http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48809
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-04-30
06:54:06 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Apr 30 06:54:02 2011
New Revision: 173207
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173207
Log:
PR tree-optimization/48809
* tree-switch-co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48830
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48752
--- Comment #17 from John David Anglin 2011-04-30
01:38:18 UTC ---
I didn't find a simpler testcase running the C testsuite.
The following cross build commands allow me to duplicate the problem on
i686-apple-darwin9 with the compiler args shown
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48830
Summary: [4.4/4.6 Regression] unrecognized insn storing fp
(simd) reg in SImode to stack
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48288
--- Comment #9 from John David Anglin 2011-04-30
00:15:48 UTC ---
Author: danglin
Date: Sat Apr 30 00:15:43 2011
New Revision: 173199
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173199
Log:
PR target/48288
* config/pa/predicate
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48760
--- Comment #30 from Gabriel Dos Reis 2011-04-29
23:52:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #29)
> This is now fixed in 4_6-branch too in C++03 mode, not in C++0x mode, where we
> would need list-initialization of __complex__. If people believe we ca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
--- Comment #6 from Thorsten Glaser 2011-04-29 23:41:11
UTC ---
I also believe this in gnattools/Makefile (generated) to be wrong:
# For cross builds of gnattools,
# put the host RTS dir first in the PATH to hide the default runtime
# files that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48760
--- Comment #28 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-04-29 23:20:04 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Apr 29 23:19:59 2011
New Revision: 173195
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173195
Log:
2011-04-29 Paolo Carlini
PR lib
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48760
--- Comment #29 from Paolo Carlini 2011-04-29
23:24:19 UTC ---
This is now fixed in 4_6-branch too in C++03 mode, not in C++0x mode, where we
would need list-initialization of __complex__. If people believe we can /
should do something else in t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
--- Comment #5 from Thorsten Glaser 2011-04-29 23:09:28
UTC ---
> Confirmed for gcc-4.4 (4.4.6-2)
Building from Debian/amd64 by the way. Workaround is:
copy/paste the failing command line into another shell,
then edit it (remove the m68k-linux-g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37109
Thorsten Glaser changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tg at mirbsd dot org
--- Comment #4 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48829
Summary: g++ no warning initializing a variable using itself
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48606
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48606
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-04-29 22:03:44 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Apr 29 22:03:40 2011
New Revision: 173194
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173194
Log:
/cp
2011-04-29 Paolo Carlini
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48800
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-29
21:26:10 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Apr 29 21:26:07 2011
New Revision: 173191
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173191
Log:
2011-04-29 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/48
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48800
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48810
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48810
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-29
21:26:10 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Apr 29 21:26:07 2011
New Revision: 173191
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173191
Log:
2011-04-29 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/48
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
--- Comment #10 from henry0312 at gmail dot com 2011-04-29 21:13:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> --disable-shared cannot be used for darwin.
I see.
Thank you, Andrew Pinski.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48746
--- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas 2011-04-29 20:26:59
UTC ---
Author: pault
Date: Fri Apr 29 20:26:56 2011
New Revision: 173185
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173185
Log:
2011-04-29 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/48462
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48462
--- Comment #11 from Paul Thomas 2011-04-29 20:26:59
UTC ---
Author: pault
Date: Fri Apr 29 20:26:56 2011
New Revision: 173185
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173185
Log:
2011-04-29 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/48462
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48828
--- Comment #2 from robbtek 2011-04-29 19:43:44
UTC ---
freebsd# cc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-undermydesk-freebsd
Configured with: FreeBSD/i386 system compiler
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.2.1 20070719 [FreeBSD]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-04-29 19:42:13 UTC ---
> --- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres
> 2011-04-29 14:17:30 UTC ---
> PR48769 looks like a duplicate of this PR. As I said in this pr I am traveling
> and h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #10 from Rainer Orth 2011-04-29 19:36:15
UTC ---
Author: ro
Date: Fri Apr 29 19:36:12 2011
New Revision: 173183
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173183
Log:
2011-04-29 Richard Guenther
PR middle-end/48819
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48828
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-04-29
19:36:48 UTC ---
What does the output of "cc -v" give? It is the original cc which is giving an
internal compile error.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48828
Summary: freebsd gcc 4.7 update
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: other
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48812
--- Comment #2 from Matthieu CASTET 2011-04-29
19:18:43 UTC ---
> We also have to make sure the shift count does not get negative, which
we can't in this case. Thus (1U<<(b-2)) is not equivalent to
(1U<> (b-2))
But I agree it is not trivial opt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski 2011-04-29
19:08:11 UTC ---
--disable-shared cannot be used for darwin.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
--- Comment #8 from henry0312 at gmail dot com 2011-04-29 19:06:04 UTC ---
Now I know the problem.
in config log,
ld: library not found for -lgcc_ext.10.5
I put libgcc_ext.10.5.dylib that is made with shared build to build_dir/gcc,
and compiled ag
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39219
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48817
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48774
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47596
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: jan.kratoch...@redhat.com
CC: do...@gcc.gnu.org
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
reposted from GDB BZ: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12644
FAIL: gcc (GCC) 4.7.0 20110429 (experimental)
FAIL: gcc (GCC) 4.6.1 20110429 (prerelease
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47230
--- Comment #9 from Uros Bizjak 2011-04-29 17:52:24
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> > > I do have quite an old binutils (2.18.50.0.9-8.fc10 20080822). I tried
> > > binutils-2.21 once, but it regressed some gcc tls test so I ditched it.
