http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50713
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
Versi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55049
--- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-10-26 06:42:00 UTC ---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Fri Oct 26 06:41:53 2012
New Revision: 192837
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192837
Log:
gcc/
PR bootstrap/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55078
Bug #: 55078
Summary: [4.8 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr46154.C
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27619
--- Comment #17 from Alan Modra 2012-10-26 03:51:35
UTC ---
Fixed in gas and ld. I think the only thing that needs doing in gcc is fixing
the lwa constraint.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #25 from Jack Howarth 2012-10-26
03:30:44 UTC ---
Patch posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg02362.html.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11393
--- Comment #28 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-10-26
02:13:23 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #27)
> And for similar reasons, it seems wrong to reject "b" with a permerror: The
> code is accepted in c++98 as an extension, so it could be equally ac
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55019
--- Comment #8 from xuepeng guo 2012-10-26 02:12:17
UTC ---
Author: xguo
Date: Fri Oct 26 02:12:06 2012
New Revision: 192831
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192831
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog
Backport from mainli
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37448
--- Comment #46 from lucier at math dot purdue.edu 2012-10-26 02:05:13 UTC ---
Created attachment 28534
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28534
memory and time statistics for compiling lgwam.c
With today's mainline
le
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11393
--- Comment #27 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-10-26
02:04:38 UTC ---
And for similar reasons, it seems wrong to reject "b" with a permerror: The
code is accepted in c++98 as an extension, so it could be equally accepted in
c++11 as an extension,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11393
--- Comment #26 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-10-26
01:53:59 UTC ---
> (In reply to comment #24)
> > So, in g++ parlance, "b" and "d" is a pedwarn enabled by default, while "c"
> > is
> > a pedwarn in c++98 mode enabled by -Wpedantic and nothin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11393
--- Comment #25 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-10-26
01:12:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> since the initialization of "b" is anyway a deprecated feature (and a
> permerror in c++11), I would say: just make it a permerror also in c++98.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11393
--- Comment #24 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-10-26
00:23:46 UTC ---
Interestingly,
manuel@gcc10:~$ ~/bin/clang++ -std=c++98 pr11393.cc -pedantic-errors
pr11393.cc:3:21: error: in-class initializer for static data member of type
'const float' i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54984
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-26
00:17:45 UTC ---
And I'm testing the below, which appears almost obviously correct: essentially,
when build_new is passed a pointer to null pointer to VEC, it should not turn
the null pointer to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11393
--- Comment #23 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-10-26
00:16:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> (In reply to comment #21)
> > In my opinion, floating point literals are allowed in constant expressions
> > in
> > the C++11 standard.
>
> They'r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11393
--- Comment #22 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-10-26
00:02:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #21)
> In my opinion, floating point literals are allowed in constant expressions in
> the C++11 standard.
They're only valid with 'constexpr' which i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55077
Bug #: 55077
Summary: implement and enable by default -Wliteral-conversion
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: en
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37448
--- Comment #45 from Steven Bosscher 2012-10-25
23:51:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> We seem to make nice progress on the testcase ;)
I wonder where things stand with trunk today..
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #24 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-10-25 23:51:00
UTC ---
The patch in comment #22 is OK with a ChangeLog entry.
Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11393
--- Comment #21 from Rich Newman 2012-10-25
23:48:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
The EDG front-end also accepts the code fragment from comment 19 without any
diagnostic message at all.
In my opinion, floating point literals are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11393
--- Comment #20 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-10-25
23:44:01 UTC ---
BTW, clang accepts "b" as a GNU extension, and it does not care at all about
"c" (except for the -Wconversion warning that is enabled by default).
manuel@gcc10:~$ ~/bin/clang+
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54984
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14483
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.8.0
--- Comment #4 from Ste
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54984
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-25
23:31:05 UTC ---
I suspect something pretty stupid went wrong when we started using VECs.
Anyway, I'm looking a bit into this.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11393
--- Comment #19 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-10-25
23:29:59 UTC ---
I think there are several issues conflated in this report. Perhaps the
following example is clearer:
class B {
static const int a = 1;
static const float b = 3;
stati
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dnovillo at gcc dot gnu.org
-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #23 from Jack Howarth 2012-10-25
23:08:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> Created attachment 28532 [details]
> proposed patch to check for _Unwind_GetIPInfo function declaration
Patch tested on powerpc-apple-darwin9 with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55068
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howarth at nitro dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55062
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #10 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54300
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55073
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55076
Bug #: 55076
Summary: ice when compiling lambda function
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11393
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org |manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #22 from Jack Howarth 2012-10-25
22:34:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 28532
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28532
proposed patch to check for _Unwind_GetIPInfo function declaration
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55075
John Ulvr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40856
--- Comment #16 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-25
21:39:48 UTC ---
Of course I meant "restricting to the non-strict mode", you got the point.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40856
--- Comment #15 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-25
21:35:57 UTC ---
Ah, a final punctualization in terms of general philosophy: I *suspect* that
some people don't fully realize that the *default* mode is -std=gnu++98 *not*
-std=c++98, thus ther
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55075
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-10-25
21:24:42 UTC ---
I don't see any problem with the warning (that turned into an error).
