http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60113
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57936
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60074
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58675
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58675
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra ---
*** Bug 57935 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57935
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60130
Bug ID: 60130
Summary: Sorry, unimplemented: mangling argument_pack_select
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52306
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
Assignee
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58675
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60129
Bug ID: 60129
Summary: Imprecise column numbers in NOTEs on discarding const
qualifiers from pointer target type
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60113
--- Comment #5 from lmat ---
Created attachment 32093
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32093&action=edit
part 4
I had to divide up part 2 a little more because it was 1084 KB (over the limit
of 1000 KB).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60032
--- Comment #8 from Alan Modra ---
*** Bug 60029 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60113
--- Comment #3 from lmat ---
Created attachment 32091
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32091&action=edit
part 2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60029
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60113
--- Comment #4 from lmat ---
Created attachment 32092
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32092&action=edit
part 3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60113
--- Comment #2 from lmat ---
Created attachment 32090
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32090&action=edit
Bug report including command line output.
My apologies! I was quite sure I had attached it, but I see quite plainly that
I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40752
--- Comment #25 from Chengnian Sun ---
Today I encountered a similar case as follows. The conversion warning by gcc is
not true as right-shifting an unsigned short decreases the value.
BTW clang does not emit warnings for this code snippet.
$
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
Bug ID: 60128
Summary: Wrong ouput using en edit descriptor
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60116
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #32088|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57129
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #9)
> > However, the error message is now different from before for the test case
> > in comment 0 and this reduction:
>
> Confirmed. AFAICT the erro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60127
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60116
--- Comment #9 from Marc Glisse ---
Extract from a gdb session, showing 2 wrong branches taken:
(gdb) p f
$15 = 1
(gdb) step
15 j = k * 54;
(gdb)
16 g = j * 147;
(gdb)
18 if (d)
(gdb) p d
$16 = 1
(gdb) step
21
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60127
Bug ID: 60127
Summary: ICE with OpenMP and DO CONCURRENT
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openmp
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60116
--- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse ---
Er, right, my attachment is useless, it is the same as Uros' (but I can't see
how to remove it). If it matters:
GNU assembler version 2.24 (x86_64-linux-gnu) using BFD version (GNU Binutils
for Debian) 2.24
GNU
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60116
--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #5)
> Created attachment 32088 [details]
> asm that prints 0
Well,
$ gcc -m32 u.s && ./a.out
1
as --version
GNU assembler version 2.23.2
Copyright 2012 Free Software Foun
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60116
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
I can reproduce 0 even with the assembly by Uros:
$ ./xgcc -B./ -m32 -xassembler Uok.s; ./a.out
0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60116
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
Created attachment 32088
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32088&action=edit
asm that prints 0
Strange, I can reproduce it easily with r207643 on Debian testing:
stedding /tmp $ /tmp/gcc-mult
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57522
--- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Sun Feb 9 20:50:21 2014
New Revision: 207646
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207646&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-02-09 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/57522
* resolve.c (resolve_assoc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60116
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60126
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59026
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Sun Feb 9 19:45:06 2014
New Revision: 207645
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207645&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-02-09 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/59026
* trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60126
Bug ID: 60126
Summary: Internal compiler error with code using pointer
reshaping (gfortran 4.8.2)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55762
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59997
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60122
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60116
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 32086
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32086&action=edit
assembly dump from trunk revision 207643
I'm not able to trigger this problem with trunk revision 207643:
$ /ssd/u
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59198
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The ICE and backtrace one gets on all variants of the test case has changed
slightly to:
internal compiler error: in tree_to_uhwi, at tree.h:3653
class(rng_t), allocatable :: rng
^
0xb24434
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59395
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59395
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Sun Feb 9 17:32:07 2014
New Revision: 207644
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207644&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-02-09 Janus Weil
Backport from mainline
2013-10-2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58803
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Sun Feb 9 17:32:07 2014
New Revision: 207644
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207644&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-02-09 Janus Weil
Backport from mainline
2013-10-2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59603
--- Comment #4 from Jörg Richter ---
Are you sure that this is not a iter_swap problem? I have found nothing in the
standard that iter_swap( x, x ) is undefined.
I always thought types do not have to be prepared to handle self move
assignment.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59395
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Pretty much a duplicate of PR 58803 after all.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59526
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Krügler ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> Trunk doesn't give the same errors, but fails two of the assertions:
>
> n.cc:30:1: error: static assertion failed:
> static_assert(std::is_nothrow_construct
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59526
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60125
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60125
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60125
Bug ID: 60125
Summary: defaulted constructor with throwing NSDMI still
declared as noexcept
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59395
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59395
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The backtrace is:
0x8a95ff crash_signal
/home/jweil/gcc48/branch/gcc/toplev.c:332
0x5bd997 free_components
/home/jweil/gcc48/branch/gcc/fortran/symbol.c:2068
0x5bd997 gfc_free_symbol(gfc_sym
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60124
Bug ID: 60124
Summary: g++ generates two copies of the same symbol due to
__builtin_bswap32 return type
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59598
--- Comment #50 from Denis Kolesnik ---
listen if you will not stop to fool me I wil act immediatelly by pointing each
your step on a illustrated map!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59598
--- Comment #49 from Denis Kolesnik ---
And do not try to lie for 4.6.1 version when I download it again. I do pay
taxes regularly and even more, so do not put me into criminal world.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59598
--- Comment #48 from Denis Kolesnik ---
sorry wrote false. Here I corrected:
it is correct because it works with every letter of russian alphabeth in that
codepage except with small "ya"(which corresponds to U+044F in Unicode). It
replaces only
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59598
--- Comment #47 from Denis Kolesnik ---
sorry wrote false. Here I corrected:
it is correct because it works with every letter of russian alphabeth in that
codepage except with small "ya"(which corresponds to U+044F in Unicode). It
replaces only
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59598
--- Comment #46 from Denis Kolesnik ---
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_alphabet
it is correct because it works with every letter of russian alphabeth in that
codepage except with small "ya"(which corresponds to U+044F in Unicode). It
replac
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59598
Denis Kolesnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45586
--- Comment #102 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On February 8, 2014 1:47:14 PM GMT+01:00, "pault at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45586
>
>Paul Thomas changed:
>
> What|Removed
58 matches
Mail list logo
