http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57464
Bug ID: 57464
Summary: c++11 crate a std::function object with lambda expr
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57463
--- Comment #2 from MengHuan Yu ---
Created attachment 30222
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30222&action=edit
preprocess file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57463
--- Comment #1 from MengHuan Yu ---
Created attachment 30221
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30221&action=edit
source code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57463
Bug ID: 57463
Summary: Internal compiler error: Error reporting routines
re-entered.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57461
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57462
Bug ID: 57462
Summary: ira-costs considers only a single register at a time
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57461
Bug ID: 57461
Summary: Ice on valid: lookup_page_table_entry, depending on
details like (length of?) identifier names, file name
of source file
Product: gcc
Versio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57448
--- Comment #2 from Steven Bosscher ---
Created attachment 30219
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30219&action=edit
Handle ALIAS_SET_MEMORY_BARRIER loads and stores
It feels like too-big-a-hammer but I don't see any other way..
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57460
Bug ID: 57460
Summary: [C++11] Sfinae doesn't respect dependent context
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57459
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ra, wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57217
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #4)
> * remove duplication in gfc_check_pointer_assign?
> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-05/msg00046.html)
This apparently does not work: Removing the second ca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57459
--- Comment #1 from Paul Pluzhnikov ---
Google ref: b/9070967
This is a 4.8/4.9 regression.
We have ~300 test cases (out of 500,000) that are all failing (in i386 mode
only) due to this bug.
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wmi at google dot com
Created attachment 30218
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30218&action=edit
small testcase
To reproduce the bug on using 1.c attached:
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
gcc version 4.9.0 2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57217
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #4)
> * fix assumed-type/rank cases
> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-05/msg00089.html)
cf. also PR 54190
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57359
--- Comment #5 from Dara Hazeghi ---
Sorry to ask again on this, but after re-reading, I'm not sure I understand the
type-punning argument here:
**ppll = ll; // write to u.ll
*k = 0; // write to u.i
j = *ppa; // u not touched
ia[0][0] =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54189
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57458
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |burnus at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57458
Bug ID: 57458
Summary: TS29113: Wrongly rejects noncontiguous argument to
assumed-rank when both are volatile/asynchronous
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54900
--- Comment #6 from Steven Bosscher ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #5)
> I am leaving this PR open while I address the corner case presented by Jakub
> somewhere in this thread:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg01763
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57448
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|jleahy+gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57454
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|CLOSED |RESOLVED
Resolution|WONTFIX
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57454
Dmitry changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
Resolution|INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57457
Bug ID: 57457
Summary: cilk tests ICE in c-array-notation.c
(is_cilkplus_reduce_builtin) on mips*-*-*
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57456
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
There is a similar problem for:
character(len=:), allocatable :: str(:)
allocate (character(len=5) :: str(5))
end
* * *
To solve this properly, one should put all the logic into gfc_trans_allocate -
and av
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57402
--- Comment #2 from Zdenek Sojka ---
Strange, I can still reproduce it with r199397. However, this might be related
to PR57404.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57454
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57454
Dmitry changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57454
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57456
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Note: It works if one uses a scalar instead of an array.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57456
Bug ID: 57456
Summary: [OOP] CLASS ALLOCATE with typespec: Too little memory
allocated
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57454
--- Comment #2 from Dmitry ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> This is not a GCC bug, the error you get is not even from GCC, it's from the
> linker, but the problem is almost certainly due to you not linking to a
> required librar
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57402
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57455
Bug ID: 57455
Summary: "internal compiler error: Floating point exception",
in seemingly random places
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57454
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57404
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57454
Bug ID: 57454
Summary: scrnsaver bug
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57453
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57452
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
We have
int main2 (int argc, char **argv);
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
int x = 0;
if (argc == 1)
{
const char *array[] = {"a.out", "10", "15"};
x = main2 (3, (char **) array);
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57453
Bug ID: 57453
Summary: [4.9 Regression] ICE: in operator[], at vec.h:815
with gcc -O3 -fno-strict-aliasing
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57441
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57452
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab ---
Also fails on ia64 for the same reason.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57452
Bug ID: 57452
Summary: FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57450
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57446
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from R
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57451
Bug ID: 57451
Summary: Incorrect debug ranges emitted for
-freorder-blocks-and-partition -g
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57441
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
Pending patch available at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01723.html.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57439
--- Comment #11 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke from comment #10)
> Created attachment 30212 [details]
> experimental patch for execute/pr42721.c failure
bootstrapped / regtested on i686-pc-linux-gnu
build / re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37336
--- Comment #22 from Tobias Burnus ---
The patch in comment 21 enables the generation of the finalization wrapper,
which is at the heart of finalization.
