[Bug bootstrap/57020] New: error: expected expression before ‘)’ token

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57020 Bug #: 57020 Summary: error: expected expression before ‘)’ token Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug target/57018] Miscompilation of bison 2.7.1 under "-Os -fomit-frame-pointer"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57018 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2013-04-21 05:04:48 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > I've always been in the habit of specifying --host=i386-... so that my > binaries > don't vary based on where I compile them. > > I tried a few -m

[Bug target/57018] Miscompilation of bison 2.7.1 under "-Os -fomit-frame-pointer"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57018 --- Comment #2 from michael at talamasca dot ocis.net 2013-04-21 04:36:34 UTC --- I've always been in the habit of specifying --host=i386-... so that my binaries don't vary based on where I compile them. I tried a few -march options to no

[Bug target/57017] «Error: expecting string instruction after `rep'» in code w/o inline assembly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57017 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/57017] «Error: expecting string instruction after `rep'» in code w/o inline assembly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57017 --- Comment #2 from Alan Aversa 2013-04-21 03:57:56 UTC --- Created attachment 29907 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29907 the preprocessed C source file

[Bug target/57018] Miscompilation of bison 2.7.1 under "-Os -fomit-frame-pointer"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57018 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Target|

[Bug fortran/57019] Compiler crashes (and make wrong assignments) at some combinations of pointers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57019 --- Comment #1 from thambsup at gmail dot com 2013-04-21 02:34:19 UTC --- it was tested under ubuntu 10.04 and 12.04, (gfortran-4.4.3 & 4.4.6), and there is no such problem in g95.

[Bug fortran/57019] New: Compiler crashes (and make wrong assignments) at some combinations of pointers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57019 Bug #: 57019 Summary: Compiler crashes (and make wrong assignments) at some combinations of pointers Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.3 Status:

[Bug c/57018] New: Miscompilation of bison 2.7.1 under "-Os -fomit-frame-pointer"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57018 Bug #: 57018 Summary: Miscompilation of bison 2.7.1 under "-Os -fomit-frame-pointer" Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONF

[Bug bootstrap/57017] «Error: expecting string instruction after `rep'» in code w/o inline assembly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57017 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2013-04-20 21:44:50 UTC --- Can you attach the preprocessed source?

[Bug bootstrap/57017] New: «Error: expecting string instruction after `rep'» in code w/o inline assembly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57017 Bug #: 57017 Summary: «Error: expecting string instruction after `rep'» in code w/o inline assembly Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status:

[Bug libmudflap/41253] mudflap complains about c++ temporary passed in to global ctor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41253 Kurt Roeckx changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kurt at roeckx dot be --- Comment

[Bug c++/57011] Compiling with _GLIBCXX_CONCEPT_CHECKS rejects vector>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57011 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-04-20 19:41:38 UTC --- I've fixed the note about concepts in the manual

[Bug c++/57016] New: [4.9 Regression] [C++0x] ICE: unexpected expression '__is_final(hash)' of kind trait_expr

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57016 Bug #: 57016 Summary: [4.9 Regression] [C++0x] ICE: unexpected expression '__is_final(hash)' of kind trait_expr Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0

[Bug c++/57005] alias template's pseudo-destructor is rejected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57005 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/45424] [F2008] Add IS_CONTIGUOUS intrinsic

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45424 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug gcov-profile/57015] New: Link error while building GCC 4.8.0 with 4.7.2 and Binutils 2.22: hidden symbol `__deregister_frame_info' in /.../4.7.2/libgcc_eh.a(unwind-dw2-fde-dip.o) is referenced by

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57015 Bug #: 57015 Summary: Link error while building GCC 4.8.0 with 4.7.2 and Binutils 2.22: hidden symbol `__deregister_frame_info' in /.../4.7.2/libgcc_eh.a(unwind-dw2-fde-dip.o) i

[Bug rtl-optimization/17838] spills are not re-used

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17838 Bill Pringlemeir changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bpringlemeir at gmail dot

[Bug target/11824] [ARM] Parameter passing via stack could be improved

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11824 Bill Pringlemeir changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bpringlemeir at gmail dot

[Bug target/57009] Select best typed instruction for scalar bitwise operations

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57009 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse 2013-04-20 13:00:48 UTC --- At least in the case where a constant is involved, it would probably be necessary to look at how the result is used (makes it much harder). If it is used in a floating point opera

[Bug c++/54948] template unnecessarily displayed as "A< template-parameter-1-1 >" not "A"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54948 --- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2013-04-20 12:50:26 UTC --- Possibly related PR57014.

