http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56929
Bug #: 56929
Summary: ICE on dummy argument child class with coarray inside
parent
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56909
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56928
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56928
Bug #: 56928
Summary: false positive when using -Wstrict-overflow
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56889
--- Comment #8 from Amali Praveena 2013-04-12
03:39:35 UTC ---
Hi reddit,
Yes, it's not a GCC bug. I had a problem with copy constructors in version
4.7.0 but got Internal Compilation Error. I'm now working with GCC 4.8.0 in
which this is fixed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56927
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.3
--- Comment #4 from Andre
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56927
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool 2013-04-12
00:15:26 UTC ---
Hey, 4.7.3 didn't exist yet :-)
Confirmed fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56923
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56921
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56388
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56909
--- Comment #3 from Arthur Zhang 2013-04-11
22:08:54 UTC ---
The only configure option works for now is '--with-arch=i686'. Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56388
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Targe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23055
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52748
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56919
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2013-04-11
21:18:43 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> In summary:
> - Cygwin is probably okay - it just starts from 0 with the first call to
> system_clock(monotonic,...) which is fine but different to L
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866
--- Comment #5 from Winfried Magerl 2013-04-11
21:07:43 UTC ---
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 08:46:34PM +0200, Winfried Magerl wrote:
> > BTW: From your report it is not clear if the problem is indeed in the
> > compiler,
> > or in the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56921
--- Comment #5 from Pat Haugen 2013-04-11
21:03:50 UTC ---
As are these forran failures also:
FAIL: gfortran.dg/minloc_3.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops
(internal compiler error)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90 -O3 -f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56919
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2013-04-11
20:14:13 UTC ---
First, I think we made a thinko with the random_seed example at
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/RANDOM_005fSEED.html
it uses (as does Angelo's code):
CAL
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56927
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56921
--- Comment #4 from Pat Haugen 2013-04-11
20:02:09 UTC ---
This is another failure due to the same revision.
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/vec-cvt-1.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops
-finline-functions (internal compiler error)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52139
--- Comment #11 from Steven Bosscher 2013-04-11
19:26:09 UTC ---
The proper fix is to simply prepend BB_HEADER_(b) to BB_FOOTER(b). The
reason for linking BB_HEADER to BB_END(a) is that there used to be line
notes there:
/* Possible
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56927
--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool 2013-04-11
19:25:05 UTC ---
Forgot to mention... I debugged this a little; it happens during
the build of the 32-bit libgcc, and gdb says
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
build
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52139
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56927
Bug #: 56927
Summary: 4.7.2 build ICEs when built with 4.8.0 and
--disable-bootstrap
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56926
Bug #: 56926
Summary: Crash (without ICE) while compiling Boost.Math
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56921
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56925
Bug #: 56925
Summary: SRA should take into account likelihood of statements
being executed
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866
--- Comment #3 from Winfried Magerl 2013-04-11
18:46:44 UTC ---
Hi Uros,
On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 09:26:51PM +, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866
>
> --- Comment #2 from Uros
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56919
--- Comment #2 from Janne Blomqvist 2013-04-11 18:32:19
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> The problem is that Cygwin does not support CLOCK_MONOTONIC; using it will
> return always return 0.
