
calls. As an example, very large sized memcpy may prefer non-temporal memory
move etc.
--
Summary: value profiling support for memOp
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 04:43
---
This works for me as well. I think it has been fixed. Dominique, can you
please confirm this is fixed for you? on 4.4
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33296
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 04:23
---
I wlll look into this a bit. This caught my attention because it says
ice-on-valid and it is set as an enhancement. That makes no sense.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Rem
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 04:12
---
I will dejagnuize the test case and commit it.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 03:48 ---
I should be able to submit this patch tomorrow morning after the testing
finishes.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34212
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 01:11
---
Fixed on 4.4
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Stat
--- Comment #9 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 00:57 ---
Subject: Bug 35222
Author: danglin
Date: Wed Mar 12 00:56:34 2008
New Revision: 133131
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133131
Log:
PR target/35222
* configure.ac (CONFIG_SJLJ_E
Szia
Elhiszem, hogy nem szeretsz ilyen levelet kapni, de kivetelesen megeri
meglatogatnod az alabbi oldalt, hisz magyarorszag legnagyobb tartalmat talalod
legolcsobban, vetek lenne kihagyni tenyleg! Rengeteg levelet
kapunk vissza, hogy mennyire jo az oldal és mennyi regen keresett filmet
talal
--- Comment #4 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-03-11 21:52 ---
Yes, it's a trivial issue, sorry about that. I think the third parameter of the
*_sorted_set_aux functions can be simply removed. Anyway, I'll fix it ASAP.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Remove
--- Comment #1 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 21:50 ---
Suspending it, as I'm not working on it "for the moment".
--
hp at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 21:35 ---
Mine, I said.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|un
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 21:34 ---
Mine. The patches which I have from the PS3 toolchain fixes this one, it is
related to PR 32110 also.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 21:29 ---
Created an attachment (id=15301)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15301&action=view)
Patch which I am testing
This is the patch which I am testing currently for this bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.or
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 21:08 ---
Subject: Bug 35403
Author: pinskia
Date: Tue Mar 11 21:08:00 2008
New Revision: 133119
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133119
Log:
2008-03-11 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* ipa
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 21:08 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from hutchinsonandy at aim dot com 2008-03-11 20:34 ---
Created an attachment (id=15300)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15300&action=view)
Patch to search modified instruction for register.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35542
fwprop.c currently has a bug where a successful propagation to one operand
of an instruction will prevent propagation to any remaining operands.
The cause is due to the use of loc_mentioned_in_p() to check that a reference,
provided by earlier DF scan, still exist in an instruction.
The test
--- Comment #3 from michael dot a dot richmond at nasa dot gov 2008-03-11
19:49 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Can you please try the following patch and tell me whether it helps?
It fixed the problem. Thank you.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35524
--- Comment #4 from carlos at codesourcery dot com 2008-03-11 19:21 ---
Greg,
The example you describe looks an awful lot like a cross-compile. Is there
anything preventing you from configuring with --enable-build-sysroot=/tmp/foo?
Could you also describe your original build process in
--- Comment #5 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 19:19 ---
Subject: Bug 35540
Author: uros
Date: Tue Mar 11 19:18:48 2008
New Revision: 133118
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133118
Log:
PR target/35540
* config/i386/i386.md (paritysi2, p
--- Comment #7 from gcc at spatium dot org 2008-03-11 18:46 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> *** Bug 35537 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
>
this bug seems to appear only with profiledbootstrap. i'm able to do normal
bootstrap without running into the problem.
--
htt
I must be doing something wrong, I cannot seem to compile the new
4.2.3 :
gmake[3]: Entering directory `/home/danny/src/gcc/x86-bootstrap/gcc'
gcc -c -g -fkeep-inline-functions -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings
-Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wold-style-definition
-Wmissing-format-at
--- Comment #3 from chris at bubblescope dot net 2008-03-11 17:12 ---
While I'm sure he will be along soon anyway, I shall add Paolo to the CC list
of this bug.