> >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47230
--- Comment #8 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-04-29
17:17:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > FWIW, I've never gotten that linkage failure on my alphaev6-linux machine,
> > and
> > last week's snapshots (4.7-20110423,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48825
--- Comment #3 from froydnj at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-29 17:02:42 UTC ---
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 04:54:34PM +, wkor97gy0eef1fr at i dot
mintemail.com wrote:
> i was using --disable-bootstrap to disable bootstrapping, but make still
> in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48800
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-29
16:50:00 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Apr 29 16:49:53 2011
New Revision: 173175
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173175
Log:
2011-04-29 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/48
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48825
--- Comment #2 from Josef Mutzenbacher
2011-04-29 16:51:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> HAVE_PSIGNAL is supposed to be defined if the header file has psignal. Why
> does that not happen? Look at config.log.
i was building with musl libc,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48810
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-29
16:49:59 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Apr 29 16:49:53 2011
New Revision: 173175
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173175
Log:
2011-04-29 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/48
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48825
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
-__cxa_atexit
--with-local-prefix=/home/ryan/x-tools/mips-unknown-linux-uclibc/mips-unknown-linux-uclibc/sys-root
--disable-nls --enable-threads=posix --enable-symvers=gnu --enable-c99
--enable-long-long --enable-target-optspace
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20110429 (experimental) [trunk revision
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48825
Summary: libiberty "psignal" lacks const modifier, failing to
compile when HAVE_PSIGNAL is undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48814
--- Comment #5 from Johannes Schaub
2011-04-29 16:20:44 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I think the relevant wording in the C1X DIS is "With respect to an
> indeterminately-sequenced function call, the operation of postfix ++ is a
> single e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48786
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-29
16:04:45 UTC ---
Mini analysis:
(In reply to comment #3)
> ==30150== Invalid read of size 8
> ==30150==at 0x4CB104: gfc_compare_derived_types (interface.c:409)
The problem is that the second argu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48488
--- Comment #7 from Janne Blomqvist 2011-04-29 16:03:57
UTC ---
Author: jb
Date: Fri Apr 29 16:03:54 2011
New Revision: 173170
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173170
Log:
PR 48488 Fix comments
Modified:
trunk/libgfortr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48488
--- Comment #8 from Janne Blomqvist 2011-04-29 16:06:55
UTC ---
Author: jb
Date: Fri Apr 29 16:06:48 2011
New Revision: 173171
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173171
Log:
PR 48488 Typo
Modified:
trunk/libgfortran/io/wr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48488
--- Comment #6 from Janne Blomqvist 2011-04-29 15:58:23
UTC ---
Author: jb
Date: Fri Apr 29 15:58:20 2011
New Revision: 173169
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173169
Log:
PR 48488 Fix comments
Modified:
trunk/libgfortr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48787
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at frontier dot com 2011-04-29 15:55:14 UTC ---
On 04/29/2011 12:14 AM, thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net wrote:
---snip---
>
> The suggested patch fails on examples in this test where d>0.
>
> I think for rounding
On 04/29/2011 12:14 AM, thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net wrote:
---snip---
The suggested patch fails on examples in this test where d>0.
I think for rounding up we need to test if ALL the cut off digits are zeros.
I have committed the whole ball of wax. I really needed to do this becau
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48821
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-29
15:44:32 UTC ---
The following in decl.c's gfc_match_import looks wrong:
if (gfc_current_ns->parent != NULL
&& gfc_find_symbol (name, gfc_current_ns->parent, 1, &sym))
{
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48488
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
15:09:02 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 15:08:57 2011
New Revision: 173168
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173168
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48602
--- Comment #45 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
15:09:02 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 15:08:57 2011
New Revision: 173168
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173168
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48787
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
15:09:03 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 15:08:57 2011
New Revision: 173168
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173168
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48684
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
15:09:03 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 15:08:57 2011
New Revision: 173168
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173168
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48615
--- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
15:09:03 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 15:08:57 2011
New Revision: 173168
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173168
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
--- Comment #7 from henry0312 at gmail dot com 2011-04-29 15:07:36 UTC ---
> However, When I tried without '--disable-debug' and '--enable-static",
> compiled
> successfully.
I made typo :(
Correctly, without '--disable-shared' and '--enable-sta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
--- Comment #6 from henry0312 at gmail dot com 2011-04-29 15:04:56 UTC ---
Created attachment 24147
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24147
libgomp's config log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
--- Comment #5 from henry0312 at gmail dot com 2011-04-29 15:03:23 UTC ---
I'm sorry.