[Bug c++/57014] pretty-printer prints anonymous for template-parameter with a name

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57014 --- Comment #1 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2013-04-20 12:50:01 UTC --- Just looking at the testsuite output, one can find many examples of this.

[Bug c++/57014] New: pretty-printer prints anonymous for template-parameter with a name

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57014 Bug #: 57014 Summary: pretty-printer prints anonymous for template-parameter with a name Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRM

[Bug c++/57013] New: pretty-printing canonical template-parameters is more confusing than helpful

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57013 Bug #: 57013 Summary: pretty-printing canonical template-parameters is more confusing than helpful Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: unknown Status:

[Bug c++/57012] New: pretty-printer does not handle well template parameter packs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57012 Bug #: 57012 Summary: pretty-printer does not handle well template parameter packs Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONF

[Bug c++/54948] template unnecessarily displayed as "A< template-parameter-1-1 >" not "A"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54948 --- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2013-04-20 12:06:10 UTC --- BTW, the parser may benefit by marking some functions with "skip" to help debugging. All the cp_lexer_peek_* are useless to step into.

[Bug c++/54948] template unnecessarily displayed as "A< template-parameter-1-1 >" not "A"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54948 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comme

[Bug libstdc++/57010] [c++0x] priority_queue<>::pop() calls self-move-assignment operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57010 --- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse 2013-04-20 11:25:30 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > More to the point, I'm under the impression that preliminarily checking > (__last > - __first > 1) is more user friendly as undefined behavior in case

[Bug libstdc++/57010] [c++0x] priority_queue<>::pop() calls self-move-assignment operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57010 --- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse 2013-04-20 11:17:27 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > By the way, traditionally, for *library* patches we never used -p + I'm > traveling sorry (C++ in Bristol), I barely installed some stuff on this tiny

[Bug libstdc++/57010] [c++0x] priority_queue<>::pop() calls self-move-assignment operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57010 --- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini 2013-04-20 11:07:38 UTC --- By the way, traditionally, for *library* patches we never used -p + I'm traveling sorry (C++ in Bristol), I barely installed some stuff on this tiny laptop, I didn't mean to use

[Bug fortran/56907] C_LOC shall not call internal-PACK when an array argument is used

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56907 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/56907] C_LOC shall not call internal-PACK when an array argument is used

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56907 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug libstdc++/57010] [c++0x] priority_queue<>::pop() calls self-move-assignment operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57010 --- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini 2013-04-20 10:55:44 UTC --- Then we should consistently change the while loops elsewhere, right? Did you analyze at all why both can't be optimized the same way?

[Bug libstdc++/57010] [c++0x] priority_queue<>::pop() calls self-move-assignment operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57010 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added CC|glisse at gcc dot gnu.org | --- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse

[Bug libstdc++/57010] [c++0x] priority_queue<>::pop() calls self-move-assignment operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57010 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org --- Com

[Bug libstdc++/57010] [c++0x] priority_queue<>::pop() calls self-move-assignment operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57010 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/28865] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong .size

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28865 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Target Milestone|-

[Bug target/56797] [4.8 Regression] internal compiler error: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2150

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56797 --- Comment #2 from Khem Raj 2013-04-20 08:39:48 UTC --- The patch posted here http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/237891/ Fixed the problem for my case of building elfutils

[Bug libstdc++/57010] [c++0x] priority_queue<>::pop() calls self-move-assignment operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57010 --- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini 2013-04-20 08:25:11 UTC --- Note that the implementation of priority_queue::push and pop is fully constrained by the Standard, directly boils down to operations on the underlying container and std::push_he

[Bug c++/57011] Compiling with _GLIBCXX_CONCEPT_CHECKS rejects vector>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57011 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|