--
daney at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirm
--- Comment #3 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-01 07:26
---
Indeed, the ICE disappeared.
Would you mind adding the testcase anyway?
Thanks!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42057
--- Comment #8 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-01 07:26 ---
Created an attachment (id=19193)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19193&action=view)
Reduced testcase
Configured as:
../trunk/configure --target=mips64-linux
--with-sysroot=/home/daney/mips64-linux
--- Comment #6 from shailen dot n dot jain at gmail dot com 2009-12-01
06:18 ---
In which version these changes are available for AIX on 64 bit ?
Thanks,
Shailen
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35484
--- Comment #14 from vlad at demoninsight dot com 2009-12-01 05:50 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> (In reply to comment #12)
> > Compile-time.
>
> configure with --enable-checking=release to turn off checks that are enabled
> by
> default in pre-release builds, that will give a better
--- Comment #27 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-12-01
04:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=19192)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19192&action=view)
walk from last _Unwind_RaiseException breakpoint until crash
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sho
--- Comment #14 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-01 04:41
---
Fixed on Trunk and 4.4
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-01 04:40
---
Subject: Bug 41278
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Dec 1 04:40:14 2009
New Revision: 154864
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154864
Log:
2009-11-30 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/41278
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-01 04:36
---
Subject: Bug 41278
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Dec 1 04:36:30 2009
New Revision: 154863
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154863
Log:
2009-11-30 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/41278
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|internal compiler error:|[4.5 Regression] internal
|verify_ssa failed
-no-create
--no-recursion : (reconfigured) ../configure --enable-lto
--prefix=/home/yang/compilers --program-prefix=svn
--with-libelf=/home/yang/compilers --enable-languages=c,c++,lto --no-create
--no-recursion
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.5.0 20091130 (experimental) (GCC)
--
Summary: i
--- Comment #18 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-01 03:01
---
As an update, gfortran currently passes the data-valid.f90 test and ices on the
data-invalid.f90 case.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24978
--- Comment #4 from rupp at gnat dot com 2009-12-01 01:06 ---
Proposed patch fixes test case on VMS.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42224
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-12-01 00:27 ---
It is caused by revision 145440:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-04/msg00060.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42225
--- Comment #3 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-01 00:26 ---
A reduced test case seems to be:
~=~
template
struct A
{
typedef T I;
};
template
struct B
{
typedef T TT;
typedef typename TT::I TT_I;
typedef A TA;
};
template
void
foo()
{
typedef T TT
--- Comment #5 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 23:34 ---
Subject: Bug 35484
Author: dje
Date: Mon Nov 30 23:34:33 2009
New Revision: 154855
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154855
Log:
2009-11-30 David Edelsohn
PR target/35484
* src/p
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 23:03 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> This gives
>
> undefined reference to `create_interface_'
>
> when linking. 'create_interface' is the abstract interface of the deferred
> TBP.
> Instead of calling this, one should do the
--
dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org|
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dodji at gcc dot gnu d
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 22:46
---
Fixed.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Statu
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 22:45 ---
Subject: Bug 40371
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Nov 30 22:45:06 2009
New Revision: 154852
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154852
Log:
cp/
2009-11-30 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/40371
* c
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jason at gcc dot gnu dot org|
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc do
--- Comment #3 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2009-11-30 22:41 ---
Fixed.
--
sje at cup dot hp dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 22:41
---
*** Bug 38712 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 22:41
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 38600 ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 22:39 ---
Submitted a patch to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg01767.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42217
--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 22:22 ---
The lattices are OK per se. Lattices really only represent arguments
of calls that are represented in the call graph. When there might be
other calls that are not represented in the graph, the function body
is clon
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-11-30 22:21 ---
Fixed
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2009-11-30 22:10 ---
Fixed in r154843, test case added in gcc.dg/pr41551.c.
--
sje at cup dot hp dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from grosser at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 22:08 ---
Subject: Bug 42130
Author: grosser
Date: Mon Nov 30 22:07:59 2009
New Revision: 154849
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154849
Log:
Protect loops that might be executed zero times.
