[Bug target/49696] ICE on mips when compiling drizzle

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49696 --- Comment #3 from Aurelien Jarno 2011-10-06 06:40:46 UTC --- I confirm the issue is fixed in trunk. Thanks!

[Bug c++/50626] ICE with non-variadic function arguments after variadic one

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50626 --- Comment #1 from Gyusik Choe 2011-10-06 02:09:22 UTC --- Created attachment 25427 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25427 preporcessed file

[Bug middle-end/50607] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/bconstp-3.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50607 --- Comment #7 from Artem Shinkarov 2011-10-06 02:07:38 UTC --- bconstp-3.c failure is fixed with the commit 179588. 2011-10-06 Artjoms Sinkarovs * c-tree.h (c_expr_t): New typedef for struct c_expr. (C_EXPR_APPEND): New macro

[Bug c++/50626] New: ICE with non-variadic function arguments after variadic one

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50626 Bug #: 50626 Summary: ICE with non-variadic function arguments after variadic one Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/44022] Spurious 'unused parameter' for a used procedure argument

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44022 john.harper at vuw dot ac.nz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||john.harper at vuw dot

[Bug debug/50279] [4.7 Regression] ICE while building the go front-end with LTO enabled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50279 --- Comment #7 from Peter Foley 2011-10-06 00:11:08 UTC --- I've attached a reduced testcase that reproduces the ICE with the commandline g++ -nostdlib -flto -g test.i

[Bug debug/50279] [4.7 Regression] ICE while building the go front-end with LTO enabled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50279 --- Comment #6 from Peter Foley 2011-10-06 00:09:03 UTC --- Created attachment 25426 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25426 reduced testcase

[Bug libstdc++/48698] gnu-versioned-namespace problems

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48698 Benjamin Kosnik changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libstdc++/48698] gnu-versioned-namespace problems

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48698 Benjamin Kosnik changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/48698] gnu-versioned-namespace problems

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48698 --- Comment #4 from Benjamin Kosnik 2011-10-05 23:10:01 UTC --- Author: bkoz Date: Wed Oct 5 23:09:51 2011 New Revision: 179580 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179580 Log: 2011-10-05 Benjamin Kosnik PR libstdc+

[Bug fortran/47844] Array stride ignored for pointer-valued function results

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47844 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |pault at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/50625] [4.6/4.7 Regression][OOP] ALLOCATABLE attribute lost for module CLASS variables

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50625 --- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-05 21:42:33 UTC --- Here's an attempt to fix it: Index: module.c === --- module.c(revision 179566) +++ module.c(working c

[Bug fortran/47844] Array stride ignored for pointer-valued function results

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47844 --- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-10-05 21:39:31 UTC --- > We could fix this in 4.7 by adding a sm field to array descriptors. I don't see why. I have looked at the dump.original of the following code: integer, target :: tgt(9) =

[Bug fortran/50625] [4.6/4.7 Regression][OOP] ALLOCATABLE attribute lost for module CLASS variables

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50625 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/35831] [F95] Shape mismatch check missing for dummy procedure argument

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35831 --- Comment #15 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-05 20:06:33 UTC --- (In reply to comment #14) > Related ToDos: > 1) check shape of dummy function results (in 'gfc_compare_interfaces') > 2) check shape of function results when overriding TBPs

[Bug fortran/50625] [4.6/4.7 Regression][OOP] ALLOCATABLE attribute lost for module CLASS variables

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50625 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.2

[Bug fortran/50625] New: [4.6/4.7 Regression][OOP] ALLOCATABLE attribute lost for module CLASS variables

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50625 Bug #: 50625 Summary: [4.6/4.7 Regression][OOP] ALLOCATABLE attribute lost for module CLASS variables Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status:

[Bug c/50624] detecting array overflows regressed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50624 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-10-05 19:22:38 UTC --- If I remember well this warning isn't very well designed and has many false positives on the other side.

