http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55349
Ben Clapp changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Component|targe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55349
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Component|c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55349
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2012-11-16
03:46:48 UTC ---
http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=20862
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55349
--- Comment #1 from Ben Clapp 2012-11-16 03:44:38
UTC ---
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
I've hunted around Google for a good while, this is what I could find on the
subject (virtually no information of worth):
http://grokbase.com/t/gg/android
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55349
Bug #: 55349
Summary: arm-linux-androideabi-gcc-4.6: Internal compiler error
compiling libpng in debug mode
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54728
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski 2012-11-16
03:36:35 UTC ---
here is the most reduced testcase.
cat > foo1.cc << EOF
template struct basic_string
{
struct _Rep {_CharT* _M_refdata() throw() { return 0; }};
_CharT * dst;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53860
Siddhesh Poyarekar changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||siddhesh at redhat dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54324
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |blocker
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55348
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54795
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2012-11-16 00:34:07
UTC ---
Revision 193543 gave:
lto1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
0xb37547 crash_signal
../../src-trunk/gcc/toplev.c:334
0x6c0763 resolve_addr_in_expr
../../src-tru
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54850
--- Comment #14 from Pat Haugen 2012-11-16
00:11:40 UTC ---
Can this be closed? Working fine on powerpc64.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55348
Bug #: 55348
Summary: Problem in tree-ssa-pre.c
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
URL: https://github.com/openlink/virtuoso-opensource
Status: UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45586
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #26 from Teresa Johnson 2012-11-15
22:42:12 UTC ---
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 6:33 AM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:56 AM, hubicka at ucw dot cz
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sho
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55346
--- Comment #3 from Michael Eager 2012-11-15
22:36:58 UTC ---
Top of tree as of Oct 20, 2012. I'll update and verify.
On 11/15/2012 01:42 PM, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55346
>
> J
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52650
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54829
--- Comment #7 from Daniel Santos 2012-11-15
21:56:02 UTC ---
First off, I apologize for my late response here.
(In reply to comment #5)
I'm going to respond a little backwards..
> In fact, on ARM there is no branch instruction that c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55346
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55347
Bug #: 55347
Summary: Specialized member of class template prevents
visibility setting
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53866
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu 2012-11-15 20:31:18
UTC ---
Revision gave 193535:
/export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/c/c-parser.c: In function
\u2018c_parser_postfix_expression_after_primary(c_parser*, unsigned int,
c_expr)\u2019:
/export/gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54279
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski 2012-11-15
20:29:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> libmudflap has the similar issue.
Actually the libmudflap is fixed by fixing libstdc++. Anyways I have a full
fix now. I am retesting it again.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48983
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55325
--- Comment #16 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2012-11-15
20:06:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> So, let's auto-detect support for non-standard suffixes in patch v2 [1].
>
> [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg01263.html
J
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55345
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55346
--- Comment #1 from Michael Eager 2012-11-15
19:53:53 UTC ---
Created attachment 28704
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28704
Disassembly and location list
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55346
Bug #: 55346
Summary: var-tracking generates incomplete/inaccurate debug
info
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48983
--- Comment #3 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2012-11-15 19:26:38 UTC ---
And this is not particularly useful: "lto1: fatal error: short write".
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55289
--- Comment #48 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-15
19:19:06 UTC ---
As proof that the current mach_override.h and mach_override.c from current
compiler-rt svn are reasonable to use for gcc 4.8.0, I compiled the complete
Polyhedron 2005 benchmar
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55289
--- Comment #47 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-15
19:09:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #46)
> (In reply to comment #45)
> > (In reply to comment #35)
> > > >> Is that certain to be soon enough
> > > Not 100%. I am just warning you.
> >
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55321
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou 2012-11-15
18:56:21 UTC ---
> Yes, 4.8-20121012 aka r192660 built fine, 20121104 and 2012 failed;
> unfortunately I don't have the 20121104 build log any more so I can't check
> exactly how it failed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55321
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-11-15
18:47:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Are you really sure about the 20121028 date?
Yes, 4.8-20121012 aka r192660 built fine, 20121104 and 2012 failed;
unfortunately I don't have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55289
--- Comment #46 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-15
18:28:44 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #45)
> (In reply to comment #35)
> > >> Is that certain to be soon enough
> > Not 100%. I am just warning you.
