[Bug fortran/46678] [4.6 Regression] Wrong code with strings

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46678 --- Comment #11 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-28 07:43:02 UTC --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Nov 28 07:42:56 2010 New Revision: 167218 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167218 Log: 2010-11-27 Tobias Burnus Jerry DeLi

[Bug c++/46687] Class member lookup ambiguity w/ overloaded static members and using declarations

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46687 --- Comment #3 from Hubert Tong 2010-11-28 04:23:55 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > However, because you have using declarations in B1 and B2 name lookup finds > B1::foo and B2::foo ... at least by my reading, which could be wrong It does fin

[Bug c++/46687] Class member lookup ambiguity w/ overloaded static members and using declarations

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46687 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2010-11-28 01:57:06 UTC --- C has two copies of the name A::foo, as B1::foo and B2::foo. if C only saw A::foo then it would be unambiguous because the same members would be found, as in this variant: struct A

[Bug c++/46687] Class member lookup ambiguity w/ overloaded static members and using declarations

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46687 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2010-11-28 01:43:26 UTC --- why do you think it's not ambiguous? C has two bases of type A, so two copies of A::foo()

[Bug libstdc++/46689] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: 20_util/shared_ptr/comparison/cmp.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46689 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2010-11-28 01:33:02 UTC --- Author: redi Date: Sun Nov 28 01:32:57 2010 New Revision: 167217 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167217 Log: 2010-11-28 Jonathan Wakely PR libstdc++/46

[Bug libstdc++/46689] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: 20_util/shared_ptr/comparison/cmp.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46689 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/40125] libgcc_s DLL installed in wrong directory in cross toolchain

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40125 --- Comment #4 from Dave Korn 2010-11-28 01:29:27 UTC --- Created attachment 22549 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22549 testing patch Something along these lines ought to get us most of the way there.

[Bug c++/46688] [4.6 Regression] g++ requires a function declaration when it should not

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46688 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at redhat dot com --- Comment #2 from H.J

[Bug fortran/46678] [4.6 Regression] Wrong code with strings

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46678 --- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-27 23:59:44 UTC --- Patch with test case submitted to gfortran list. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-11/msg00381.html

[Bug c++/46688] [4.6 Regression] g++ requires a function declaration when it should not

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46688 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Status|UNCON

[Bug libstdc++/46689] New: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: 20_util/shared_ptr/comparison/cmp.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46689 Summary: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: 20_util/shared_ptr/comparison/cmp.cc Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug middle-end/46488] server/core_filters.c from apache httpd 2.2.17 miscompiled with optimization -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46488 Frédéric Buclin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Comment

[Bug c++/46688] New: [4.6 Regression] g++ requires a function declaration when it should not

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46688 Summary: [4.6 Regression] g++ requires a function declaration when it should not Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/46678] [4.6 Regression] Wrong code with strings

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46678 --- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-27 23:06:17 UTC --- Looking at what these functions do, clearly we had a scope problem and do not want a new scope. For this case I am sure we do not want start_block. void gfc_start_block (stmtblock_t

[Bug fortran/46678] [4.6 Regression] Wrong code with strings

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46678 --- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-27 22:56:56 UTC --- This fixes it: Index: trans-decl.c === --- trans-decl.c(revision 167208) +++ trans-decl.c(working copy) @@ -295

[Bug fortran/46301] [4.6 Regression] Missing diagnosis for "len=:"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46301 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/46675] [4.6 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46675 --- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther 2010-11-27 22:20:13 UTC --- (In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #9) > > > > > Testcase: > > > > volatile int j; > > int __attribute__((noinline)) > > foo(int n) > > { > > int i = 0, npairs;

[Bug fortran/46301] [4.6 Regression] Missing diagnosis for "len=:"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46301 --- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-27 22:12:49 UTC --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Sat Nov 27 22:12:46 2010 New Revision: 167212 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167212 Log: 2010-11-27 Jerry DeLisle PR fortran/463

[Bug tree-optimization/46675] [4.6 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46675 --- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu 2010-11-27 22:06:27 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) > > Testcase: > > volatile int j; > int __attribute__((noinline)) > foo(int n) > { > int i = 0, npairs; > npairs = n - (- __INT_MAX__ - 1); > if (npairs >

[Bug fortran/46641] Specification-expr checks and results with C_SIZEOF and SIZEOF