2009-11-23
--- Comment #16 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 22:08
---
> The issue with the boolean_type_node is that the middle-end does not have
> a type for a comparison result but implicitly assumes boolean_type_node.
>
> So for
>
> D._16 = (boolean) D._6;
> if (D.
--- Comment #3 from gmorin1 at bloomberg dot net 2009-11-30 22:06 ---
The trunk g++ output looks good. As I said, there is a simple workaround. But
since this is a regression from 4.1, a fix in 4.4 would be nice.
Additionally, it would be great if you could document the full scope of t
--- Comment #25 from pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 21:29
---
I am still seeing the 2-block loop using revision 154838, both 32 and 64 bit,
compile options -O3 -mcpu=power6 -funroll-loops.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39976
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 21:25 ---
Fixed on trunk with r154840.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 21:24 ---
Fixed on trunk with r154840.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42053
--- Comment #25 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 21:01
---
Fixed on trunk. Closing.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 20:46 ---
Or vice versa, I like this testcase better :)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38600
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 20:43 ---
Subject: Bug 41631
Author: janus
Date: Mon Nov 30 20:43:06 2009
New Revision: 154840
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154840
Log:
merge from fortran-dev branch:
gcc/fortran/
2009-11-30 Janus
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 20:43 ---
Subject: Bug 42053
Author: janus
Date: Mon Nov 30 20:43:06 2009
New Revision: 154840
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154840
Log:
merge from fortran-dev branch:
gcc/fortran/
2009-11-30 Janus
--- Comment #24 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 20:35
---
Subject: Bug 42131
Author: tkoenig
Date: Mon Nov 30 20:35:41 2009
New Revision: 154839
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154839
Log:
2009-11-30 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/42131
--- Comment #23 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 20:19
---
Thomas, Ido not have email access at the moment.
I reviewed your patch and it is approved for trunk.
Thanks for the work.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42131
--- Comment #22 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 19:15
---
(In reply to comment #21)
> the "sign" for unsigned steps is always 1, you don't seem to account
> for unsignedness?
(Un)fortunately, there are no unsigned varaibles in Fortran.
> Note that I believe generating
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 19:15 ---
Subject: Bug 42212
Author: janis
Date: Mon Nov 30 19:14:58 2009
New Revision: 154837
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154837
Log:
PR testsuite/42212
* gcc.target/powerpc/regnames-
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 18:41
---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg01729.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40371
--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 18:16 ---
Fixed.
--
jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #2 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 18:00 ---
Subject: Bug 42196
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Nov 30 17:59:57 2009
New Revision: 154834
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154834
Log:
2009-11-30 Martin Jambor
PR middle-end/42196
--- Comment #2 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 17:29 ---
With 4.5 we seem to be all fine here:
j...@gcc17:~/trunk/build/gcc$ ./g++ -B ./ -O2 tt.c -fdump-tree-all-details -S
-fdump-rtl-all-details-blocks
j...@gcc17:~/trunk/build/gcc$ more tt.s
.file "tt.c"
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from gmorin1 at bloomberg dot net 2009-11-30 17:00 ---
I can see this problem with 4.3.2 (Debian 4.3.2-1.1), 4.2.4 (Debian 4.2.4-6),
4.4.0 20090514 (Red Hat 4.4.0-6). I do not see it with 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat
4.1.2-46) and 4.1.3 20080704 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.2-25).
--- Comment #4 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 17:00 ---
Fixed.
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #5 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 16:59 ---
Fixed.
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #13 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 16:46 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Compile-time.
configure with --enable-checking=release to turn off checks that are enabled by
default in pre-release builds, that will give a better comparison between the
4.4.2 release and
The following c/++ code generates assembly that favors the unlikely case with
gcc 4.3 and 4.4:
extern void likely();
extern void unlikely();
void test_expect(char * a, char *b, char *c, char *d) {
if (__builtin_expect(!!(a == b && c == d), 1)) {
likely();
}
else {
unlike
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.4.3
Known to work||4.3.4 4.5.0
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 16:26 ---
Created an attachment (id=19191)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19191&action=view)
reduced testcase
Reduced testcase from https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559091.