>
> apologies for not much input to this
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55322
--- Comment #2 from Wolf 2012-11-15 18:23:51 UTC
---
I know it's legal, but it may be suspicious, like many other legal statements
which are, optionally, warned.
Anyway, such optional warning may be helpful.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55345
Bug #: 55345
Summary: ICE with abstract interface type with use-renamed
local names
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55339
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc-linux-gnu
Compo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55344
Bug #: 55344
Summary: Cross compiling for alpha-linux fails because
doesn't exist
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55289
--- Comment #45 from Iain Sandoe 2012-11-15 17:58:21
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #35)
> >> Is that certain to be soon enough
> Not 100%. I am just warning you.
apologies for not much input to this - somewhat tied up with other things.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55289
--- Comment #44 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-15
17:53:40 UTC ---
Posted the final revision of the patch that now properly handles static linkage
options with -faddress-sanitizer...
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg01285.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55321
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|bootstrap |middle-end
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44578
--- Comment #6 from kl4yfd at gmail dot com 2012-11-15 17:05:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Using mmX as global registers variables is a user bug if you ever call
> something that might be using FPU stack, because the registers can't
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55286
--- Comment #4 from wbrana 2012-11-15 17:01:22 UTC ---
Bytemark source code
http://www.tux.org/~mayer/linux/nbench-byte-2.2.3.tar.gz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54619
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resol
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54619
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-15 16:50:04 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Thu Nov 15 16:49:45 2012
New Revision: 193537
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193537
Log:
2012-11-15 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55343
Bug #: 55343
Summary: Renamed C_PTR entities are not treated as equivalent
types.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54903
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55342
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55329
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55325
--- Comment #15 from Uros Bizjak 2012-11-15 16:23:51
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> (In reply to comment #13)
> > [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg01198.html
>
> Thanks. Note that pa handles 'q'.
So, let's auto-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55286
--- Comment #3 from wbrana 2012-11-15 16:16:05 UTC ---
Created attachment 28700
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28700
function Assignment with 175752
according to gprof Assignment is called
1574 times without 175752
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55286
--- Comment #2 from wbrana 2012-11-15 16:12:57 UTC ---
Created attachment 28699
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28699
function Assignment without 175752
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54903
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2012-11-15
16:12:03 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Nov 15 16:11:56 2012
New Revision: 193535
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193535
Log:
PR c++/54903
* decl2.c (mark_us
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19165
--- Comment #14 from Clemens 2012-11-15 15:32:11
UTC ---
As describt in duplication Bug 55336 I would extend the xml for compound
messages p.e. a warning/error which points to 2 source positions like member
initialisation and member positi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55342
Bug #: 55342
Summary: [LRA,x86] Non-optimal code for simple loop with LRA
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55289
--- Comment #43 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-15
15:12:31 UTC ---
Posted updated patch to adjust for bit-rot from the libsanitizer multilib
support checkin and add required spec handling to gcc/config/darwin.h. Ignore
my previous comment about
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54717
--- Comment #17 from Dominique d'Humieres
2012-11-15 15:07:33 UTC ---
> Is the slowdown still reproducing with my patch?
Most of it (if not all) is gone with the patch:
23.96s with '-fprotect-parens -Ofast -funroll-loops -ftree-loop-lin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55289
--- Comment #42 from Dominique d'Humieres
2012-11-15 15:03:53 UTC ---
Jack,
Thanks for the patch in comment #37. I had to do some minor surgery to adjust
it to revision 193528, but otherwise it worked as expected for both -m32 and
-m64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55275
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55339
--- Comment #2 from anton.katilin at gmail dot com 2012-11-15 14:35:12 UTC ---
An update:
There is no problem when linking statically, i.e. if we do
g++ -m32 -fPIC -O2 *.cpp -static-libstdc++ -static-libgcc -o test-O2.bin
instead of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #25 from Teresa Johnson 2012-11-15
14:34:10 UTC ---
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:56 AM, hubicka at ucw dot cz <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
>
> --- Comment #24 from J
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55304
--- Comment #9 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-11-15
14:25:42 UTC ---
Thanks, this helped
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55340
--- Comment #1 from Johnny Willemsen 2012-11-15
14:17:38 UTC ---
Lowering optimization from -O3 to -O2 removes the warning
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55304
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu 2012-11-15 14:11:54
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> That's strange but on x86 I see
>
> CDPATH="${ZSH_VERSION+.}:" && cd ../../../libsanitizer && /bin/sh
> /export/users/izamyati/tmp_gcc/missing --run acl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55304
Igor Zamyatin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53300
--- Comment #19 from David Edelsohn 2012-11-15
14:04:10 UTC ---
The problem still is present, but when I asked Honza about the status on IRC,
he seemed to say the work-around patch was the correct fix -- that this
behavior is expected.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54466
--- Comment #14 from dodji at seketeli dot org
2012-11-15 13:52:18 UTC ---
"mattyclarkson at gmail dot com" a écrit:
> @Dodji, thanks for fixing this :)
You are welcome. Sorry for the delay.