[Bug c/50624] detecting array overflows regressed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50624 --- Comment #2 from Andi Kleen 2011-10-05 18:56:24 UTC --- Thanks. It's not a pure regression. Even 4.5 misses some easy cases: especially the local stack array case, which should be in theory really easy.

[Bug c/50624] detecting array overflows regressed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50624 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/50624] New: detecting array overflows regressed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50624 Bug #: 50624 Summary: detecting array overflows regressed Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug tree-optimization/50613] [4.7 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name, have addr_expr in find_equal_ptrs, at tree-ssa-strlen.c:712 with -foptimize-strlen -fno-tree-ccp

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50613 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/43829] Scalarization of reductions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43829 --- Comment #40 from Mikael Morin 2011-10-05 18:10:08 UTC --- (In reply to comment #39) > Regarding the (In reply to comment #37) > > Sorry, you should have asked for the latest patch. > > I'll post a more up-to-date than the more up-to-date soon

[Bug tree-optimization/50613] [4.7 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name, have addr_expr in find_equal_ptrs, at tree-ssa-strlen.c:712 with -foptimize-strlen -fno-tree-ccp

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50613 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-10-05 18:10:03 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Oct 5 18:09:56 2011 New Revision: 179567 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179567 Log: PR tree-optimization/50613 * tree-ssa-strle

[Bug bootstrap/50621] [4.7 Regression] Bootstrap failure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50621 Bernd Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug bootstrap/50621] [4.7 Regression] Bootstrap failure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50621 --- Comment #7 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-10-05 17:17:17 UTC --- Author: bernds Date: Wed Oct 5 17:17:12 2011 New Revision: 179560 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179560 Log: PR bootstrap/50621 * config/i386/i386.c (i

[Bug c++/50623] Template metaprogramming involving 4 std::complex fails without -std=gnu++0x

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50623 --- Comment #2 from Giulio Eulisse 2011-10-05 15:57:31 UTC --- Yes, just a misunderstanding with vincenzo on who posts the bug.

[Bug c++/50622] [4.7 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed for std::complex

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50622 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/50623] Template metaprogramming involving 4 std::complex fails without -std=gnu++0x

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50623 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/50622] ICE: verify_gimple failed for std::complex

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50622 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||giulio.eulisse at cern dot

[Bug tree-optimization/49279] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] Optimization incorrectly presuming constant variable inside loop in g++ 4.5 and 4.6 with -O2 and -O3 for x86_64 targets

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49279 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-10-05 15:52:49 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) > with tag coming from allocate_decl_uid (). We would use these copies > as restrict tag sources using the specified UID. Thus every inline > copy (and clo

[Bug tree-optimization/49279] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] Optimization incorrectly presuming constant variable inside loop in g++ 4.5 and 4.6 with -O2 and -O3 for x86_64 targets

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49279 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-10-05 15:48:57 UTC --- Created attachment 25423 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25423 CAST_RESTRICT removal Attaching a test patch that just removed CAST_RESTRICT altogether, plus IRC d

[Bug c++/50623] New: Template metaprogramming involving 4 std::complex fails without -std=gnu++0x

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50623 Bug #: 50623 Summary: Template metaprogramming involving 4 std::complex fails without -std=gnu++0x Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UN

[Bug c++/50622] New: ICE: verify_gimple failed for std::complex

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50622 Bug #: 50622 Summary: ICE: verify_gimple failed for std::complex Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priorit

[Bug bootstrap/50621] [4.7 Regression] Bootstrap failure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50621 --- Comment #6 from Yukhin Kirill 2011-10-05 15:43:54 UTC --- This was caused by gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk@179553 Previous one bootstraps ok: gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk@179549

[Bug middle-end/48580] missed optimization: integer overflow checks

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48580 --- Comment #14 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-10-05 15:19:01 UTC --- On Wed, 5 Oct 2011, jules at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > I don't much like the idea of using builtins for operations as fundamental as > integer arithmetic. How about th

[Bug bootstrap/50621] [4.7 Regression] Bootstrap failure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50621 --- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-10-05 15:18:00 UTC --- > Passes with -fno-shrink-wrap. Is that on by default(?) +{ OPT_LEVELS_1_PLUS, OPT_fshrink_wrap, NULL, 1 }, Am I correct to understand that -fshrink-wrap is on at -O1 and

[Bug bootstrap/50621] [4.7 Regression] Bootstrap failure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50621 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2011-10-05 15:05:36 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Confirmed. > > A stage1 cc1 ICEs the same way on gcc.c-torture/execute/2205-1.c with -O1 Passes with -fno-shrink-wrap. Is that on by default(?)