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46641 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-27 21:57:01 UTC --- The issue with specification issues is now fixed by PR 46678 (almost, not yet committed). The TRANSFER issue was fixed as PR 46638. Thus, remaining is only using C_SIZEOF - and by com

[Bug middle-end/41082] [4.5/4.6 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/where_2.f90 execution, -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41082 --- Comment #60 from Dominique d'Humieres 2010-11-27 21:49:28 UTC --- > Can you please try latest trunk, if the test works with -O3 -m64 -mtune=rs64 > and fails with -O3 -m64 -mtune=power4 ? Confirmed, but I have no idea of what is the default o

[Bug fortran/46668] FAIL: gfortran.dg/transfer_simplify_10.f90

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46668 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/46638] Wrong result with TRANSFER from string to DT

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46638 --- Comment #11 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-27 21:27:52 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Sat Nov 27 21:27:49 2010 New Revision: 167211 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167211 Log: 2010-11-27 Tobias Burnus PR fortran/4

[Bug fortran/46668] FAIL: gfortran.dg/transfer_simplify_10.f90

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46668 --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-27 21:27:53 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Sat Nov 27 21:27:49 2010 New Revision: 167211 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167211 Log: 2010-11-27 Tobias Burnus PR fortran/46

[Bug fortran/46668] FAIL: gfortran.dg/transfer_simplify_10.f90

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46668 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-27 21:26:19 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Sat Nov 27 21:26:15 2010 New Revision: 167210 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167210 Log: 2010-11-27 Tobias Burnus PR fortran/46

[Bug fortran/46638] Wrong result with TRANSFER from string to DT

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46638 --- Comment #10 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-27 21:26:19 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Sat Nov 27 21:26:15 2010 New Revision: 167210 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167210 Log: 2010-11-27 Tobias Burnus PR fortran/4

[Bug fortran/46668] FAIL: gfortran.dg/transfer_simplify_10.f90

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46668 --- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-27 21:22:04 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Sat Nov 27 21:22:00 2010 New Revision: 167209 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167209 Log: 2010-11-27 Tobias Burnus PR fortran/46

[Bug fortran/46638] Wrong result with TRANSFER from string to DT

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46638 --- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-27 21:22:04 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Sat Nov 27 21:22:00 2010 New Revision: 167209 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167209 Log: 2010-11-27 Tobias Burnus PR fortran/46

[Bug c++/46687] New: Class member lookup ambiguity w/ overloaded static members and using declarations

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46687 Summary: Class member lookup ambiguity w/ overloaded static members and using declarations Product: gcc Version: 4.5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priorit

[Bug fortran/46638] Wrong result with TRANSFER from string to DT

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46638 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se --- Comment #8

[Bug tree-optimization/46675] [4.6 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46675 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/46675] [4.6 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46675 --- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther 2010-11-27 20:12:44 UTC --- The bug seems to be: Visiting PHI node: i_1950 = PHI Argument #0 (291 -> 503 executable) i_1028 Value: [0, 0] Argument #1 (510 -> 503 executable)

[Bug ada/43806] [4.5 regression] internal error (use before freeze) in gigi

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43806 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug ada/35645] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:6120

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35645 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug ada/34717] Ada runtime improvements for OpenBSD to enable tasking and related features

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34717 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug ada/39502] Unexpected uninitialized warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39502 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug ada/42150] GNAT (really) appears to misbehave with limited types/finalization/extended return

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42150 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW CC|

[Bug ada/46574] ada bootstrap fails with --enable-build-with-cxx.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46574 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug ada/44431] [boot with C++] Conflicting exit declaration in ada/b_gnatb.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44431 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pluto at agmk dot net --- Comment #4 from

[Bug ada/46574] ada bootstrap fails with --enable-build-with-cxx.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46574 --- Comment #2 from Eric Botcazou 2010-11-27 19:07:10 UTC --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Sat Nov 27 19:07:08 2010 New Revision: 167207 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167207 Log: PR ada/46574 * gcc-interface/utils2.c (

[Bug ada/40777] compile error on gcc-interface/targtyps.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40777 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug ada/40777] compile error on gcc-interface/targtyps.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40777 --- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou 2010-11-27 18:46:54 UTC --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Sat Nov 27 18:46:49 2010 New Revision: 167205 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167205 Log: PR ada/40777 * gcc-interface/targtyps.c

