http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54693
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-10-04
06:09:48 UTC ---
As a quick hack just for this testcase we might perhaps do something in jump
threading code, if we have a DEBUG stmt based on a PHI result and are splitting
it up, look if it is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54807
--- Comment #2 from Ulf Magnusson 2012-10-04
04:57:42 UTC ---
Could very well be the same problem, but I don't have 4.7 handy to confirm.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54807
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-10-04
04:54:35 UTC ---
I think this was fixed for 4.7. Even the porting guide for 4.7 mentions it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54807
Bug #: 54807
Summary: Names declared in a for's for-init-statement and
condition should be in the same declarative region
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Versi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52613
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-04
01:32:27 UTC ---
Again probably Dup of PR54403.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52619
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-04
01:31:22 UTC ---
Probably Dup of PR54403.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54403
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philipp at fb dot com
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53921
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54806
--- Comment #1 from Matt Arsenault
2012-10-04 01:10:34 UTC ---
Created attachment 28351
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28351
packaged_task test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54806
Bug #: 54806
Summary: [4.7.2 Regression] Undefined symbols: "___emutls_v.*",
... on *-apple-darwin*
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50598
Matt Arsenault changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||whatmannerofburgeristhis at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50598
--- Comment #32 from Matt Arsenault
2012-10-04 00:57:42 UTC ---
Created attachment 28350
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28350
Test case using packaged_task
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54805
Bug #: 54805
Summary: __gthread* on VxWorks
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54804
Bug #: 54804
Summary: -Wuninitialized fails to warn about uninitialized
local union
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54803
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Manual constant unfolding |Rotates are not vectorized
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53921
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53248
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53248
--- Comment #9 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-10-04 00:02:33 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Oct 4 00:02:29 2012
New Revision: 192056
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192056
Log:
2012-10-03 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54803
Bug #: 54803
Summary: Manual constant unfolding breaks vectorization
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancemen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54798
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53921
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc at boxie dot eu
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54802
Bug #: 54802
Summary: Trivial code changes result in different assembly with
respect to rotations and bswap.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26472
--- Comment #17 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-10-03 22:39:46 UTC ---
On 3-Oct-12, at 6:18 PM, anilkris at hotmail dot com wrote:
> I am getting the following error when I run a concurrent programs in
> Oracle
> R12.1.3, which ca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54801
Bug #: 54801
Summary: [c++11] static variables constructed with lambda
params inside member functions cause undefined errors
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Ve
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26472
Anil Krishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anilkris at hotmail dot com
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54798
--- Comment #4 from Christian Maaser 2012-10-03 21:42:30
UTC ---
True, looks like the same bug. My workaround was to define "auto self = this;"
outside the lambda function, but using "this->" bypasses the issue as well.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
--- Comment #54 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-03
21:39:22 UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Wed Oct 3 21:39:18 2012
New Revision: 192052
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192052
Log:
PR target/51244
* config/sh/sh.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50457
--- Comment #14 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-03
21:36:18 UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Wed Oct 3 21:36:14 2012
New Revision: 192051
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192051
Log:
PR target/50457
* config/sh/sh.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54800
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman 2012-10-03
21:22:31 UTC ---
Or if you want something that compiles
memset (&namebuf[MACH_O_NAME_LEN], 0, MACH_O_NAME_LEN + 2);
might be closer ;->
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54800
Bug #: 54800
Summary: libiberty/simple-object-mach-o.c:704: possible
optimisation ?
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54798
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50211
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54782
dehao at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resol
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54782
--- Comment #4 from dehao at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-03 20:34:30 UTC ---
Author: dehao
Date: Wed Oct 3 20:34:26 2012
New Revision: 192049
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192049
Log:
2012-10-03 Dehao Chen
gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51238
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54798
--- Comment #2 from gcc at boxie dot eu 2012-10-03 20:01:32 UTC ---
Created attachment 28345
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28345
minimal test case
I further reduce the test case to a minimum. The ICE only happens if
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54799
--- Comment #1 from denkpadje at gmail dot com 2012-10-03 19:59:06 UTC ---
Created attachment 28344
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28344
The test file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54799
Bug #: 54799
Summary: Missing ";" gives "GNAT BUG DETECTED" box with GPL
2012, GPL 2010, AUX 4.7.1, and AUX 4.6.3
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54797
--- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl
2012-10-03 19:55:46 UTC ---
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 07:37:24PM +, christopher.romick at gmail dot com
wrote:
>
> I have indeed tried include -I but it makes no differences. The compilation
> returns t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51518
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54798
--- Comment #1 from gcc at boxie dot eu 2012-10-03 19:44:05 UTC ---
Errr.. "The error DOES occur as soon as I use the captured this pointer."
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54798
Bug #: 54798
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54797
--- Comment #2 from christopher.romick at gmail dot com 2012-10-03 19:37:24 UTC
---
I have indeed tried include -I but it makes no differences. The compilation
returns the same error.
The 1st line states
GFORTRAN module created from /.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54797
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54797
Bug #: 54797
Summary: Gnu Fortran compiler does not recognize module file it
created
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54741
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49171
--- Comment #6 from Daniel Krügler
2012-10-03 18:46:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Ok, thanks. Sorry about the naive question: is it already clear what it means
> for reinterpret_cast uses to be "well-defined" in this sense?