[Bug fortran/47844] Array stride ignored for pointer-valued function results

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47844 --- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus 2011-10-05 15:04:02 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > We could fix this in 4.7 by adding a sm field to array descriptors. > If we added the sm field after the dimension array, we would not > damage the exiting A

[Bug bootstrap/50621] [4.7 Regression] Bootstrap failure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50621 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/38885] missed FRE with BIT_FIELD_REF and vectors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38885 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug bootstrap/50621] [4.7 Regression] Bootstrap failure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50621 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/45095] "internal compiler error: Segmentation fault" compiling p7zip

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45095 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/49279] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] Optimization incorrectly presuming constant variable inside loop in g++ 4.5 and 4.6 with -O2 and -O3 for x86_64 targets

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49279 --- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther 2011-10-05 14:38:40 UTC --- After talking about this for some time another idea came up. Basically, assign the restrict tags for parameters at gimplification time by gimplifying foo (int * restrict p) { to

[Bug bootstrap/50621] [4.7 Regression] Bootstrap failure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50621 --- Comment #1 from Yukhin Kirill 2011-10-05 14:36:19 UTC --- Revision 179538 is ok.

[Bug tree-optimization/38885] missed FRE with BIT_FIELD_REF and vectors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38885 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2011-10-05 14:35:22 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Wed Oct 5 14:35:15 2011 New Revision: 179556 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179556 Log: 2011-10-05 Richard Guenther PR tree-op

[Bug fortran/47844] Array stride ignored for pointer-valued function results

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47844 --- Comment #6 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com 2011-10-05 14:35:14 UTC --- Dear Tobias and Dominique, We could fix this in 4.7 by adding a sm field to array descriptors. If we added the sm field after the dimension array, we would not d

[Bug bootstrap/50621] New: [4.7 Regression] Bootstrap failure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50621 Bug #: 50621 Summary: [4.7 Regression] Bootstrap failure Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/43829] Scalarization of reductions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43829 --- Comment #39 from Tobias Burnus 2011-10-05 14:10:30 UTC --- Regarding the (In reply to comment #37) > Sorry, you should have asked for the latest patch. > I'll post a more up-to-date than the more up-to-date soon. Thanks. One comment: I think

[Bug middle-end/48580] missed optimization: integer overflow checks

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48580 --- Comment #13 from jules at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-05 13:05:47 UTC --- Coming to think of it, if _Sat were allowed on plain integers too, a _Flagged _Sat int could also be queried for saturation using a similar mechanism, like: int foo (_Sat in

[Bug tree-optimization/38884] missed FRE with __real and __imag

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38884 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/48580] missed optimization: integer overflow checks

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48580 jules at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jules at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug lto/50620] New: "undefined reference" errors / csmith lto testing

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50620 Bug #: 50620 Summary: "undefined reference" errors / csmith lto testing Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/50614] [4.7 Regression] [C++0x] ICE: tree check: expected field_decl, have identifier_node in component_ref_field_offset, at expr.c:6697 with -fcompare-debug and a non-static initializer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50614 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-10-05 12:10:15 UTC --- -fdump-final-insns calls dump_enumerated_decls and that ICEs on the C++ specific trees (ARROW_EXPR etc.) left over in DECL_INITIAL of the FIELD_DECL by the NSDMI support. I wonder if t