[Bug ada/40777] compile error on gcc-interface/targtyps.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40777 --- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou 2010-11-27 18:47:10 UTC --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Sat Nov 27 18:47:06 2010 New Revision: 167206 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167206 Log: PR ada/40777 * gcc-interface/targtyps.c

[Bug ada/46574] ada bootstrap fails with --enable-build-with-cxx.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46574 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug ada/40777] compile error on gcc-interface/targtyps.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40777 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unassigned at

[Bug middle-end/46681] insn-recog.c is too taxing on bootstrap compiler (Apple gcc 4.0.1)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46681 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/46681] insn-recog.c is too taxing on bootstrap compiler (Apple gcc 4.0.1)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46681 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski 2010-11-27 18:33:28 UTC --- Don't use --disable-bootstrap, it does not do what you think it does.

[Bug middle-end/46221] [4.6 Regression] huge number of c++ testsuite failures, libstdc++.so alias missing

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46221 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jiez at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #25 f

[Bug middle-end/46674] [4.6 Regression] Weak alias is mistakenly optimized away

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46674 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug objc++/46222] [4.6 Regression] ICE in grokdeclarator, at cp/decl.c:9441

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46222 Nicola Pero changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug objc++/46222] [4.6 Regression] ICE in grokdeclarator, at cp/decl.c:9441

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46222 --- Comment #5 from Nicola Pero 2010-11-27 18:17:19 UTC --- Author: nicola Date: Sat Nov 27 18:17:14 2010 New Revision: 167202 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167202 Log: In gcc/cp/: 2010-11-27 Nicola Pero PR objc++

[Bug middle-end/46685] [4.6 Regression] New stack alignment failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46685 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0

[Bug c/46684] GCC throws incorrect "may be used uninitialized" warnings

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46684 --- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2010-11-27 18:14:45 UTC --- As only constant initializers are involved CCP optimizes based on undefinedness of uninitialized variables.

[Bug libstdc++/46683] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: ext/profile/all.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46683 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0

[Bug middle-end/41082] [4.5/4.6 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/where_2.f90 execution, -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41082 --- Comment #59 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-27 17:51:38 UTC --- Can you please try latest trunk, if the test works with -O3 -m64 -mtune=rs64 and fails with -O3 -m64 -mtune=power4 ?

[Bug fortran/46678] [4.6 Regression] Wrong code with strings

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46678 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug ada/40767] ICE verify_ssa failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40767 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/46682] __sync_bool_compare_and_swap generates wrong code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46682 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug middle-end/45292] [4.5/4.6 regression] libgomp test failures for i586-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45292 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||us15 at os dot |

[Bug middle-end/46685] [4.6 Regression] New stack alignment failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46685 --- Comment #2 from John David Anglin 2010-11-27 16:53:41 UTC --- ldo -62(%r30),%r23 bl qsort,%r2 The offset of -62 is misaligned. r23 should point to a plabel. plabels have to be 4-byte aligned.

[Bug fortran/46686] New: Improve backtracing (unwinding) on MinGW

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46686 Summary: Improve backtracing (unwinding) on MinGW Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassig

[Bug tree-optimization/46675] [4.6 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46675 --- Comment #8 from Uros Bizjak 2010-11-27 16:35:51 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > You don't by chance have a standalone testcase yet? ;) Unfortunately, I was not able to create testcase - the function is a huge switch, but you don't need to

[Bug tree-optimization/46675] [4.6 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46675 --- Comment #7 from Uros Bizjak 2010-11-27 16:33:49 UTC --- Created attachment 22547 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22547 _.122t.reassoc2 and _.123t.vrp2 detailed dumps

[Bug middle-end/46685] [4.6 Regression] New stack alignment failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46685 --- Comment #1 from John David Anglin 2010-11-27 16:33:36 UTC --- Although the printouts don't show it, the fails are with -fpic. The non pic versions don't fail. In the nested-6.c case, it appears the procedure label for the call to compare fro

[Bug middle-end/46685] New: [4.6 Regression] New stack alignment failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46685 Summary: [4.6 Regression] New stack alignment failures Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo:

[Bug c++/46680] Suboptimal code generated for bool comparisons

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46680 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/46680] Suboptimal code generated for bool comparisons

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46680 Adriano Rezende changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|WONTFIX

[Bug c/46684] New: GCC throws incorrect "may be used uninitialized" warnings

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46684 Summary: GCC throws incorrect "may be used uninitialized" warnings Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug libstdc++/46683] New: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: ext/profile/all.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46683 Summary: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: ext/profile/all.cc Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ AssignedTo: unas