(gdb) bt
#0 0x
> g++-4.4 -S -m32 bug-559091_solver_main_pre_omp.3.cpp -fopenmp
bug-559091_solver_main_pre_omp.3.cpp: In member function void
LbmFsgrSolver::mainLoop(int):
bug-559091_solver_main_pre_omp.3.cpp:121: internal compiler error: Segmentation
fault
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed sour
--- Comment #12 from vlad at demoninsight dot com 2009-11-30 16:07 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Slower in runtime or in compile-time?
>
Compile-time.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42159
--- Comment #4 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 15:58 ---
The variable is initialized now. Thanks for pointing it out.
--
jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 15:46 ---
Subject: Bug 42206
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Nov 30 15:46:00 2009
New Revision: 154820
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154820
Log:
2009-11-30 Martin Jambor
PR middle-end/42206
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 15:29
---
Ian, can you have a look to this issue? Thanks in advance.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 15:27
---
Slower in runtime or in compile-time?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42159
--- Comment #10 from vlad at demoninsight dot com 2009-11-30 15:19 ---
So, using 4.5 trunk works around this issue... But ouch: 4.5 is almost 2x
slower than 4.4...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42159
--- Comment #3 from uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 15:17
---
OK, I've reproduced the problem. It seems int_or_pointer_precision
is fundamentally wrong for pointers using a non-standard size
(i.e. pointer variables defined using a mode attribute).
The history of this is tha
--- Comment #5 from roche+gccbugs at exalead dot com 2009-11-30 15:06
---
Just a small note: also work with "just" -fno-ipa-cp-clone in O3 mode,
actually. Therefore the issue is probably related to the "Perform function
cloning to make interprocedural constant propagation stronger" feat
--- Comment #15 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 15:05
---
The issue with the boolean_type_node is that the middle-end does not have
a type for a comparison result but implicitly assumes boolean_type_node.
So for
D._16 = (boolean) D._6;
if (D._16 != 0)
w
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|4.4.3 |4.4.0 4.4.3
Priority|P3 |P2
http
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 14:46 ---
Confirmed. Works with 4.5 and with -fno-ipa-cp.
IPA lattices after propagation:
Lattice:
Node: main:
Node: callback:
param [0]: type is CONST 0
which is obviously wrong. On trunk the same propagation res
--- Comment #4 from olga at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 14:43 ---
Subject: Bug 39806
Author: olga
Date: Mon Nov 30 14:42:54 2009
New Revision: 154811
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154811
Log:
2009-11-30 Olga Golovanevsky
PR middle-end/39806
--- Comment #3 from roche+gccbugs at exalead dot com 2009-11-30 14:38
---
Created an attachment (id=19190)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19190&action=view)
The assembly source version
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42231
--- Comment #2 from roche+gccbugs at exalead dot com 2009-11-30 14:38
---
Created an attachment (id=19189)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19189&action=view)
The preprocessor version
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42231
--- Comment #1 from roche+gccbugs at exalead dot com 2009-11-30 14:29
---
Created an attachment (id=19188)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19188&action=view)
The test program (exit code is meaningful)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42231
Bug reproduced with GCC 4.4.2 and GCC 4.4.1, on x86_64.
The following simple test program should succeed (EXIT_SUCCESS return code from
main()), but fails with GCC 4.4.2 when compiling with -O3.
The program succeed with "-O2", _AND_ "-O2 -finline-functions -funswitch-loops
-fpredictive-commoning
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 14:07
---
The second part seems to me essentially a duplicate of PR28300.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42062
When calling abi::__cxa_demangle("e", 0, &length, &cc) length is not updated
but the documentation indicates that it should be set to the length of the
demangled name.
