http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57437
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
Howard Brodale changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #12 from Howard Brodal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57532
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57545
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57751
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50554
--- Comment #5 from Vittorio Zecca ---
No problem, it was low priority and with easy workaround.
gfortran has much much improved from first time I looked at it around 2005.
Keep up the good work!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
--- Comment #10 from Howard Brodale ---
Should we expect to see "as" in the for loop's printf, for arr[0][0]? YES!
And, we do when the pointer arithmetic is NOT being done, above.
But, something changed arr[0] to "s" only! What did that?
Did I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57658
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57831
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57550
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
Howard Brodale changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57857
--- Comment #1 from David Krauss ---
Narrowing down the cause, the statement { 0; } silences the error but {
void(0); } does not.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57857
Bug ID: 57857
Summary: argument of decltype used by no return value warning
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57856
--- Comment #5 from Chen Gang ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I think this is a dup of another bug.
Firstly, thank you reply as soon as possible.
Could you provide the related Bug number ?
Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57856
--- Comment #4 from Chen Gang ---
Created attachment 30480
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30480&action=edit
This attachment is for gcc 4.9.0 from compiling source code (sorry, the
original disassembly code is for red hat 4.7.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57856
--- Comment #3 from Chen Gang ---
Created attachment 30479
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30479&action=edit
The related warnings, not find uninitailized warning for lru.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57856
Chen Gang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gang.chen at asianux dot com
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57856
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think this is a dup of another bug.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57856
Bug ID: 57856
Summary: for an uninitialized variable, gcc assumes it already
has value instead of report uninitialized warnings.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57855
--- Comment #1 from Mike Spear ---
PS: error seems to have been around for a while, and is certainly present in
trunk revision 200806
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57855
Bug ID: 57855
Summary: passing unsafe function as transaction_safe function
pointer does not generate error
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57854
Bug ID: 57854
Summary: Would like to have a warning for virtual overrides
without C++11 "override" keyword
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19448
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19448
--- Comment #21 from Janis Johnson ---
I'm definitely not working on the bug anymore, and would have to do a lot of
work (better left to experts) to figure out if the test is valid. Please
assign it to someone else, or at least unassign it from m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19448
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #20 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
--- Comment #7 from Howard Brodale ---
we get only 's' in a subsequent printf that runs after that "++" statements.
>From that next printf "as" should aappear but, it has been changed to only 's',
by the "++" operation!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
--- Comment #6 from Howard Brodale ---
"*++arr[0][0]" is not supposed to change the array arr! It is supposed to take
the source, change it for later use and leave the source unchanged! That the
way pointer arithmetic works. It never has change
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
Howard Brodale changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
Howard Brodale changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
--- Comment #1 from Howard Brodale ---
gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/i686-linux-gnu/4.6/lto-wrapper
Target: i686-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Ubuntu/Linaro
4.6.3-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
Bug ID: 57853
Summary: pointer arithmetic on arrays
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assigne
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57232
Jon Beniston changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #13
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57852
Bug ID: 57852
Summary: lib/plugin-support.exp incorrectly sets PLUGINCC to
compilers in prev-gcc breaks testing on lean bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57785
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57785
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon Jul 8 19:12:08 2013
New Revision: 200796
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=200796&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-07-08 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/57785
* simplify.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57785
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon Jul 8 19:10:32 2013
New Revision: 200795
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=200795&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-07-08 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/57785
* simplify.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57591
--- Comment #2 from acrux ---
same failure with gcc-4.8-20130704
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57834
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57834
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon Jul 8 19:05:16 2013
New Revision: 200794
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=200794&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-07-08 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/57834
* check.c (is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57848
--- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson ---
The reduced test case also ICEs 4.8-20130704, 4.7-20130706, and 4.6-20130405
(haven't checked older versions yet).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57844
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57851
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Petr.Salinger from comment #0)
> Created attachment 30476 [details]
> proposed patch
>
> Please add support for unwinding through signal handler for GNU/kFreeBSD.
>
> The attached patch is tested
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57843
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50554
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50554
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57636
Jon Beniston changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jon at beniston dot com
--- Comment #2 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57232
--- Comment #12 from Jon Beniston ---
This looks like it might be similar to bug 57636, which has the same ICE on the
cr16 port.
Suggestion there is that it was introduced in trunk@188870:
2012-06-21 Alexandre Oliva
PR debug/53671
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19448
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje.gcc at gmail dot com
--- Comment #19
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57850
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini ---
See also PR2778 (!) If there is no interest in maintaining the option we should
probably remove / deprecate it. Seriously.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57232
Jon Beniston changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #11 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19448
--- Comment #18 from Paolo Carlini ---
So, are you still actively working on it? (I'm asking because the bug is
assigned to you) Do you think it's still an issue today?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19448
--- Comment #17 from Janis Johnson ---
Paolo, I don't remember, but assume I didn't uncover anything else that was
interesting.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57232
Jon Beniston changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jon at beniston dot com
--- Comment #10 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57850
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|translation |c++
Severity|critical
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57785
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon Jul 8 13:48:19 2013
New Revision: 200786
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=200786&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-07-08 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/57785
* simplify.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55221
Anton Shterenlikht changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Version|4.6.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57698
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #3)
> Hmm,
> the problem here is that we output errors after early inlining always now,
> while previously we did
> only when some other inlining happened in the fun
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56342
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Another example: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-07/msg5.html - Here,
the SUM is not simplified.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57698
kpet at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kpet at free dot fr
--- Comment #5 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57469
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57469
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon Jul 8 12:15:11 2013
New Revision: 200785
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=200785&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-07-08 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/57469
* trans-decl.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57851
Bug ID: 57851
Summary: [patch] unwinding via signal trampoline for
kfreebsd*-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57850
Bug ID: 57850
Summary: Option -fdump-translation-unit not working
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Component: trans
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57848
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson ---
Created attachment 30475
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30475&action=edit
reduced test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57848
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57786
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57786
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Jul 8 09:05:38 2013
New Revision: 200776
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=200776&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/57786
* combine.c (distribute_notes) : Chang
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57807
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57819
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57786
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |rtl-optimization
Summary|Waste
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57829
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57784
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57847
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson ---
There was a known problem in the Linux kernel on ARM with gcc-4.7+ due to one
of the mem* procedures (likely memset or memcpy) being written in such a way
that its return value didn't follow normal specs,
77 matches
Mail list logo