[Bug c++/46680] Suboptimal code generated for bool comparisons

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46680 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|INVALID |WONTFIX --- Comment #4 from Richard Gu

[Bug c++/46680] Suboptimal code generated for bool comparisons

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46680 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/46681] insn-recog.c is too taxing on bootstrap compiler (Apple gcc 4.0.1)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46681 --- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2010-11-27 14:53:16 UTC --- Also try --disable-stage1-checking (without --disable-bootstrap). If that doesn't work trying STAGE1_CFLAGS="-O0" (without -g) or STAGE1_CFLAGS="-O1" might be worth trying. As thi

[Bug tree-optimization/46675] [4.6 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46675 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/46678] [4.6 Regression] Wrong code with strings

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46678 --- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-27 14:10:54 UTC --- The problem seems to be in trans-array.c's gfc_trans_auto_array_allocation where gfortran had before: - gfc_add_expr_to_block (&block, fnbody); - return gfc_finish_block (&block);

[Bug c++/18635] use of uninitialised reference accepted in C++ front end

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18635 --- Comment #14 from Ádám Rák 2010-11-27 13:45:03 UTC --- (In reply to comment #13) > There are lots of ways to put your program into an invalid state. > > Of course there's "no point" to doing it, and noone's asking for the code to > *work* >

[Bug fortran/45159] Unnecessary temporaries

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45159 --- Comment #22 from Thomas Koenig 2010-11-27 13:16:54 UTC --- Created attachment 22546 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22546 Patch for some more improvements Here's a patch for some more improvements.

[Bug middle-end/46488] server/core_filters.c from apache httpd 2.2.17 miscompiled with optimization -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46488 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW Known to fail|4.5.1

[Bug tree-optimization/46675] [4.6 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46675 --- Comment #5 from Uros Bizjak 2010-11-27 12:15:12 UTC --- To prove my claims, following change brings gcc back to profiledbootstrap land: Index: gcc/java/verify-impl.c === --- gcc

[Bug c++/46680] Suboptimal code generated for bool comparisons

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46680 --- Comment #2 from Adriano Rezende 2010-11-27 12:10:21 UTC --- >> Am I missing something? > -O1 / -O2 / -O3 / -Os option. I know about these optimization flags :). My suggestion is directed specifically to -O0. I would not rest knowing that i

[Bug objc++/46222] [4.6 Regression] ICE in grokdeclarator, at cp/decl.c:9441

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46222 Nicola Pero changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |nicola at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/46675] [4.6 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46675 Uros Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Component|middle-end |tree-optimization --- Comment #4 from Uros

[Bug fortran/46662] [OOP] gfortran accepts "CALL polymorphic%abstract_type%ppc()"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46662 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|una

[Bug middle-end/46675] [4.6 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46675 --- Comment #3 from Uros Bizjak 2010-11-27 10:21:20 UTC --- Created attachment 22545 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22545 preprocessed file The problem is in -fprofile-use. Corresponding .gcda file is not needed to trigger t

[Bug fortran/46678] [4.6 Regression] Wrong code with strings

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46678 --- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-27 10:00:38 UTC --- I think one needs to define the type as character(kind=1) string[1:]; (unknown upper bound, as for allocatable arrays) and work with the length as a separate variable - as we do with

[Bug fortran/46678] [4.6 Regression] Wrong code with strings

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46678 --- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-27 09:54:36 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > While it makes a bit more sense, I admittedly still fail to understand why > int .string > { > .string = 4 > } > // use .string > fails 'cause

[Bug fortran/46678] [4.6 Regression] Wrong code with strings

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46678 --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-27 09:45:41 UTC --- > If one looks at the original dump, the only difference is nesting: > > the working version has: > > { > // setup .string and other initialization > } > [...] > } > > >

[Bug middle-end/46675] [4.6 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46675 --- Comment #2 from Uros Bizjak 2010-11-27 09:32:47 UTC --- The loop in following part of verify_instructions_0 is miscompiled: cut here case op_lookupswitch: { int i; jint npairs, lastkey; pop_type (in

[Bug target/43751] dsymutil is not called for fortran and, under some circumstances not for other FEs.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43751 --- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe 2010-11-27 09:29:24 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) Firstly, the patch mentioned at comment #2 is withdrawn - it's no longer functional. > 1. for Fortran, one can effect a fix by altering the dsymutil spec in >