This error, 'configure: error: Link tests are not allowed after
GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES. ', occurs when 'make -j4'.
I tried 'make', then
configure: error: in
`/Use
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48615
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
14:56:08 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 14:56:02 2011
New Revision: 173166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173166
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
Janne Blom
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48602
--- Comment #44 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
14:56:07 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 14:56:02 2011
New Revision: 173166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173166
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
Janne Blom
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48787
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
14:56:08 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 14:56:02 2011
New Revision: 173166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173166
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
Janne Blomq
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48488
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
14:56:06 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 14:56:02 2011
New Revision: 173166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173166
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
Janne Blomq
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48684
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
14:56:08 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 14:56:02 2011
New Revision: 173166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173166
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
Janne Blomq
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48824
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48824
Summary: Wrong link to fixed bug-list on release notes
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: web
AssignedTo: unassi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48813
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-04-29
14:18:10 UTC ---
Started with http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=139234
so might very well be latent before that.
Slightly cleaned up testcase:
/* PR rtl-optimization/48813 */
/* { dg-d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-04-29
14:17:30 UTC ---
PR48769 looks like a duplicate of this PR. As I said in this pr I am traveling
and have limited testing capabilities.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48769
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-04-29
14:15:53 UTC ---
PR48819 looks like a duplicate of this pr.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48823
Summary: gcc-4.6.0 floating-point optimization regression on
ia64-Linux
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48822
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Component|c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48822
--- Comment #3 from qball at sarine dot nl 2011-04-29 14:04:48 UTC ---
Doing -O1 -finline-small-functions breaks it aswell.
Indeed adding -fno-tree-fre fixes compilation.
Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47230
--- Comment #7 from Uros Bizjak 2011-04-29 14:01:55
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> FWIW, I've never gotten that linkage failure on my alphaev6-linux machine, and
> last week's snapshots (4.7-20110423, 4.6-20110422, and 4.5-20110421) all
> boo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48786
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48822
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48810
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48822
--- Comment #1 from qball at sarine dot nl 2011-04-29 13:44:26 UTC ---
Created attachment 24146
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24146
Test case triggering the bug.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48822
Summary: G++ gets stucks and never finishes compilation when
enabling -O2/3 optimization options.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48809
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48093
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2011-04-29 13:29:48
UTC ---
There are no -mtls-dialect=gnu2 runtime testcases anywhere either.
We have no idea if it works at all.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48821
Summary: IMPORT :: dummy_arg is rejected, while "IMPORT"
imports it
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-04-29 12:50:00 UTC ---
> ick. So, I suppose
>
> CONSTRUCTOR_PREPEND_VALUE (d, build_int_cst (ptr_type_node,
> temp));
>
> would fix it as well. Patch is obvious if it works fo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48820
Summary: TR 29113: Implement parts needed for MPI 3
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de
2011-04-29 12:40:19 UTC ---
On Fri, 29 Apr 2011, ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
>
> --- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-04-29 12:32:34 UTC ---
> --- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-29
> 10:44:54 UTC ---
> Issues may arise if build_int_cst is called with NULL_TREE and the value
> is using all HOS
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48814
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-29 12:13:46 UTC ---
I think the relevant wording in the C1X DIS is "With respect to an
indeterminately-sequenced function call, the operation of postfix ++ is a
single evaluation."; C++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48816
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-29 12:08:57 UTC ---
On Fri, 29 Apr 2011, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> It is "used" in i += 3. I suppose we should ignore value-updates in
> use analysis.
See PR 44677.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48814
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-29 12:03:14 UTC ---
This may well be a bug, but it's the sort of case where you want an
analysis not in terms of sequence points but in terms of the more
precisely defined sequencing mod
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
henry0312 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolutio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48814
--- Comment #2 from Johannes Schaub
2011-04-29 10:42:12 UTC ---
Since the order of evaluation is undefined it may evaluate "count++" and
"incr()" in any order, as it pleases.
Since there is a sequence point before entering a function, and befor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-29
10:44:54 UTC ---
Issues may arise if build_int_cst is called with NULL_TREE and the value
is using all HOST_WIDE_INT bits (I suppose 64 on sparc-sun-solaris2?) but
integer_type_node has less precisi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48498
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-04-29 10:42:00 UTC ---
> --- Comment #7 from Ira Rosen 2011-04-28 07:42:31
> UTC ---
> I submitted a patch (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-04/msg01627.html)
> some time ago, but
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-04-29 10:40:14 UTC ---
> --- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-29
> 10:30:33 UTC ---
> Can you check if
>
> Index: tree.c
> ==
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-29
10:30:33 UTC ---
Can you check if
Index: tree.c
===
--- tree.c (revision 173151)
+++ tree.c (working copy)
@@ -1019,7 +1019
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48818
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth 2011-04-29 10:18:29 UTC
---
Created attachment 24144
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24144
assembler output after patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth 2011-04-29 10:17:20 UTC
---
Created attachment 24143
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24143
assembler output before patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
Summary: [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit
libjava testsuite on SPARC
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48816
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
