There seems to be a bug involving procedure pointers and OpenMP when using the
default(none) clause when starting a parallel region. This means that if there
is a procedure pointer inside a parallel region, and a default(none) clause is
present, a compile time error will occur. If the defaul
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58151
--- Comment #2 from David Starner ---
I don't expect any problem from those lines. But it's giving me an error
message on those lines when there's an error on an unrelated line. Comment that
unrelated line out, and then it gives no error on 80 and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58151
Anh Vo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anhvofrcaus at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58208
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |tree-optimization
--- Comment #1 from Pao
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58207
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58208
Bug ID: 58208
Summary: deque 32-bit "-O3" bug
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58143
--- Comment #6 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Created attachment 30681
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30681&action=edit
possible fix
This seems to be a possible fix.
What do you think of it, Jan?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58207
Bug ID: 58207
Summary: ICE in sort_constexpr_mem_initializers due to out of
bounds vector access
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58206
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Most likely related to bug 58201.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58206
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45076
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #3)
> > With 4.7 I get instead of an ICE just the warning:
>
> Same with curent 4.8 trunk:
>
> dynamic_dispatch_6.f03:66:0: note: Skipping target new_periodic_5th_or
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58206
Bug ID: 58206
Summary: [4.9 Regression] AIX bootstrap broken
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58201
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57370
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58198
--- Comment #2 from chihin ko ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> For book keeping of what? GCC before 4.7.0 are no longer supported.
oracle solstudtio debugger dbx support gnu compiler v4.1 v4.5.2...etc,
this is to show why dbx h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58178
--- Comment #9 from chihin ko ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #8)
> The configure line for the compiler is needed on Solaris as well.
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/pkg/gnu/bin/g++-4.8.1-5.10
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/pkg/gnu/libexec/g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58205
Bug ID: 58205
Summary: ../../gcc-4.1/gcc/crtstuff.c:323: internal compiler
error
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57904
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
--- Comment #18 from Easwaran Raman ---
Could you confirm if the patch in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg01584.html fix this? I am waiting
for someone to review that patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58202
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58197
--- Comment #1 from Winfried Magerl ---
checked some ancient versions of subversion and there was no
format-change to URL: since subversion-1.0.0 (2004):
./subversion-1.0.0/subversion/clients/cmdline/info-cmd.c: printf ("URL:
%s\n", name_std
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54300
Eric Batut changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|4.8.0 |
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58204
Bug ID: 58204
Summary: Spurious error when using BOZ literal to set an
integer
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58201
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini ---
Honza could you please look into this?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #6)
> The two above need some adjustements at translation stage, which defeats the
> purpose of generating the class container using front-end structures only.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58203
Bug ID: 58203
Summary: memset/memcpy are discarded with -flto
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58203
--- Comment #1 from kukyakya at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 30679
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30679&action=edit
Test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #9)
> (In reply to janus from comment #8)
> > Error: Assumed shape array at (1) must be a dummy argument
>
> I suppose s/AS_ASSUMED_SHAPE/AS_DEFERRED/ would d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58201
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
--- Comment #9 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to janus from comment #8)
> Error: Assumed shape array at (1) must be a dummy argument
I suppose s/AS_ASSUMED_SHAPE/AS_DEFERRED/ would do for this case, but the
problem remains the same: the original
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #5)
> Index: gcc/fortran/class.c
> ===
> --- gcc/fortran/class.c (revision 201871)
> +++ gcc/fort
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53655
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
--- Comment #7 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to janus from comment #5)
> (In reply to janus from comment #4)
> > Will check if this survives a regtest.
>
> Certainly not! At least we need to check if an as is present at all ...
>
>
> Index: g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
--- Comment #6 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to janus from comment #3)
> (In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #0)
> > Every of the 'a' dummy argument should have its own class container type.
> > This means that we have to discriminate not onl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58202
Bug ID: 58202
Summary: [graphite] qtcore-4.8* (compiling with glib
support):error fatal: glib.h: No such file or
directory
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58201
Bug ID: 58201
Summary: [g++] Undefined reference to `B::B(void const**)'
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #3)
> I think in general it's ok to use the same class container type for all of
> them, but we should not fix the array spec of the _data component at compile
> time
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58119
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57562
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #3)
> Slightly reduced test case.
... is here:
type :: Parent
integer :: member = 0
end type
type, extends(Parent) :: Child
end type
type(Child), pa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57562
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57843
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #6)
> This patch fixes the ordering in gfc_extend_assign and in this way repairs
> the behavior on the code in comment 3.
... and regtests cleanly.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58190
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.0 |4.8.2
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58199
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
--- Comment #17 from Marek Polacek ---
Yeah, it "fixed" a few testcases for me, but it's wrong. :(
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #16
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58190
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
--- Comment #15 from Marek Polacek ---
The fix am about to test (optimize_range_tests can change the ranks...)
--- gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c.mp2013-08-20 13:40:45.478290165 +0200
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c2013-08-20 13:41:00.428348680 +0200
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57843
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58190
--- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #5)
> Ok, that makes sense, it simply means that on darwin, at variance with
> Linux, for -m32 a size_t is an unsigned long instead of an unsigned int, we
> can simply app
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58190
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini ---
Ok, that makes sense, it simply means that on darwin, at variance with Linux,
for -m32 a size_t is an unsigned long instead of an unsigned int, we can simply
apply the patchlet and close the issue.
Next time,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58190
--- Comment #4 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #3)
> Before committing anything, do you have any idea why the testcase isn't
> simply skipped on darwin10? Because I just built mainline on a darwin12
> machine and the t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58137
--- Comment #5 from Bernd Edlinger ---
OK, a slightly improved patch was posted at:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-08/msg01099.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57843
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Summary|[
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58190
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini ---
Before committing anything, do you have any idea why the testcase isn't simply
skipped on darwin10? Because I just built mainline on a darwin12 machine and
the testcase is correctly skipped as UNSUPPORTED, thu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
--- Comment #13 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #12)
> Started with r199048.
yes, as was pointed out in PR57370
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57370#c2
which is presumably a dup (but hanging ins
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57798
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57798
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #2)
> Mikael,
>
> this seems to be your area of expertise. Do you have any idea?
Hmm, in the dump, D.1917 is initialized to late, just before the inner loop
inside the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57843
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58200
Bug ID: 58200
Summary: Option fcheck is misleadingly located in option
descriptions
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57843
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Polymorphic assignment for |[OOP] Polymorphic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58018
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
--- Comment #11 from Marek Polacek ---
*** Bug 58018 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58018
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57843
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58190
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58190
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini ---
Created attachment 30676
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30676&action=edit
Obvious patchlet
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42947
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Stubbs ---
With multilibs enabled this is usually the correct behaviour, but I wouldn't
have expected this with --disable-multilib.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58188
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58199
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58178
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ---
The configure line for the compiler is needed on Solaris as well.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58199
Bug ID: 58199
Summary: [4.9 regression] ICE in dump_type_inheritance_graph
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58188
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58198
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
78 matches
Mail list logo
