http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58240
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to shiyan from comment #7)
> (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #4)
> > -fno-builtin (or some better such option)?
> > strncmp is a standard function, your code redefining it has undefined
> > be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58208
--- Comment #8 from Tammy Hsu ---
Thanks a lot for trying rebuilding twice!!
you don't think it is caused by optimization code? if we use "-O2" or "-O3
-fno-tree-vectorize" then it won't seg fault
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58240
--- Comment #9 from shiyan ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #5)
> Closing then.
Hi Carlini,
I still think it is a bug. I know the test case is not practical. In fact, I
will not use such code in real case. But from compiler's side, th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58240
--- Comment #8 from shiyan ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> The testcase is clearly bogus. You are not using the result of either of
> the strncmp calls, strncmp is a pure function, so it is fine not to call it
> at all.
Hi Jeli
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58240
--- Comment #7 from shiyan ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #4)
> -fno-builtin (or some better such option)?
> strncmp is a standard function, your code redefining it has undefined
> behavior. gcc optimizes based on the standard behavior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58241
--- Comment #7 from Francisco Jerez ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> (In reply to Francisco Jerez from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> > > You need to use -std=g++11 or undefine bool after the include
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
--- Comment #7 from Gabriel Dos Reis ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #4)
> > OK, I see the emitted reference to 'operator delete', and I suspect I
> > have an idea of why the compiler generated this reference even though
> > it isn't u
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58241
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Francisco Jerez from comment #5)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> > You need to use -std=g++11 or undefine bool after the include of altivec.h
> > as context sensitive keywords is n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58241
Francisco Jerez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||currojerez at riseup dot net
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58143
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #30693|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
--- Comment #6 from Gabriel Dos Reis ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #4)
> > OK, I see the emitted reference to 'operator delete', and I suspect I
> > have an idea of why the compiler generated this reference even though
> > it isn't u
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
--- Comment #5 from Gabriel Dos Reis ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> (In reply to Gabriel Dos Reis from comment #2)
> > OK, I see the emitted reference to 'operator delete', and I suspect I
> > have an idea of why the compiler ge
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58241
--- Comment #4 from Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
---
The testcase was based on
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/plain/src/gallium/state_trackers/clover/core/base.hpp?id=f0cb66b69904b0a3e4083aa8874af63cf1c14321
That header file still fails t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58241
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58241
--- Comment #1 from Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
---
Created attachment 30697
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30697&action=edit
preprocessed source with -std=c++11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58241
--- Comment #2 from Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
---
Created attachment 30698
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30698&action=edit
preprocessed source with -std=gnu++11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58241
Bug ID: 58241
Summary: [PPC/Altivec] altivec.h inclusion in -std=c++98..11
causes bool to be redefined
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58208
--- Comment #7 from Mikael Pettersson ---
CentOS 5.8 has an old binutils-2.17.50.0.6-20.el5_8.3. Building and installing
binutils-2.23.2 and rebuilding gcc-4.8.1 against that makes no difference,
./import still SEGVs. I'm beginning to suspect a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58240
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The testcase is clearly bogus. You are not using the result of either of the
strncmp calls, strncmp is a pure function, so it is fine not to call it at all.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58208
--- Comment #6 from Mikael Pettersson ---
I've just bootstrapped gcc-4.8.1 on CentOS 5.8 (the closest I have to the OP's
RHEL 5.5), and LD_LIBRARY_PATH=. ./import does indeed SEGV there.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58240
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Gabriel Dos Reis from comment #2)
> OK, I see the emitted reference to 'operator delete', and I suspect I
> have an idea of why the compiler generated this reference even though
> it isn't used an
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58240
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
-fno-builtin (or some better such option)?
strncmp is a standard function, your code redefining it has undefined behavior.
gcc optimizes based on the standard behavior of the function.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
--- Comment #2 from Gabriel Dos Reis ---
OK, I see the emitted reference to 'operator delete', and I suspect I
have an idea of why the compiler generated this reference even though
it isn't used anywhere in the input source code.
Why are we linki
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
--- Comment #1 from Gabriel Dos Reis ---
Here is the definition of pretty_printer::~pretty_printer ()
at the location indicated:
pretty_printer::~pretty_printer ()
{
buffer->~output_buffer ();
XDELETE (buffer);
}
The macro XDELETE is define
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34547
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58240
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|shiyan2016 at 126 dot com |
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58240
--- Comment #2 from shiyan ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #1)
> I can't reproduce this.
Hi,
What is your GCC version? I am using gcc4.7.2. My OS information are as below:
$lsb_release -a
No LSB modules are available.
Distributor ID:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58240
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|shiyan2016 at 126 dot com |
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46487
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46485
Bug 46485 depends on bug 46487, which changed state.
Bug 46487 Summary: Missing memory freeing for functions returning allocatable
scalars (allocatable_scalar_5.f90)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46487
What|Removed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55603
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus ---
*** Bug 46487 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55603
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jwmwalrus at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58229
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58240
Bug ID: 58240
Summary: GCC optimize strncmp when N=1 incorrectly
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58166
--- Comment #6 from Vladimir Makarov ---
On 13-08-22 10:11 AM, rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58166
>
> --- Comment #5 from Richard Earnshaw ---
> (In reply to Jay Foad from comment #3)
>> I've bi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 13615, which changed state.
Bug 13615 Summary: -Wuninitialized produces wrong error message for characters
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13615
What|Removed |Added
-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13615
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19276
Bug 19276 depends on bug 13615, which changed state.
Bug 13615 Summary: -Wuninitialized produces wrong error message for characters
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13615
What|Removed |Added
-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58148
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini ---
-std=c++11 / gnu++11 required
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58208
--- Comment #5 from Mikael Pettersson ---
Unmodified FSF gcc-4.8.1 configured as follows:
/tmp/gcc-4.8.1/configure --prefix=/tmp/install --with-gmp=/path/to/my/gmp-5.1.2
--with-mpfr=/path/to/my/mpfr-3.1.2 --with-mpc=/path/to/my/mpc-1.0.1
--enable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58148
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53025
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Daniel Krügler from comment #3)
> IMO it is important to fix at, because otherwise
> it does have the potential to subtly change overload selection (if noexcept
> is used as part of sfinae) and othe
44 matches
Mail list logo
