http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61092
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 32751
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32751&action=edit
Preprocessed source
Fails with -O2.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61090
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61092
Bug ID: 61092
Summary: [4.10 Regression]: wide-int merge broke alpha
bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61084
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
The bootstrap is finished now: my last one is a week and a half ago, but
at least some of the regressions are wide-int related:
+FAIL: gcc.target/sparc/pdist-2.c (internal compiler error)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61082
--- Comment #3 from David Greene ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Y is a non-POD.
So...?
The ABI doesn't talk about POD vs. non-POD. It talks about copy constructors
and destructors.
Can you explain what POD has to do with thi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61091
Bug ID: 61091
Summary: [4.10 Regression] wide-int.h:1172:45: error:
incomplete type ‘wi::int_traits’ used in nested name specifier
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61090
Bug ID: 61090
Summary: [4.10 Regression] ICE in build_ref_for_offset
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tre
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61082
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Y is a non-POD.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61082
--- Comment #1 from David Greene ---
This is on Linux/SuSE/SLES 11.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61049
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed May 7 01:46:03 2014
New Revision: 210135
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210135&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-06 Jerry DeLisle
PR libfortran/61049
* gfortran.dg/l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61049
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed May 7 01:31:42 2014
New Revision: 210134
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210134&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-06 Jerry DeLisle
PR libfortran/61049
* io/list_read.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61033
Maxim Kuvyrkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu.org
A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61089
Bug ID: 61089
Summary: Misleading error message regarding inability to
convert pointers
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61080
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #5)
> Thanks. Thus should we go back to the pre-r210043 behavior and somehow
> handle the case in instantiate_decl under the early:
>
> if (/* If there is no definiti
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61080
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini ---
This (rather heavy handed?) tweak also appears to work (with it these deleted
functions can keep flowing through instantiate_decl):
Index: pt.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61023
Paul Pluzhnikov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppluzhnikov at google dot com
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61080
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini ---
Thanks. Thus should we go back to the pre-r210043 behavior and somehow handle
the case in instantiate_decl under the early:
if (/* If there is no definition, we cannot instantiate the
template. */
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61080
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
We shouldn't be trying to generate the body of a deleted function.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60999
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|jason at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60999
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue May 6 22:32:49 2014
New Revision: 210126
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210126&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2014-05-06 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/60999
* pt.c (may
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60999
--- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue May 6 22:34:11 2014
New Revision: 210127
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210127&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2014-05-06 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/60999
* pt.c (may
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61088
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61088
Bug ID: 61088
Summary: segfault with array of lambdas initialized with
initializer list that contains a lambda that captures
the array
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61087
--- Comment #2 from hs ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> dup, fixed in 4.9.0
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 54812 ***
Awesome, thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54812
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hs at xmission dot com
--- Comment #14
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61087
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61087
Bug ID: 61087
Summary: Generated class default ctor (using =default;) not
respecting private access?
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: mi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61021
--- Comment #4 from Sandra Loosemore ---
Patch has been committed to llvm libsanitizer trunk:
http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?view=revision&revision=208066
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61086
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61084
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
Bootstrap is into stage2 now. Will take a couple of hours before it's done.
Thanks.
Rainer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61086
Bug ID: 61086
Summary: ubsan detects undefined behaviour in the standard
library
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61084
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61085
Bug ID: 61085
Summary: [4.9/4.10 Regression] wrong code with -O2
-fno-early-inlining (maybe wrong devirtualization)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61084
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
Summary|wide-int merge br
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61084
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth ---
Created attachment 32747
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32747&action=edit
preprocessed input
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61084
Bug ID: 61084
Summary: wide-int merge broke Solaris/SPARC bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: boot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38375
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39902
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61082
Bug ID: 61082
Summary: [x86-64 Itanium ABI] g++ uses wrong return location
for class with head padding
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61081
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 06:33:03PM +, peter_e at gmx dot net wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61081
>
> --- Comment #2 from Peter Eisentraut ---
> No, these "functions" need to have a
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 06:33:03PM +, peter_e at gmx dot net wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61081
>
> --- Comment #2 from Peter Eisentraut ---
> No, these "functions" need to have a usable return value, because someone
> could
> write
>
> if (!sigemptyset(...))
> w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59584
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.8/4.9/4.10 Regression]: |[4.8/4.9/4.10 Regression]:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61069
--- Comment #9 from Tristan Moody ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #8)
> program foo
> integer i
> external bar, baz
> i=0
> call bar(i)
> call baz(i)
> end
>
> This is standard conforming Fortran. When gfortran compiles
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61069
--- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl ---
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 06:17:42PM +, tristanmoody at gmail dot com wrote:
> (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #5)
> > The Fortran code conforms to the Fortran standard! Why do you continue to
> > claim
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61080
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini ---
By the way your fix makes perfect sense to me, I would suggest adding a
comment, testing it and sending it to the mailing list with Jason in CC.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61081
--- Comment #2 from Peter Eisentraut ---
No, these "functions" need to have a usable return value, because someone could
write
if (!sigemptyset(...))
weirderror();
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61080
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61081
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61069
--- Comment #7 from Tristan Moody ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #5)
> The Fortran code conforms to the Fortran standard! Why do you continue to
> claim that it is nonconforming invalid code. What the linker does to
> the object code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61080
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
So for now I ended up with the following bit in my tree (it's easier
to add this than to fight Mozilla build system not to add Werrors).
