http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53201
--- Comment #4 from Kirill Yukhin 2012-05-03
06:50:25 UTC ---
Author: kyukhin
Date: Thu May 3 06:50:16 2012
New Revision: 187075
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187075
Log:
PR target/53201
* config/i386/dr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53186
--- Comment #4 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-05-03 06:46:01 UTC ---
Ciao Paolo,
grazie per il patch.
Io no so quale sia lo "standard" gcc, ma credo sarebbe meglio distribuire patch
che si applicano direttamente dalla directory principale e non
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53206
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53186
--- Comment #3 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-05-03 06:42:46 UTC ---
not bad…
hope it could be back ported to 4.7.1
c++ -std=gnu++11 -c opFinal.cpp; nm opFinal.o; otool -t -v -V -X opFinal.o |
c++filt
00b0 s EH_frame1
002
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53201
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52684
--- Comment #10 from davem at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-03 05:18:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 27298
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27298
Proposed fix.
It turns out to in the end be a sparc specific problem.
This makes sure, in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53201
--- Comment #2 from Yukhin Kirill 2012-05-03
05:15:47 UTC ---
Tobias, bootstrap (-march=native) is passing with your fix.
If nobody objects, I'll commit it as obvious fix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53208
Bug #: 53208
Summary: build failure on mingw native internal compiler error:
Segmentation fau lt
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.7
Status: UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53201
Yukhin Kirill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kirill.yukhin at intel dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
Michael Matz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
--- Comment #15 from Michael Matz 2012-05-03 02:32:13
UTC ---
Author: matz
Date: Thu May 3 02:32:08 2012
New Revision: 187074
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187074
Log:
PR bootstrap/53197
* tree-ssa-dse.c (dse_opt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53206
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53206
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-03
01:38:14 UTC ---
-Woverloaded-virtual is not enabled by either -Wextra or -Wall right now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53207
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48420
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hub at figuiere dot net
--- Comment #7 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53207
Bug #: 53207
Summary: bool conversion on return
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53206
Bug #: 53206
Summary: overloaded virtual non const warning
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53202
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-03
01:14:28 UTC ---
If I change some of the functions to forward lvalues instead of using perfect
forwarding then I see one call to a copy constructor
e.g. just changing the thread::Impl ctor to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53186
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2012-05-03
00:51:22 UTC ---
Created attachment 27295
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27295
Draft
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53186
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53202
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
--- Comment #14 from Michael Matz 2012-05-03 00:13:16
UTC ---
Thanks to Jonathan I have a hunch now. He has BUILD_CONFIG=bootstrap-debug
whereas I have BUILD_CONFIG empty for all my machines.
This means that for him stage2 is built with -g -gto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu 2012-05-03 00:02:26
UTC ---
Created attachment 27294
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27294
auto-host.h on Fedora/15/x86-64
Here is auto-host.h on Fedora/15/x86-64. How does it compare
against you
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
--- Comment #12 from Michael Matz 2012-05-02 23:22:26
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
>
> I'll try binutils 2.22 now.
Doesn't help, still no miscompare :-/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52974
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-02
23:04:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Does it also help with the debug info? I haven't tested that.
It does, great!
> Also, I don't think it changes the output of g++ -v.
It doesn't, I don'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40380
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
--- Comment #11 from Michael Matz 2012-05-02 22:53:21
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> > > Are you using binutils 2.22 or newer?
> >
> > No: binutils-2.21.1-60.1.x86_64 .
>
> Please try binutils 2.22.
Even though Jonathan uses 2.20 and also
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37144
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49484
--- Comment #25 from asharif at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-02 22:52:36 UTC ---
Author: asharif
Date: Wed May 2 22:52:28 2012
New Revision: 187067
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187067
Log:
Backported r187026 from branches/goog
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52191
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53205
Bug #: 53205
Summary: Compound literals don't allow empty initializer lists
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52689
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44015
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-02
22:39:48 UTC ---
Same files:
Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: gcc/cc1plus-checksum.o differs
warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap comparison failure!
gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.o differs
gcc/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
--- Comment #11 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-02 22:36:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Actually, I think that's what rtlanal.c:rtx_cost should be changed to do, for
> the cases where the targetm.rtx_costs function returns false.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu 2012-05-02 22:33:12
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> >
> > Are you using binutils 2.22 or newer?
