[Bug libstdc++/54757] FAIL: ext/random/beta_distribution/cons/default.cc (test for excess errors)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54757 --- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-09-30 00:50:17 UTC --- On 29-Sep-12, at 7:34 PM, paolo.carlini at oracle dot com wrote: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54757 > > --- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini

[Bug tree-optimization/53636] [4.7 Regression] SLP may create invalid unaligned memory accesses

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53636 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.3 Summary|SLP may

[Bug libstdc++/54757] FAIL: ext/random/beta_distribution/cons/default.cc (test for excess errors)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54757 --- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini 2012-09-29 23:34:20 UTC --- I suppose _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_MATH_TR1 remains undefined on hppa-hpux, right? In that case, I would pre-approve a patch changing each of the three uses of the C99 hypot in includ

[Bug c++/54755] Template instantiation confused by actual template argument definitions before and after template definition

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54755 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libstdc++/54757] New: FAIL: ext/random/beta_distribution/cons/default.cc (test for excess errors)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54757 Bug #: 54757 Summary: FAIL: ext/random/beta_distribution/cons/default.cc (test for excess errors) Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 S

[Bug c++/54755] Template instantiation confused by actual template argument definitions before and after template definition

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54755 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler at |

[Bug c++/54738] [C++11][SFINAE] Hard errors for pointer-to-member function expressions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54738 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c++/54738] [C++11][SFINAE] Hard errors for pointer-to-member function expressions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54738 --- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-29 22:58:36 UTC --- Author: paolo Date: Sat Sep 29 22:58:31 2012 New Revision: 191862 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191862 Log: /cp 2012-09-29 Paolo Carlin

[Bug libstdc++/54754] [parallel mode] 'make check-parallel' only works on x86-64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54754 --- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2012-09-29 22:53:36 UTC --- Jon, please, pursue the approach you like better and let's make progress on this: remember that we are still in Stage 1, we can also take some little risks.

[Bug testsuite/54148] FAIL: gcc.dg/plugin/selfassign.c compilation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54148 John David Anglin changed: What|Removed |Added Component|plugins |testsuite --- Comment #3 fr

[Bug rtl-optimization/54739] [4.8 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/lower-subreg-1.c scan-rtl-dump subreg1 "Splitting reg"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54739 John David Anglin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/21161] "clobbered by longjmp" warning ignores the data flow

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21161 Thorsten Glaser changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tg at mirbsd dot org --- Comm

[Bug libstdc++/54754] [parallel mode] 'make check-parallel' only works on x86-64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54754 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-09-29 20:37:59 UTC --- Created attachment 28301 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28301 Use built-in atomics on non-x86_64 targets. This patch uses __atomic_always_lock_free to

[Bug c++/54755] Template instantiation confused by actual template argument definitions before and after template definition

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54755 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-09-29 19:06:09 UTC --- I haven't bothered analysing the code, but Comeau and Clang agree it's ambiguous, so GCC is probably right.

[Bug fortran/54756] [OOP] Should reject CLASS, intent(out) in PURE procedures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54756 --- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2012-09-29 18:33:32 UTC --- As follow up - and side note: The following constraint ensures that there is a compile-time error if one tries this with a nonpolymorphic entries. I am not sure whether we curre

[Bug fortran/54756] [OOP] Should reject CLASS, intent(out) in PURE procedures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54756 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug c++/54744] [4.7/4.8 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault, by dependent base, member typedef and ctor-initializer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54744 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/54756] New: [OOP] Should reject CLASS, intent(out) in PURE procedures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54756 Bug #: 54756 Summary: [OOP] Should reject CLASS, intent(out) in PURE procedures Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/54755] New: Template instantiation confused by actual template argument definitions before and after template definition

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54755 Bug #: 54755 Summary: Template instantiation confused by actual template argument definitions before and after template definition Classification: Unclassified

[Bug libstdc++/34106] [parallel mode] Atomic operations compatibility layer needs cleanup

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34106 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libstdc++/54754] New: [parallel mode] 'make check-parallel' only works on x86-64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54754 Bug #: 54754 Summary: [parallel mode] 'make check-parallel' only works on x86-64 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRME

[Bug libstdc++/34106] [parallel mode] Atomic operations compatibility layer needs cleanup

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34106 --- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-09-29 17:58:42 UTC --- Author: redi Date: Sat Sep 29 17:58:34 2012 New Revision: 191856 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191856 Log: PR libstdc++/34106 * include/

[Bug other/54749] libbacktrace

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749 Ian Lance Taylor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug other/54749] libbacktrace

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749 --- Comment #4 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-29 17:51:01 UTC --- Author: ian Date: Sat Sep 29 17:50:54 2012 New Revision: 191855 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191855 Log: PR other/54749 * filelin