>
> Note that Cygwin not only defines CLOCK_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56924
Bug #: 56924
Summary: Folding of checks into a range check should check
upper boundary
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56905
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Krügler
2013-04-11 18:05:18 UTC ---
Here is my suggestion for a possible test, to be compiled with flags
-std=c++11 -Wall -W -pedantic
//-
#define copy_exception k42;
#include
#include
//---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56923
Bug #: 56923
Summary: "Internal compiler error: Error reporting routines
re-entered" if -Weffc++ specified
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56921
Pat Haugen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56901
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56922
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-04-11
16:33:38 UTC ---
Yes, libstdc++ is already correct, there's nothing for us to do here
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56922
--- Comment #3 from Akim Demaille 2013-04-11
16:23:57 UTC ---
Agreed. Sorry for the noise, I was not aware of this page.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48184
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48184
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek 2013-04-11
16:23:00 UTC ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Thu Apr 11 16:22:38 2013
New Revision: 197817
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=197817&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/48184
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48184
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek 2013-04-11
16:21:05 UTC ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Thu Apr 11 16:20:26 2013
New Revision: 197816
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=197816&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/48184
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56922
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2013-04-11
16:16:07 UTC ---
I was about to reply that the issue isn't just about std::set and I was trying
to remember why we decided many years ago to *not* have the explicit in the
singled out default co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56922
--- Comment #1 from Akim Demaille 2013-04-11
16:08:07 UTC ---
FWIW: http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-active.html#2193
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56913
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56922
Bug #: 56922
Summary: set: the default constructor should be explicit
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56916
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56921
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc*-*-*
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56921
Bug #: 56921
Summary: [4.8 Regression] ICE in rtx_cost
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56900
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56918
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-04-11
15:20:11 UTC ---
*** Bug 56920 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56920
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51239
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill 2013-04-11
15:19:29 UTC ---
Created attachment 29859
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29859
initial patch
This patch takes the approach the committee seems to be settling on for 1430:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56918
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50686
--- Comment #40 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2013-04-11 14:30:49 UTC ---
> --- Comment #39 from Bernd Schmidt 2013-04-11
> 11:35:33 UTC ---
[...]
> Ok, the --enable-checking made it reproducible. The lesson here is that a good
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56919
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56920
Bug #: 56920
Summary: another static initialization of an array miscompiled
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56905
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|un
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56905
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56835
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56889
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-04-11
12:42:52 UTC ---
You keep quoting Stroustrup but your code is still broken.
Your clone() function copies the object. The object is not copyable. What is
so difficult to understand?
Add a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56910
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-04-11
12:38:45 UTC ---
$ gcc -c -pedantic x.c
x.c:11:5: warning: ISO C forbids forward parameter declarations [-pedantic]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56919
Bug #: 56919
Summary: [4.6/4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Wrong result for
SYSTEM_CLOCK on Cygwin
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56918
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener 2013-04-11
11:59:05 UTC ---
The vectorizer does nothing wrong. The bug goes away with -fdisable-tree-vrp2
which would expose
- stmp_var_.3_2 = 0 + 1;
- stmp_var_.3_19 = stmp_var_.3_2 + 1;
- stmp_v
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56918
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50686
--- Comment #39 from Bernd Schmidt 2013-04-11
11:35:33 UTC ---
Created attachment 29857
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29857
Candidate fix
Ok, the --enable-checking made it reproducible. The lesson here is that a go
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56916
--- Comment #1 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-11 11:34:56 UTC ---
Created attachment 29856
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29856
Reduced testcase
ICEs with:
-std=gnu99 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-pro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56888
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
AssignedTo|rguenth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56878
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56918
Bug #: 56918
Summary: incorrect auto-vectorization of array initialization
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56917
Bug #: 56917
Summary: -ftrapv detects a overflow wrongly.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56914
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini 2013-04-11
09:34:15 UTC ---
I can't reproduce the ICE this with current (r197743) mainline & branch (I'm
using x86_64 -m32), I can with 4.8.0.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56890
--- Comment #6 from Martin 2013-04-11 09:21:54 UTC ---
Created attachment 29854
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29854
Results of testcase with -O0 to -O3 for gcc 4.7.2 and 4.8.0
Output (stdout+stderr, assembler file)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56904
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-04-11
09:16:08 UTC ---
I guess you can either use
::n::E n::S::foo() { return e; }
or
::n::E (::n::S::foo)() { return e; }
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54216
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|jaso
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56916
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
Known to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56916
Bug #: 56916
Summary: ICE when building libgfortran for arm-none-eabi
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56899
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50925
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.6.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27855
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
Summary|[4.5/4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56895
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Resolution|FIXE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54899
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #4 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53623
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #7 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45685
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #25 from Ric
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53379
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #12 from Ric
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53636
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #4 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56175
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #15 from Ric
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56267
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #5 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53533
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #23 from Ric
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50686
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #38 from Ric
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54300
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #7 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50045
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #9 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54490
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #6 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55964
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #9 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55181
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #7 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56407
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #4 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56154
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #4 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56505
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #3 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54373
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #6 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50557
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #18 from Ric
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56079
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #7 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55574
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #5 from Rich
1 - 100 of 147 matches
Mail list logo