>As a result, in the attached example, it raises a compile error.
Yes because if GCC does not know the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55075
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Component|c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55075
Bug #: 55075
Summary: GCC optimizer makes bad assumptions on data range
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40856
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|paolo.carlini at oracle dot |unassigned at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55074
Bug #: 55074
Summary: error during bootstrap of trunk
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40856
--- Comment #13 from Marc Glisse 2012-10-25
20:23:43 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> If I can declare a variable of a non-standard extension-type with some
> compiler flags in effect, e.g., -std=c++11, then I should also be able
> to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40856
John Salmon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #21 from Jack Howarth 2012-10-25
19:57:29 UTC ---
FYI the test in Comment 20 passes for llvm-gcc-4.2 and clang in Xcode 4.5.1 but
only for gcc-4.2 and llvm-gcc-4.2 in Xcode 4.2. The clang in Xcode 4.2
apparently doesn't provide
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #20 from Jack Howarth 2012-10-25
19:38:07 UTC ---
This testcase should work for powerpc-apple-darwin9...
#include "unwind.h"
int
main()
{
struct _Unwind_Context *co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #19 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-10-25 18:55:25
UTC ---
Yes, I'm sure, because
test -n "${with_target_subdir}"
is true exactly when libbacktrace is being built as a target library. That
test will not be true when libbacktra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55063
Cary Coutant changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55063
--- Comment #7 from Cary Coutant 2012-10-25
18:30:34 UTC ---
Author: ccoutant
Date: Thu Oct 25 18:30:27 2012
New Revision: 192820
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192820
Log:
gcc/
PR debug/55063
* dwarf2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55069
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2012-10-25
18:21:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> As for updating compilers, unfortunately this is not really a decision I can
> make. My group is required to maintain this software for on several spe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55063
Paul Koning changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paul_koning at dell dot com
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #18 from Jack Howarth 2012-10-25
17:56:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
Are you sure? I see...
if test -n "${with_target_subdir}"; then
GCC_CHECK_UNWIND_GETIPINFO
else
AC_CHECK_FUNC(_Unwind_GetIPInfo, [have_unwind_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55069
--- Comment #3 from Sean Santos 2012-10-25
17:49:44 UTC ---
Ah, it seems I was quite tired yesterday and made a couple mistakes:
- I mixed up a test using an older gfortran version with a test with
optimization off. I suppose that this i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54075
--- Comment #31 from Martin Cracauer 2012-10-25
17:47:45 UTC ---
The case I reported is in a large system. I did an isolated test case which
sees the time shoots up from 32.54 seconds in gcc-4.4 to 42.86 s in gcc-4.7 and
back down to 32.27
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #17 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-10-25 17:41:26
UTC ---
Thanks for attaching the config.log. The config.log suggests that this
program:
int
main ()
{
return _Unwind_GetIPInfo ();
}
both compiles and links when using G
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55063
--- Comment #5 from Jack Howarth 2012-10-25
17:40:26 UTC ---
Interestingly, on x86_64 Fedora 15, I don't see repeated instances of
AT_location but instead...
<2><2b72>: Abbrev Number: 78 (DW_TAG_class_type)
<2b73> DW_AT_name
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #16 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-10-25 17:37:10
UTC ---
I think you may be looking at the wrong thing. The libbacktrace configure.ac
only uses GCC_CHECK_UNWIND_GETIPINFO when it is built as a target library. You
are seeing a fa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55057
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-25 17:23:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Apparently it only handles expressions correctly, where the base symbol is
> CLASS, but fails for those where it is TYPE.
Sorry, I meant t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55057
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53761
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53761
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-10-25 16:15:19 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Oct 25 16:14:59 2012
New Revision: 192814
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192814
Log:
/cp
2012-10-25 Paolo Carlin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #15 from Jack Howarth 2012-10-25
15:05:18 UTC ---
It unclear how to recraft the test. Adding...
--- unwind_ipinfo.m4.orig2012-10-25 10:30:59.0 -0400
+++ unwind_ipinfo.m42012-10-25 11:04:37.0 -0400
@@
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54980
--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka 2012-10-25
14:52:37 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Oct 25 14:52:32 2012
New Revision: 192809
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192809
Log:
PR tree-optimize/54980
* tre
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55057
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-25 14:51:44 UTC ---
Here is a reduced test case, which is not usable as a runtime test, but shows
the wrong dump:
module m
implicit none
type :: t1
end type
type :: t2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50713
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54095
--- Comment #14 from Andi Kleen 2012-10-25
14:20:31 UTC ---
Is there a chance to fix this in 4.8? What remains to be done?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #14 from Jack Howarth 2012-10-25
14:11:38 UTC ---
Can we enhance the section in config/unwind_ipinfo.m4...