>
> No: binutils-2.21.1-60.1.x86_64 .
Please try binutils 2.22.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
--- Comment #10 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-02 22:32:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Not to mention that it would be nice to avoid the possibly expensive
> initialization, which increases empty source file compilation time, whe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
--- Comment #8 from Michael Matz 2012-05-02 22:29:17
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
>
> Are you using binutils 2.22 or newer?
No: binutils-2.21.1-60.1.x86_64 .
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2012-05-02
22:27:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Actually, I think that's what rtlanal.c:rtx_cost should be changed to do, for
> the cases where the targetm.rtx_costs function returns false.
...and no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
--- Comment #7 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-02 22:27:50
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Without help this will be impossible to debug for me. I can't reproduce with
> either x86_64-linux (no configure options), nor under linux32 personality
> (wi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44015
--- Comment #3 from Benjamin Kosnik 2012-05-02
22:25:36 UTC ---
Author: bkoz
Date: Wed May 2 22:25:28 2012
New Revision: 187066
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187066
Log:
2012-05-02 Benjamin Kosnik
PR libstdc++/44
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
--- Comment #8 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2012-05-02
22:22:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> I contacted iant before I started this, and he said that the proper plan
> is to use the rtl cost model. So that is what we did. The alternative
> is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Target Milestone|4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
--- Comment #5 from Michael Matz 2012-05-02 22:21:31
UTC ---
Without help this will be impossible to debug for me. I can't reproduce with
either x86_64-linux (no configure options), nor under linux32 personality
(without options and with HJs opt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-02
22:17:26 UTC ---
Definitely affects x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu too, my bootstrap failed with this
config:
/home/jwakely/src/gcc/configure --prefix=/home/jwakely/gcc/4.x
--with-system-zlib --with-gnu-l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53188
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-02
22:13:06 UTC ---
Something odd's happening, after a git pull and running make in my build dir I
find the source has changed (I didn't do it)
diff --git a/libatomic/Makefile.in b/libatomic/Makefile.i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53200
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-05-02
22:13:17 UTC ---
Created attachment 27293
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27293
file x86_64-apple-darwin10.8.0/libatomic/auto-config.h
> Please attach the generated auto-con
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52866
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-02
22:11:38 UTC ---
Yep, I can't reproduce it now
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53203
Bug #: 53203
Summary: [4.8 Regression]: gcc.dg/setjmp-1.c
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
Michael Matz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53202
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53196
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-02
21:21:49 UTC ---
Actually, I'm wrong, G++ does still support compound literals, but only with a
non-empty initializer. Maybe I'll open a separate bug for that.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
--- Comment #7 from Kenneth Zadeck 2012-05-02
21:19:18 UTC ---
I do apologize for the lack of heads up.that was a mistake on our part.
I am also a little skeptical about the simple rtl cost model being good
enough to encompass every machine
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53196
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-02
21:17:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > That's simply because compound literals aren't valid in C++.
>
> So this page is wrong?
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53202
Bug #: 53202
Summary: Copy constructor not called when starting a thread
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53201
Bug #: 53201
Summary: [4.8 Regression] unrecognized command line option
'-mno-lzcnt-mno-hle
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53200
--- Comment #1 from Richard Henderson 2012-05-02
20:44:51 UTC ---
Please attach the generated auto-config.h file.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
--- Comment #5 from Kenneth Zadeck 2012-05-02
20:35:47 UTC ---
For each mode larger than the word size of the machine, a factor is
computed. That factor is the number of times that mode is larger than
a word mode. A move is split if the cost
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40076
--- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-05-02
20:20:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> That's correct for C++ (by the analogy discussed in this bug report), but
> not for C.