[Bug other/54749] libbacktrace

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749 Ian Lance Taylor changed: What|Removed |Added Component|middle-end |other --- Comment #3 from Ia

[Bug fortran/52724] Internal read with character(kind=4) data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52724 --- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig 2012-09-29 17:38:50 UTC --- Author: tkoenig Date: Sat Sep 29 17:38:46 2012 New Revision: 191854 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191854 Log: 2012-09-29 Thomas König PR fortran/52724

[Bug middle-end/54749] libbacktrace

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749 --- Comment #2 from Joost VandeVondele 2012-09-29 17:34:04 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > You filed this against the "go" component, but it seems that Go is not > involved. Is that right? This is just about a backtrace printed after

[Bug go/54749] libbacktrace

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749 --- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-09-29 16:59:02 UTC --- You filed this against the "go" component, but it seems that Go is not involved. Is that right? This is just about a backtrace printed after a run of the Fortran compiler?

[Bug fortran/54753] New: assumed-rank dummies: Reject assumed-size actuals in in some cases (C535c)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54753 Bug #: 54753 Summary: assumed-rank dummies: Reject assumed-size actuals in in some cases (C535c) Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 St

[Bug lto/54752] New: lto-wrapper: internal compiler error in convert_move at expr.c:327

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54752 Bug #: 54752 Summary: lto-wrapper: internal compiler error in convert_move at expr.c:327 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status: UN

[Bug rtl-optimization/54751] New: [4.8 Regression] slow compile time with rtl loop unroller

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54751 Bug #: 54751 Summary: [4.8 Regression] slow compile time with rtl loop unroller Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/54744] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault, by dependent base, member typedef and ctor-initializer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54744 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug c/54750] New: conflicting float.h on windows using mingw

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54750 Bug #: 54750 Summary: conflicting float.h on windows using mingw Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major

[Bug go/54749] New: libbacktrace

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749 Bug #: 54749 Summary: libbacktrace Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: go

[Bug libmudflap/54748] New: libmudflap/mf-hooks2.c:1776: possible missing break ?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54748 Bug #: 54748 Summary: libmudflap/mf-hooks2.c:1776: possible missing break ? Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: nor

[Bug target/54747] New: config/bfin/bfin.c:2721: possible missing break ?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54747 Bug #: 54747 Summary: config/bfin/bfin.c:2721: possible missing break ? Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/54744] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault, by dependent base, member typedef and ctor-initializer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54744 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comm

[Bug target/54746] config/s390/s390.c:1583: possible missing break in switch ?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54746 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c/54745] gcc/c/c-typeck.c: CASE_CONVERT possible coding bug ?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54745 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/54746] New: config/s390/s390.c:1583: possible missing break in switch ?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54746 Bug #: 54746 Summary: config/s390/s390.c:1583: possible missing break in switch ? Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRM

[Bug c/54745] gcc/c/c-typeck.c: CASE_CONVERT possible coding bug ?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54745 --- Comment #1 from David Binderman 2012-09-29 10:29:35 UTC --- More of the same over in trunk/gcc/c-family/c-pretty-print.c [dcb@zippy src]$ fgrep CASE_CONVERT !$ fgrep CASE_CONVERT trunk/gcc/c-family/c-pretty-print.c CASE_CONVERT:

[Bug c/54745] New: gcc/c/c-typeck.c: CASE_CONVERT possible coding bug ?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54745 Bug #: 54745 Summary: gcc/c/c-typeck.c: CASE_CONVERT possible coding bug ? Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug c++/54744] New: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault, by dependent base, member typedef and ctor-initializer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54744 Bug #: 54744 Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault, by dependent base, member typedef and ctor-initializer Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Versi

[Bug c/54743] Large loop runs endingless

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54743 --- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2012-09-29 08:08:32 UTC --- The condition is always to true thus the signed integer overflows and anything can happen, maybe something different for different release series or at the different optimizatio

[Bug c/54743] Large loop runs endingless

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54743 --- Comment #3 from 顏烈彬 2012-09-29 07:49:12 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) You mean that i (as most INT_MAX) is always less than 300L? And, in a RH 2.6.18-164.el5, gcc Red Hat 4.1.2-52, it runs as (was) expected, because it's buggy is g

[Bug c/54743] Large loop runs endingless

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54743 --- Comment #2 from 顏烈彬 2012-09-29 07:48:26 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) You mean that i (as most INT_MAX) is always less than 300L? And, in a RH 2.6.18-164.el5, gcc Red Hat 4.1.2-52, it runs as (was) expected, because it's buggy is g

[Bug c/54743] Large loop runs endingless

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54743 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/54735] [4.8 Regression] Segmentation fault in walk_aliased_vdefs_1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54735 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org