It looks to me like a simple typo was made while fixing 34730.
--
chris at bubblescope dot net changed:
What
--- Comment #2 from chris at bubblescope dot net 2008-03-11 17:08 ---
This used to work (works on Apple's gcc 4.0.1).
The bug is an inconsistency between __check_sorted_set on lines 317 and 334 and
the __check_sorted_set_aux on the lines before
The 4 __check_sorted_set_aux methods expe
--- Comment #17 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 16:53
---
Adding a note: fallback formulas for systems that lack C99 complex functions
can be found in Cephes (http://www.netlib.org/cephes/)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33197
--- Comment #12 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-03-11 16:49 ---
For 4.4, both mul16 and mul32 will be fixed by the pending patch.
The pending patch is what cures the regression part of this bug.
--- Comment #13 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-03-11 16:49 ---
Subject: Bug 35
--- Comment #12 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-03-11 16:49 ---
For 4.4, both mul16 and mul32 will be fixed by the pending patch.
The pending patch is what cures the regression part of this bug.
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Ad
--- Comment #9 from bfriesen at simple dot dallas dot tx dot us 2008-03-11
16:35 ---
A documentation update will be suffient provided that binutils 'ld' adequately
supports Solaris now. However, I notice that there are may be some issues with
code built/linked with the Sun linker and t
--- Comment #1 from dominik dot strasser at onespin-solutions dot com
2008-03-11 16:25 ---
Created an attachment (id=15299)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15299&action=view)
Source file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35541
The attached legal C++ source can't be compiled with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG
--
Summary: Legal C++ program can't be compiled with -
D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
--- Comment #8 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-03-11 16:20 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html#ix86-x-solaris210
>
> It is recommended that you configure GCC to use the GNU assembler in
> /usr/sfw/bin/gas but the Sun linker, using the options --wit
--- Comment #10 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 16:14 ---
Fixed.
--
ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--
ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org
Target Milestone|---
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 15:53 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html#ix86-x-solaris210
It is recommended that you configure GCC to use the GNU assembler in
/usr/sfw/bin/gas but the Sun linker, using the options --with-gnu-as
--with-as=/usr/sfw
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-03-11 15:53 ---
It was introduced between revisions 121818 and 122326.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35540
--- Comment #6 from bfriesen at simple dot dallas dot tx dot us 2008-03-11
15:51 ---
The previous GCC releases worked "out of the box" but 4.3.0 does not. Give
this, how can this bug report be "invalid"? The configuration for Solaris 10
on x86 hardware has clearly degraded as compared
--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-03-11 15:43 ---
Mine.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot
--- Comment #4 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 15:36 ---
Subject: Bug 33275
Author: ghazi
Date: Tue Mar 11 15:35:51 2008
New Revision: 133114
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133114
Log:
PR target/26149
Backport:
2007-03-18 Ur
--- Comment #9 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 15:36 ---
Subject: Bug 26149
Author: ghazi
Date: Tue Mar 11 15:35:51 2008
New Revision: 133114
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133114
Log:
PR target/26149
Backport:
2007-03-18 Ur
--- Comment #8 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 15:36 ---
Subject: Bug 31369
Author: ghazi
Date: Tue Mar 11 15:35:51 2008
New Revision: 133114
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133114
Log:
PR target/26149
Backport:
2007-03-18 Ur
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl dot tools at gmail dot
|
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 15:33 ---
g77 is no longer maintained, long live gfortran.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35539
--- Comment #2 from Laurent dot Vivier at bull dot net 2008-03-11 15:28
---
Created an attachment (id=15298)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15298&action=view)
new version of previous patch (aix-asm.patch)
correctly export symbols
Add compatibility with libtool proc
--- Comment #2 from r dot schuerer at gmx dot at 2008-03-11 15:23 ---
The assembler code for f() (as listed by "objdump -d a.out") is as follows:
0804838c :
804838c: 55 push %ebp
804838d: 89 e5 mov%esp,%ebp
804838f: b8 01
--- Comment #1 from r dot schuerer at gmx dot at 2008-03-11 15:13 ---
Created an attachment (id=15297)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15297&action=view)
The C source file triggering the bug
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35540
Consider the following C-Program main.c:
/*/
int f (unsigned* a, int b)
{
return b ? 1 : __builtin_parity(*a);
}
int main()
{
unsigned a = 0;
return f(&a, 0);
}
/*/
Using GCC 4.3.0:
$ /usr/local/gcc-