Note: No actual finalization is done, yet. Still missing are calls to the
finalization wrapp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37336
--- Comment #21 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Wed May 29 13:15:16 2013
New Revision: 199409
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=199409&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-05-28 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/37336
* class.c (f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57366
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka ---
Indeed, this is generic problem with weakref implementation that for some very
entertaining reason use the CHAIN pointer of identifier nodes in undocumented
way. I will try to debug today who clears the pointe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57268
--- Comment #4 from Dinar Temirbulatov ---
proposed fix posted here
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01713.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57441
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57430
--- Comment #3 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
Created attachment 30213
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30213&action=edit
modified testcase
This is modified testcase which does not have a problem with redundant move
instruction in in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57430
--- Comment #2 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
I don't believe that this is related to rtl optimizations, but rather to
inlining phase. To prove it I did small changes in t.c for remove.c (it now has
type void):
void remove (node ** head, node* elt)
{
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57450
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
> Use absu_hwi
That works, getting me into stage 2. I'll let the bootstrap finish to
see if anything else crops up, then commit that patch as ob
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57450
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|c/c-array-notation.c|[4.9 Regression]
|comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57449
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57450
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57450
Bug ID: 57450
Summary: c/c-array-notation.c compilation failure
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57449
Bug ID: 57449
Summary: name lookup of conversions-function-id differs from
clang
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57439
--- Comment #10 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 30212
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30212&action=edit
experimental patch for execute/pr42721.c failure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57446
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Schwab ---
These are the failures on ia64.
c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c -O2 -ftree-vectorize -fcilkplus execution
test
c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c -O3 -fcilkplus execution test
c-c++-common/cilk-plus/A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56863
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
Currently, -ffast-math generates cmplepd, -fno-trapping-math generates
cmpnltpd. That's better, but we should have cmpnltpd even with -ftrapping-math.
Besides, if we manage to have an unlt with -ftrapping-math,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42575
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57448
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57447
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57448
Bug ID: 57448
Summary: GCSE generates incorrect code with acquire barrier
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57447
Bug ID: 57447
Summary: [4.9 Regression] ICE on 435.gromacs from spec2006
after r199298
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57315
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ra
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57427
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57446
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|m68k-*-*|m68k-*-*, i?86-*-*
Status|UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57441
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57445
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57446
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57446
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab ---
This is the full list of failing cilk-plus tests (all fail in the same
way). All other tests pass.
c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/builtin_func_double.c -O3 -ftree-vectorize -std=c99
-g -fcilkplus
c-c++-common/c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57365
--- Comment #2 from rxs at hotmail dot de ---
Thank you for the suggested workaround. But it is not a solution, a non
unlimited polymorphic variable can not hold intrinsic data types like
character.
There also seems to be a problem with dummy arg
Target: m68k-*-*
Executing on host: /daten/aranym/gcc/gcc-20130529/Build/gcc/xgcc
-B/daten/aranym/gcc/gcc-20130529/Build/gcc/
/daten/aranym/gcc/gcc-20130529/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/builtin_func_double.c
-fno-diagnostics-show-caret -fdiagnostics-color=never -fcilkplus -std
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57439
--- Comment #9 from Andreas Schwab ---
Not enough.
Executing on host: /daten/aranym/gcc/gcc-20130529/Build/gcc/xgcc
-B/daten/aranym/gcc/gcc-20130529/Build/gcc/
/daten/aranym/gcc/gcc-20130529/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr42721.c
-fno
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57419
--- Comment #2 from David Krauss ---
I guess the proper terminology would be taking its pointer. Nonstatic members
don't really have addresses. Anyway what I was doing was determining the
argument of a functor with one operator() overload using &f
80 matches
Mail list logo
