http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53594
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53594
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53594
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-06-25
06:54:12 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jun 25 06:54:08 2012
New Revision: 188926
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=188926
Log:
PR c++/53594
* class.c (check_bases_and_mem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53760
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=53594
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-06-25
06:48:09 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jun 25 06:48:04 2012
New Revision: 188925
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=188925
Log:
PR c++/53594
* class.c (check_bases_and_mem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53765
--- Comment #1 from Étienne 2012-06-25
05:40:22 UTC ---
Same internal error on g++ 4.5.3.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53765
Bug #: 53765
Summary: Internal errror in build_call_a at cp/call.c:342
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53740
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53682
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53488
Daniel Lunow changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lunow at math dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40134
--- Comment #8 from Thorsten Glaser 2012-06-24 23:27:34
UTC ---
Looks like this is needed for all architectures having such symbols in libgcc.a
only – I just backported those for m68k to gcc-4.6 and encountered this issue,
which Mikael Pettersson
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40134
Thorsten Glaser changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tg at mirbsd dot org
--- Comment #7 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53488
--- Comment #7 from Jiří Paleček 2012-06-24 20:23:38
UTC ---
Daniel, sorry, but I don't think your second example is relevant. First this
bug occurs only when capturing by reference, not by value, but your second
example uses capture by value. Mo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53488
Jiří Paleček changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lunow at math dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53763
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53760
--- Comment #4 from Stas Sergeev 2012-06-24
18:20:00 UTC ---
Is this mandated in some spec or doc?
Any way to defeat that? :)
Btw, why can't the "attribute packed" be
allowed to pack on a bit boundary too?
Sounds like a useless limitation, no?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53760
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2012-06-24
18:12:39 UTC ---
Because each inner struct has to be at a byte boundary.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53762
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53760
--- Comment #2 from Stas Sergeev 2012-06-24
18:09:18 UTC ---
Even if "attribute packed" have nothing to do with this,
then why doesn't it pack regardless?
Eg,
struct {
char a:1;
char b:1;
char c:1;
}
would be packed, no matter what.
Why does the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53760
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-06-24
17:59:08 UTC ---
I think having a size of 4 is correct. Packed is on a byte boundary and not a
bit boundary.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53758
Jan Boon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53764
Bug #: 53764
Summary: Typo in translatable string: "literalto"
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53762
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-06-24
16:30:54 UTC ---
These are allowed:
pa = static_cast(pb);
pb = static_cast(pa);
All the other casts are not because they involve dereferencing a null pointer
which is not allowed by [expr.unary
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53762
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wak
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53763
Bug #: 53763
Summary: Missing error check on decltype when used within
variadic template argument list
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53762
Bug #: 53762
Summary: pointer-casts don't always check null-pointers
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Prio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53759
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2012-06-24 15:46:33
UTC ---
It is caused by revision 172123:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2011-04/msg00316.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53759
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53488
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Lunow 2012-06-24
14:30:19 UTC ---
Created attachment 27694
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27694
integral constant-expression not an integral constant-expression
This test case should compile, but i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53761
Bug #: 53761
Summary: ICE (only with C++) on incorrect transparent union
(first field has floating point type)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53758
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52857
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p |http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53488
--- Comment #4 from Daniel Lunow 2012-06-24
14:21:31 UTC ---
Created attachment 27693
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27693
small test case
Just wanted to report the same bug with gcc 4.7.1.
I found out, that it occurs, if t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53760
Bug #: 53760
Summary: attribute packed doesn't pack inner structs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53682
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- Comment #7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53759
--- Comment #1 from Dag Lem 2012-06-24 12:45:55 UTC ---
Test code as follows:
typedef float v4sf __attribute__ ((vector_size (4*4)));
typedef float v2sf __attribute__ ((vector_size (4*2)));
v2sf mem[1];
int main()
{
v4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53759
Bug #: 53759
Summary: gcc -mavx emits vshufps for__builtin_ia32_loadlps
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53758
Bug #: 53758
Summary: Segfault at 'vmovaps' when setting pointer array in a
loop
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53663
--- Comment #4 from brendan.jones.it at gmail dot com 2012-06-24 07:56:59 UTC
---
Hi,
have you been able to replicate this issue with the second example I have sent?
If so is there a known workaround that we can use?
many thanks
Brendan
39 matches
Mail list logo