--- Comment #11 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-03-11 14:34 ---
With patch from comment #10, the failures for gcc.c-torture/compile/pr11832.c
and gcc.c-torture/compile/pr33009.c disappear on (powerpc|i686)-apple-darwin9,
32 and 64 bit modes without regression (gcc on powerpc, gcc
--- Comment #7 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-03-11 14:31 ---
Fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-03-11 14:24 ---
Which revision isn't OK?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35518
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-03-11 14:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=15296)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15296&action=view)
A patch
Try this patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35538
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-03-11 14:18 ---
It looks like variables in a shared library can't be overridden
at run time on MacOS. You can skip or xfail it for MacOS.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 14:17 ---
Subject: Bug 35526
Author: uros
Date: Tue Mar 11 14:16:25 2008
New Revision: 133108
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133108
Log:
2008-03-11 Uros Bizjak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR middle-end
--- Comment #5 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-03-11 13:56 ---
Also, I would like to understand what does the "Some past versions of GMP used
`--target' incorrectly" part mean. Does it mean that those past versions
changed their configuration according to `--target', instead of `--hos
--- Comment #4 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-03-11 13:53 ---
The patch does not remove the --target option. It just causes the "real"
--target option (which is not equal to the host if we're building a cross) to
be passed down to gmp/mpfr.
Does this issue actually cause a build fail
Using -fugly-logint with the following code gives wrong evaluation of .eqv.
statement
program test
Logical a, b
a=.TRUE.
b=.FALSE.
if( a .eqv. b )then
print *,'true'
else
print *,'false'
end if
end
The result is "true". Program compile
On (powerpc|i686)-apple-darwin9 I see the following failure in 32 and 64 bit
modes:
FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-store-ccp-4.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized
"conststaticvariable" 1
[ibook-dhum] test/tmp% cat ssa-store-ccp-4.c.127t.optimized
;; Function f (f)
Analyzing Edge Insertions.
f ()
{
:
--- Comment #5 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 12:48 ---
Subject: Bug 35526
Author: uros
Date: Tue Mar 11 12:47:29 2008
New Revision: 133106
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133106
Log:
PR middle-end/35526
* expr.c (store_expr): Call emi
--
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
GCC target triplet||i686-openbsd
Keywords||build
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 12:07
---
*** Bug 35537 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 12:07
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 32581 ***
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--
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
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--
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
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 12:02 ---
What glibc or newlib version are you using to compile GCC with?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--
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
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--
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
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
GCC 4.3.0 build fails with GNAT BUG, more info below
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-4.2.3/configure --prefix=/usr --enable-threads
--enable-shared --enable-languages=c,c++,ada,java,objc,fortran
--host=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu --with-system-z
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35244
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35494
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 11:43 ---
Can you provide the preprocessed source?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-03-11 11:17 ---
Any way, it is not gcc that fails here.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last recon
--- Comment #10 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 10:50
---
Fixed on mainline.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 10:49
---
Subject: Bug 32812
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Tue Mar 11 10:49:13 2008
New Revision: 133104
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133104
Log:
PR libfortran/32812
* intrinsics/random.
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-03-11 10:03 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression] Rejects JArray
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, aph at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #7 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 09:58 ---
> Okay, but I don't quite understand
--- Comment #7 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 09:58 ---
Okay, but I don't quite understand this final sentence:
"Still with C++ now reducing operations on bit-precision types
you get different answers for the above case now."
What exactly do you mean by this?
--
http:/
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 09:46 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