My fault. Clang pays more attention to the file extension than
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53126
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law 2012-05-02 20:15:23
UTC ---
This code should generally follow the logic from gcc.c. We may not need to
support all the environment variables that gcc.c handles. But for those we do
need to support, the overal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40076
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2012-05-02 20:13:02 UTC ---
On Wed, 2 May 2012, manu at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> I think this is confirmed. Clang prints:
>
> pr40076.cc:1:17: error: 's3' can not be defined in a type specifier
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51034
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51034
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lzie59p1 at frolickingcow
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53196
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53200
Bug #: 53200
Summary: [4.8 Regression] bootstrap broken on
x86_64-apple-darwin10 at revision 187018
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53126
--- Comment #4 from Andi Kleen 2012-05-02
20:04:50 UTC ---
Patch looks good. Thanks Jakub.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40076
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53196
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2012-05-02 19:59:46 UTC ---
On Wed, 2 May 2012, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Also, to be valid C the initializer should be { 0 }, allowing an empty
> initializer is a GNU C extension.
And in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53196
--- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-05-02
19:52:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> That's simply because compound literals aren't valid in C++.
So this page is wrong?
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Compound-Literals.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52605
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor 2012-05-02
19:50:40 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed May 2 19:50:37 2012
New Revision: 187063
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187063
Log:
2012-05-02 Martin Jambor
PR lto/52605
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53126
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-02
19:39:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 27290
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27290
gcc48-pr53126.patch
Ugh, what gcc-ar does isn't even remotely matching to what gcc does.
If GCC_EXE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53196
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-02
19:32:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Interestingly, the code without the typo:
>
> struct foo {
> int i;
> };
>
> int
> main(void)
> {
> struct foo f = (struct foo) { };
> return 0;
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53194
--- Comment #2 from Yukhin Kirill 2012-05-02
19:20:59 UTC ---
The problem is here:
+
+ sprintf (hle_macro, "__ATOMIC_HLE_ACQUIRE=%d", IX86_HLE_ACQUIRE);
+ def_or_undef (parse_in, hle_macro);
+
+ sprintf (hle_macro, "__ATOMIC_HLE_RELEASE=%d", I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53199
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner 2012-05-02
19:16:26 UTC ---
If you compile the following with -mcpu=power6 -m64:
long long
b64 (long long *p)
{
return __builtin_bswap64 (*p);
}
Using the -mno-avoid-indexed-addresses works around the prob
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53196
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53199
Bug #: 53199
Summary: __builtin_bswap64 and __builtin_bswap32 generate
errors if -mcpu=power6
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53198
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53198
Bug #: 53198
Summary: [4.6 Regression] gcc wrongly emits "array subscript is
above array bounds" for simple arrays
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197
Bug #: 53197
Summary: [4.8 Regression] bootstrap failure on Linux/ia32
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
--- Comment #3 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-02 17:58:17
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Lower-subreg is most likely a terrible transformation to do on later x86s but
> is likely to have been useful on the earlier ones. So this regression is
> li
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53194
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu 2012-05-02 17:55:50
UTC ---
The same failures happens on both ia32 and x86-64.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53196
Bug #: 53196
Summary: unknown struct name in C99 compound initializer
doesn't generate error
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53194
Bug #: 53194
Summary: [4.8 Regression] Many x86 failures
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50820
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.5.4
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50820
--- Comment #6 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-05-02
17:37:36 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Wed May 2 17:37:31 2012
New Revision: 187059
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187059
Log:
Backport from 2011-10-21 4.6-branch 180303.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45263
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Known to work|4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53190
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45263
--- Comment #16 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-05-02
17:23:14 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Wed May 2 17:23:06 2012
New Revision: 187058
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187058
Log:
Backport from 2011-05-30 4.6-branch r174427.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53184
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill 2012-05-02
17:23:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Because then the anonymous class has the name "Foo" for linkage purposes, and
> has external linkage. When Foo referes to the const or volatile qualified
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53193
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-02 17:16:43 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed May 2 17:16:33 2012
New Revision: 187057
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187057
Log:
2012-05-02 Paolo Carlini
PR libs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53193
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39633
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.5.4
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53175
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2012-05-02
17:15:33 UTC ---
As I have not clearly mentioned it before, there exist the following
workarounds:
a) Make "dim" *not* PRIVATE. ("dim" can be marked as PROTECTED to avoid
unwanted changes.) That might
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39633
--- Comment #15 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-05-02
17:14:42 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Wed May 2 17:14:32 2012
New Revision: 187056
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187056
Log:
Backport from 2011-07-11 4.6-branch r176143
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52447
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52740
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
1 - 100 of 181 matches
Mail list logo