> What release will this be in? 4.8.1?
As Jon s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55289
--- Comment #41 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-15
13:51:11 UTC ---
I will also post a small patch to gcc-patches to allow darwin to automatically
pass the required linker flags on the link spec in darwin.h...
ndex: gcc/config/darwin.h
==
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55332
--- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-11-15 13:47:24 UTC ---
On 15-Nov-12, at 5:38 AM, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> It doesn't break bootstrap any longer, configure.tgt should enable
> it solely on
> i?86/x86_64-linu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55289
--- Comment #40 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-15
13:46:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #39)
> I agree with Kostya that no major changes to mach_override are necessary
> because we are really going to dump it. However minor fixes required for A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
Bug #: 55341
Summary: address-sanitizer and Fortran
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55340
Bug #: 55340
Summary: Invalid maybe unitialized warning
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55331
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44578
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Kn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55331
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55331
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55334
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55339
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55329
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55339
--- Comment #1 from anton.katilin at gmail dot com 2012-11-15 11:28:32 UTC ---
Compile with:
-
export PATH=/opt/gcc-4.7.2/bin:$PATH
g++ -m32 -fPIC -O2 *.cpp -o test-O2.bin
g++ -m32 -fPIC -O1 *.cpp -o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55329
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Targe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55339
Bug #: 55339
Summary: Generated code hangs with -O2 on Linux ppc
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55334
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-15
11:07:10 UTC ---
I think the problem is that we somehow make MEM_REF to be base...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55338
Bug #: 55338
Summary: Incorrectly reported error in type name hiding
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #24 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-15 10:56:53
UTC ---
> Note though that this is not an assert. It just emits a message to
> stderr. Do you think a better error message is appropriate? I'm not
> sure the "some data files may have be
> Note though that this is not an assert. It just emits a message to
> stderr. Do you think a better error message is appropriate? I'm not
> sure the "some data files may have been removed" is an accurate
> description of the issue. Perhaps something like "Profile data file
> mismatch may indicate
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54717
--- Comment #16 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-15
10:52:13 UTC ---
OK, 4.7 vectorize two loops in the function in cptrf2
loop at ../a.f90:3538
if (nxtr < 4) then
kerr = 1
do ixtr = 1, nxtr - 1
ixtrt (ixt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55330
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55336
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19165
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clemens1509 at web dot de
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55332
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54717
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-15
10:27:49 UTC ---
Path posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg01222.html
Can we figure out why the vectorization still does not happen?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55337
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55337
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55337
Bug #: 55337
Summary: [4.8 Regression] ICE tree check: expected sizeof_expr,
have alignof_expr in cp_tree_equal, at cp/tree.c:2608
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55325
--- Comment #14 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2012-11-15
08:44:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg01198.html
Thanks. Note that pa handles 'q'.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55325
--- Comment #13 from Uros Bizjak 2012-11-15 08:26:11
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Probably due to the fact that x86_64 defines TARGET_C_MODE_FOR_SUFFIX that
> declares support for non-standard 'q' and 'w' suffixes. There is a smal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55336
--- Comment #2 from Clemens 2012-11-15 08:24:41 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I doubt this will be implemented. The format for GCC's warning and errors are
> simple to parse as of right now. In fact GCC will never have an id to the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55289
--- Comment #39 from Alexander Potapenko 2012-11-15
08:18:01 UTC ---
I agree with Kostya that no major changes to mach_override are necessary
because we are really going to dump it. However minor fixes required for ASan
in GCC to work on D
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55336
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
--- Comment #1 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55336
Bug #: 55336
Summary: Feature request : message output format XML
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
100 matches
Mail list logo