[Bug c++/50614] [4.7 Regression] [C++0x] ICE: tree check: expected field_decl, have identifier_node in component_ref_field_offset, at expr.c:6697 with -fcompare-debug and a non-static initializer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50614 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milesto

[Bug middle-end/49801] df_live_verify_transfer_functions fails with to use of CC_REGNUM and checking enabled in rx backend

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49801 --- Comment #3 from Paulo J. Matos 2011-10-05 11:08:36 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Is this bug still reproducible for you ? > > I tried building an rx-elf toolchain from the current 4.6 branch sources and > I could not reproduce the p

[Bug other/50582] Instruct GCC that added_clobbers_hard_reg_p shouldn't consider a specific register

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50582 --- Comment #3 from Paulo J. Matos 2011-10-05 10:53:06 UTC --- Created attachment 25420 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25420 Allows reload to remove trivial insn I noticed that reload was failing to remove insn of the form:

[Bug c++/38980] [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] missing -Wformat warning on const char format string

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38980 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unassigned at

[Bug fortran/47844] Array stride ignored for pointer-valued function results

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47844 --- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas 2011-10-05 10:21:33 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > Still there on trunk at revision 179525 (I see it with 4.4.6, 4.5.3, and > 4.6.1). Note that for the test in comment #3, the line > > print *, ptr ! but

[Bug rtl-optimization/50615] [4.7 Regression] ICE: in distribute_notes, at combine.c:13282 with -O --param max-cse-insns=1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50615 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0

[Bug lto/50617] [4.7 Regression] ICE: RTL flag check: INSN_ANNULLED_BRANCH_P used with unexpected rtx code 'simplify_immed_subreg' in output_bb, at config/pa/pa.c:6631

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50617 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||lto Target Milestone|---

[Bug fortran/47844] Array stride ignored for pointer-valued function results

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47844 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/50614] [C++0x] ICE: tree check: expected field_decl, have identifier_node in component_ref_field_offset, at expr.c:6697 with -fcompare-debug and a non-static inilializer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50614 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/49279] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] Optimization incorrectly presuming constant variable inside loop in g++ 4.5 and 4.6 with -O2 and -O3 for x86_64 targets

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49279 --- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de 2011-10-05 09:40:58 UTC --- On Wed, 5 Oct 2011, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49279 > > --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-10-05 > 09:04:59 UTC -

[Bug middle-end/50609] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr23135.c compilation, -O2 -flto (ICE)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50609 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/50609] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr23135.c compilation, -O2 -flto (ICE)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50609 --- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther 2011-10-05 09:31:44 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Wed Oct 5 09:31:40 2011 New Revision: 179540 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179540 Log: 2011-10-05 Richard Guenther PR tree-op

[Bug tree-optimization/49279] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] Optimization incorrectly presuming constant variable inside loop in g++ 4.5 and 4.6 with -O2 and -O3 for x86_64 targets

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49279 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-10-05 09:04:59 UTC --- Created attachment 25419 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25419 patch An incomplete patch to avoid those casts from the IL. We'd need to adjust SRA to add casts if

[Bug fortran/50619] Surprising interaction between -finit-real=NAN and the associate construct

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50619 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code CC|

[Bug c++/48035] [4.4 Regression] Mismatch on size of class when initializing hierarchy involving virtual inheritance and empty base classes

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48035 Ozkan Sezer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sezeroz at gmail dot com --- Comment #11 fr

[Bug tree-optimization/49279] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] Optimization incorrectly presuming constant variable inside loop in g++ 4.5 and 4.6 with -O2 and -O3 for x86_64 targets

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49279 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-10-05 08:09:24 UTC --- BTW, the extra problematic casts aren't coming from the frontend, it is the gimplifier that is inserting them: /* Insert pointer conversions required by the middle-end that are not

[Bug tree-optimization/50596] Problems in vectorization of condition expression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50596 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-10-05 07:10:56 UTC --- Until http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176563 float a[1024], b[1024], c[1024], d[1024]; int j[1024]; void foo (void) { int i; for (i = 0; i < 1024; ++i) {