# Darwin before version 9 does not have _Unwind_GetIPInfo.
changequote(,)
case ${target} in
*-*-da
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #13 from Jack Howarth 2012-10-25
13:47:21 UTC ---
% grep Unwind_GetIPInfo
/usr/lib/gcc/powerpc-apple-darwin9/4.2.1/include/unwind.h
% extern _Unwind_Ptr _Unwind_GetIPInfo (struct _Unwind_Context *, int *);
% grep Unwind_Get
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #12 from Jack Howarth 2012-10-25
13:33:33 UTC ---
The diff between the preprocessed source of backtrace.c on gcc 4.0.1 and 4.2.1
is...
--- backtrace.i2012-10-25 09:31:46.0 -0400+++ backtrace.i.gcc-4.2
2012-1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55062
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50713
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|SLP vs loop: code generated |SLP vs loop: code generated
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54427
--- Comment #11 from Marc Glisse 2012-10-25
13:17:06 UTC ---
>From a front-end perspective, we are getting close. Some remaining items:
- port ?: to the C front-end (I don't know the maybe_const stuff)
- support &&, ||, !
- make sure ever
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #11 from Jack Howarth 2012-10-25
13:15:39 UTC ---
Created attachment 28530
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28530
config.log from libbacktrace subdirectory on powerpc-apple-darwin9 using gcc
4.0.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #10 from Jack Howarth 2012-10-25
13:14:20 UTC ---
Created attachment 28529
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28529
preprocessed source for libbacktrace/backtrace.c on powerpc-apple-darwin9 under
gcc 4.0.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55062
--- Comment #8 from Iain Sandoe 2012-10-25 13:13:12
UTC ---
r192798 bootstrapped c,lto,c++,objc using apple's gcc-4.2.1 as bootstrap
it is on stage3 for all languages + Ada and OjbC++ using gcc-4.7(with Ada) as
botostrap.
so, it looks
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54427
--- Comment #10 from Marc Glisse 2012-10-25
13:02:48 UTC ---
Author: glisse
Date: Thu Oct 25 13:02:42 2012
New Revision: 192808
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192808
Log:
2012-10-25 Marc Glisse
PR c++/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55062
--- Comment #7 from Jack Howarth 2012-10-25
13:00:47 UTC ---
I can't debug Comment 6 in Xcode 3.1.4's gdb on powerpc-apple-darwin9. When I
try to load the compiler into gdb, I get the error...
.gdbinit:12: Error in sourced command file:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54300
--- Comment #4 from Eric Batut 2012-10-25
12:56:33 UTC ---
I did the test with -fno-strict-aliasing and the exact same problem occur.
Do I need to provide more information on this issue for it to move to the
"Confirmed" state?
Best Rega
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55073
Bug #: 55073
Summary: Wrong Neon code generation at -O2 caused by
-fschedule-insns
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55065
--- Comment #3 from dschinn1001 2012-10-25
12:16:24 UTC ---
sorry for my inconvenience - it is simply
the difference between USB 2.0 port and USB 3.0 port !
It makes with the test-code above a difference of 1 Kibi.
Regards.
dschi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55058
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-10-25
12:03:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> The error is no longer
> present,
Then the attachment isn't very useful. It needs to be reduced to the minimum
that still shows the bug, otherw
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55057
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-25 11:58:15 UTC ---
-fdump-tree-original shows that the correct code is generated for the call to
"alt" in the main program (involving _vptr->_size):
{
struct __clas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55065
--- Comment #2 from dschinn1001 2012-10-25
11:54:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Certainly your USB port is haunted.
you mean usb-port is "spooking" ?
but rkhunter has negative result (no infection!).
okay. thanks for your re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55066
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55058
--- Comment #3 from Sebastian Huber
2012-10-25 11:43:09 UTC ---
Created attachment 28527
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28527
Reduced smaple code.
This is the offending code reduced to the minimum. The error is no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54992
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-25 11:36:00 UTC ---
Related (or duplicate): PR 55057.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55057
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54902
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55067
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener 2012-10-25
11:30:39 UTC ---
Shouldn't we poison loc_t in system.h to prevent this issue from popping up
again?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55067
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55068
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55065
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55063
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-debug
Status|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55060
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55069
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54902
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener 2012-10-25
11:16:19 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Oct 25 11:16:12 2012
New Revision: 192804
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192804
Log:
2012-10-25 Richard Biener
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55058
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55069
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54902
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener 2012-10-25
11:05:49 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Oct 25 11:05:43 2012
New Revision: 192803
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192803
Log:
2012-10-25 Richard Biener
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55066
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53983
Terry Guo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||terry.guo at arm dot com
--- Commen
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