It seems that this change was introduced after 3.4.6
--
Summary: abi::__cxa_demangle fails to return the length of t
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 14:02
---
The ICE part is fixed by my patch for PR34272.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42062
--- Comment #22 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 13:56 ---
In that case you weren't using the latest version of the patch.
Please try http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg01582.html
instead, it should fix several important bugs and initializers of compound
literals ar
--- Comment #24 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 13:14
---
ppc folks, can you re-confirm this bug?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39976
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 13:11 ---
I believe this was fixed with
2009-07-22 Michael Matz
PR tree-optimization/35229
PR tree-optimization/39300
* tree-ssa-pre.c (includes): Include tree-scalar-evolution.h.
(inhibit
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 12:36
---
Fixed by Honza.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Statu
--- Comment #23 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2009-11-30 12:20 ---
Applied:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?limit_changes=0&view=revision&revision=154794
Thanks,
Ira
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42108
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 11:32 ---
Confirmed. remove_path doesn't honor the fact that cancel_loop_tree removes
all sub-loops, so the work list may contain already removed loops.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Remo
--- Comment #21 from dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2009-11-30 11:30 ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg01392.html
I tried out your patch on a recent Linux kernel and got
some possibly false positives
Code like
static inline pud_t __pud(pudval_t va
--
dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-11-30 10:54 ---
This may be related to revision 154688, which has caused PR 42202.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42216
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 10:41 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 10:40 ---
Fixed for 4.5.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|A
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 10:39 ---
Subject: Bug 38530
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Nov 30 10:39:36 2009
New Revision: 154778
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154778
Log:
2009-11-30 Richard Guenther
PR middle-end/42119
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 10:39 ---
Subject: Bug 42119
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Nov 30 10:39:36 2009
New Revision: 154778
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154778
Log:
2009-11-30 Richard Guenther
PR middle-end/42119
--- Comment #3 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 10:38 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> The issue is pretty simple, actually: std::unique_future (which, by the way,
> will be renamed just std::future), is missing move assignment operator. Note,
> in N2914 it does *not* exist, has
--- Comment #2 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 10:36 ---
What a stupid oversight, I'll prepare a patch straight away.
--
jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 10:33 ---
I suspect it's rtx costs messed up if asked for speed vs. size metrics.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42226
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 10:32 ---
With checking enabled I get
> g++-4.5 -S -o /dev/null product_small.ii -B /abuild/rguenther/trunk-g/gcc
In file included from /home/bjacob/eigen/test/product_small.cpp:26:0:
/home/bjacob/eigen/test/product.h: In fun
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 10:27
---
Today (r154772), I can't reproduce the issue anymore. Volker, can you double
check?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42057
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 10:26 ---
THus fixed in 4.5.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Stat
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 10:26 ---
Uli, this is your code.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2009-11-30 10:23 ---
Created an attachment (id=19187)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19187&action=view)
C++ source code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42229
I just tried to compile package libgeos_c1-3.1.1 with the GNU C++ compiler
version 4.5 snapshot 20091126 and the compiler said
AbstractSTRtree.cpp: In member function 'geos::index::strtree::ItemsList*
geos::index::strtree::AbstractSTRtree::itemsTree(geos::index::strtree::AbstractNode*)':
AbstractS
--- Comment #6 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 10:15 ---
Fixed in 4.5.
--
dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGN
--- Comment #22 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-11-30 10:13 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4/4.5 Regression] Vectorizer
cannot deal with PAREN_EXPR gracefully, 50% performance regression
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009, irar at il dot ibm dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #20 from irar at il dot ibm dot
--- Comment #21 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-11-30 10:10 ---
Subject: Re: Weird translation of DO loops
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009, tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #20 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 07:31
> ---
> Created an attachment (id=1
--- Comment #1 from dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2009-11-30 10:06 ---
Created an attachment (id=19186)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19186&action=view)
gzipped C++ source code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42228
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