Just checking DECL_DELETED_FN when emitting the error is not enough
beca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61081
Bug ID: 61081
Summary: excessive warnings: right-hand operand of comma
expression has no effect
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61075
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host|Linux 3.13.5-gentoo #10|
|SMP Fri Apr 25 16:1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61080
Bug ID: 61080
Summary: Spurious no return statement warning with deleted
operators
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61069
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |WONTFIX
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61069
--- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl ---
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 03:41:13PM +, tristanmoody at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> I concede this point: the standard only specifies that the compiler catch
> nonconforming code within individual program units
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60939
--- Comment #4 from lbl2007 at gmx dot net ---
Can you suggest a workaround?
I already found that combining all sources into a single compilation solves the
problem. However, in some cases, the combined source code becomes too large and
won't comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60969
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #15 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61075
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57381
Bug 57381 depends on bug 57417, which changed state.
Bug 57417 Summary: [4.7 Regression] hang on volatile int array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57417
What|Removed |Added
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57417
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue May 6 14:22:41 2014
New Revision: 210110
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210110&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-06 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2013-05-27
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61076
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61042
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mliska at suse dot cz
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61079
Bug ID: 61079
Summary: #pragma fini doesn't apply without definition
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: targ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61079
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59584
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61076
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biene
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61078
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
Summary|ESA mode boots
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35634
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.4 |4.8.0
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61078
Bug ID: 61078
Summary: ESA mode bootstrap failure since r209897
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60594
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60594
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue May 6 13:27:46 2014
New Revision: 210105
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210105&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport libstdc++/60594 fix from mainline.
PR libstdc++/60594
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57864
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Caused by
static pre_expr
phi_translate_1 (pre_expr expr, bitmap_set_t set1, bitmap_set_t set2,
basic_block pred, basic_block phiblock)
{
...
case NAME:
{
...
if (TREE_C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61077
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61077
Bug ID: 61077
Summary: _Atomic in the return type or argument types of main
not diagnosed
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57864
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Priority|P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61076
Bug ID: 61076
Summary: [4.10 Regression] ICE SEGFAULT in bb_predicate
tree-if-conv.c:149
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55964
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|rguenth at gcc do
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35634
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55022
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59859
Bug 59859 depends on bug 55022, which changed state.
Bug 55022 Summary: [4.8 Regression] air.f90 is miscompliled with -m64 -O2
-fgraphite-identity after revision 190619
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55022
What|Removed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55022
--- Comment #29 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue May 6 12:01:21 2014
New Revision: 210104
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210104&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-06 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2014-04-14
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53676
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35634
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|rguenth at gcc do
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60594
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue May 6 11:45:14 2014
New Revision: 210103
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210103&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport libstdc++/60594 fix from mainline.
PR libstdc++/60594
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61016
Kostya Serebryany changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61016
--- Comment #1 from Kostya Serebryany ---
Slightly more reduced test:
template
struct vector {
void resize(int, T = T()) {}
};
class UnknownField;
class UnknownFieldSet {
void DeleteByNumber (int);
vector < UnknownField > *fields_;
};
cl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61069
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60973
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
I wonder if the tailcall flag can't be reliably set by tree-tailcall, but i
suppose we want tailcall in thunks even at -O0.
The patch seems fine to me.
Note that this is not ipa-devirt issue, just semi-latent bu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61075
--- Comment #2 from Denes Matetelki ---
g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin/4.8.2/g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.8.2/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: /v
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56888
--- Comment #30 from Richard Biener ---
Thus, from 4.8.3, 4.9.1 and 4.10.0 on -ffreestanding, -fno-hosted and
-fno-builtin
will cause -ftree-loop-distribute-patterns to _not_ be enabled by default
with -O3+ (you can still enable it manually).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56888
--- Comment #29 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Rich Felker from comment #28)
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 02:16:38PM +, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > Honza, is there a more "fancy" way of doing this?
>
> The only correct way to fix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61062
Alan Lawrence changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alan.lawrence at arm dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61068
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
-fno-ivopts fixes it. Reverting r195609 on top of the branch doesn't fix it,
backporting r196782 does.
IVOPTs ends up choosing different IVs, but I don't see anything obviously
wrong ...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61075
Denes Matetelki changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host||Linux 3.13.5-gentoo #10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61075
Bug ID: 61075
Summary: parallel std::accumulate reduct type cannot be
different than the iterated type
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60969
--- Comment #14 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to h...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #12)
> Author: hjl
> Date: Fri Apr 25 20:52:01 2014
> New Revision: 209811
HJ, can you please backport this patch to 4.9?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61060
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
> I'd say the backend should better deal with this. Or we have to
> double-check (or delay) the zero-length check until after
>
> len_rtx = expand_normal (len);
>
> sth like
This looks good to me indeed. T
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61068
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61068
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53477
--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to JiYouguo from comment #18)
> Would you mind telling how to patch a bug? I just can't find the file
> simple.cc.
simple.cc is a test file, patching that won't fix anything. The patch you want
i
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