This is sure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54741
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54601
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54741
--- Comment #18 from Andrew W. Nosenko
2012-10-03 17:36:28 UTC ---
Created attachment 28342
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28342
Followup patch for config/i386/driver-i386.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54796
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-10-03
17:35:44 UTC ---
Perhaps it would suffice to reserve another rtx flag bit on VALUE for
SP_BASED_VALUE_P, and just from var-tracking if hard_frame_pointer_adjustment
is != -1 (i.e. frame_pointer_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54741
Andrew W. Nosenko changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew.w.nosenko at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54618
--- Comment #15 from Tobias Burnus 2012-10-03
17:32:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> - Fix INTENT(OUT) handling for allocatable polymorphic arrays (cf. comment 0)
Reminder: Check that this also handles (non)polymorphic assumed-rank
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54782
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54782
--- Comment #2 from Dehao Chen 2012-10-03 16:47:23
UTC ---
Thanks for reporting this problem. The root cause has been identified that
phi_arg_location is not correctly updated in move_block_to_fn. A patch is on
the way.
BTW, how can I a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49171
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-03
16:46:30 UTC ---
Ok, thanks. Sorry about the naive question: is it already clear what it means
for reinterpret_cast uses to be "well-defined" in this sense?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54796
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
--- Comment #1 from Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49171
--- Comment #4 from Daniel Krügler
2012-10-03 16:22:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Daniel, what's the status of this issue? Is there some consensus that GCC is
> actually Ok, we don't really want to reject reinterpret_casts?
My opinion i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54784
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[OOP] allocation of |[4.7/4.8 Regression] [OO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54796
Bug #: 54796
Summary: [4.8 Regression] Non-addressable stack parameter debug
quality regression
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Sta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54795
Bug #: 54795
Summary: [4.8 Regression] Random profiledbootstrap failure with
LTO
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRME
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54792
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54777
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54792
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-10-03
14:28:32 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 3 14:28:28 2012
New Revision: 192038
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192038
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/54792
* sch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49171
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54777
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-10-03
14:27:35 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 3 14:27:30 2012
New Revision: 192037
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192037
Log:
PR c++/54777
* semantics.c (cxx
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54777
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-10-03
14:21:24 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 3 14:21:20 2012
New Revision: 192036
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192036
Log:
PR c++/54777
* semantics.c (cxx
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54618
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #28304|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54793
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54794
--- Comment #2 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko 2012-10-03
14:04:06 UTC ---
i have 23 src-files hence 23 ii-files with about 50Mb code
if i remove any file from build then err not triggered
(at beginning there were 29 files)
i'll run creduce to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54793
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54794
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54791
--- Comment #2 from David Edelsohn 2012-10-03 13:46:44
UTC ---
Constructors are working because they work without your big header. I would
try using divide and conquer techniques to reduce the big header and find out
what is interfering w
cal/gcc_current --with-multilib-list=m64 --enable-__cxa_atexit
--enable-shared --enable-checking=yes,df,fold,rtl,tree
--enable-gnu-unique-object --enable-linker-build-id
--enable-languages=c,c++,lto --enable-plugin
--enable-version-specific-runtime-libs
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.8.0 20121003 (experimental) [trunk revision 192029] (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54780
--- Comment #5 from Andreas Schwab 2012-10-03 13:10:32
UTC ---
> I guess this is not a big issue if you are using Autotools, where the
> established practice is to compile inside the source directory.
It is common practice to build outsi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54793
Bug #: 54793
Summary: the location of a formal_parameter is not started from
a function entry with -mfentry
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53475
--- Comment #12 from Bernhard Rosenkränzer 2012-10-03 12:25:21 UTC ---
*** Bug 54595 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54595
Bernhard Rosenkränzer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54788
--- Comment #4 from Sylwester Arabas 2012-10-03
10:45:10 UTC ---
Thanks for your replies!
I've managed to get a vector of array pointers employing one more intermediate
derived type. The arrvec_t defined below has also some limited suppo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54784
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-03 10:38:22 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> The following patch seems to cure the test case in comment 1, as well as both
> variants in comment 0:
... and regtests cleanly!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54792
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-10-03
09:59:05 UTC ---
Created attachment 28340
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28340
gcc48-pr54792.patch
Untested fix. The problem appears to be that find_modifiable_mems wasn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54792
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54792
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-10-03
09:52:57 UTC ---
Created attachment 28339
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28339
tree-inline-reduced.ii
Delta reduced testcase. This one just fails -fcompare-debug, doesn'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54792
Bug #: 54792
Summary: [4.8 Regression] -fcompare-debug failures introduced
by r191493
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54791
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54791
Bug #: 54791
Summary: AIX-only: Constructors are not called in main program.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: ma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54788
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2012-10-03
09:14:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> allocate(vec(2))
> allocate(vec(0)%arr(4,4))
I assume you have a C background. In Fortran, by default the lower array bound
is one. Thus, with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54780
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-10-03
09:00:05 UTC ---
I think the majority don't use PCH anyway.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54790
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54782
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54780
--- Comment #3 from jpakkane at gmail dot com 2012-10-03 07:53:59 UTC ---
Thanks for the explanation and workaround.
I guess this is not a big issue if you are using Autotools, where the
established practice is to compile inside the source
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54788
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54790
Bug #: 54790
Summary: [4.8 Regression] Missing optimization with LTO
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
93 matches
Mail list logo
