https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61306
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
Indeed. I also noticed that the original bswap code would happily accept signed
ssa value and signed cast which can lead to disaster. I worked out a patch for
this issue that check the sign of the lhs of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61327
Bug ID: 61327
Summary: Problem with friend template object
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61326
Bug ID: 61326
Summary: bootstrap failure of gcc-4.8.3 on ia64-hpux
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: boots
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56811
--- Comment #12 from Alexander ---
fixed in GCC 4.8.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59904
--- Comment #9 from wangzheyu ---
Hi, would please provide your elf file with the new binutils, so that we can
verify that whether it's the same issue as your former elf. If it is, it can be
verified as a bug because you're using the latest binut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60969
christophe.lyon at st dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||christophe.lyon at st dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61325
--- Comment #1 from christophe.lyon at st dot com ---
Created attachment 32858
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32858&action=edit
preprocessed source file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61325
Bug ID: 61325
Summary: [4.10 regression] aarch64_be build fails
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61324
Bug ID: 61324
Summary: [4.10 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV at ipa-comdats.c:321
with -fno-use-cxa-atexit -fkeep-inline-functions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61191
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61321
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61314
--- Comment #2 from Georg Koppen ---
Created attachment 32856
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32856&action=edit
config.log
Attached is the config.log. Here comes some additional information that might
help to understand this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61310
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61310
--- Comment #5 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Mon May 26 19:44:24 2014
New Revision: 210947
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210947&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 61310 Rewrite implementation of CTIME and FDATE intrinsics.
2014-05-26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61191
Igor Zamyatin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61222
--- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Mon May 26 18:50:55 2014
New Revision: 210945
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210945&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR rtl-optimization/61222
* combine.c (simpl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61310
--- Comment #4 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Mon May 26 18:36:01 2014
New Revision: 210943
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210943&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 61310 Rewrite implementation of CTIME and FDATE intrinsics.
2014-05-26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61310
--- Comment #3 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Mon May 26 18:28:49 2014
New Revision: 210941
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210941&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 61310 Rewrite implementation of CTIME and FDATE intrinsics.
2014-05-26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61310
--- Comment #2 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Mon May 26 18:17:13 2014
New Revision: 210938
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210938&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 61310 Rewrite implementation of CTIME and FDATE intrinsics.
2014-05-26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61191
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kyukhin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61271
--- Comment #9 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon May 26 17:33:09 2014
New Revision: 210937
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210937&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/61271
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_rtx_costs)
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61319
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Patch preapproved, but please post it to gcc-patches with full ChangeLog entry.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61319
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Can't you use -? instead of -* (or is it -\? ?) though?
What follows passes the tests.
diff -up ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/ubsan/float-cast-overflow-1.c
gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/ubsan/f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61319
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61321
--- Comment #2 from Pedro Alves ---
That worked. Running bootstrap/tests.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61323
--- Comment #1 from Joel Yliluoma ---
Interestingly enough, only if you add the term "constexpr" to the array
declaration, you get an actually meaningful error message:
constexpr const char* table7[10] = {};
template void test7() { }
v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61323
Bug ID: 61323
Summary: 'static' and 'const' attributes cause non-type
template argument matching failure
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61322
Bug ID: 61322
Summary: gccgo: spurious "incompatible type for field 2 in
struct construction" error [GoSmith]
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56947
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55117
--- Comment #27 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Mon May 26 15:32:33 2014
New Revision: 210935
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210935&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-26 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran/55117
* gfortran.d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61321
--- Comment #1 from Pedro Alves ---
I think we need to distinguish conversion operators from expression casts.
Working on a patch that adds:
--- c/include/demangle.h
+++ w/include/demangle.h
@@ -373,6 +373,10 @@ enum demangle_component_type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55117
--- Comment #26 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Mon May 26 15:19:36 2014
New Revision: 210934
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210934&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-26 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/55117
* trans-io.c (nm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59904
--- Comment #8 from christophe.lyon at st dot com ---
Using GCC trunk @210861, binutils-linaro-2.24-2014.03, I can see that
tls-reload-1.c all PASS with:
--target arm-none-linux-gnueabi --with-mode=arm --with-cpu=cortex-a9
--with-fpu=neon and targ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61319
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8817164/signed-nan-values
If the sign bit in the underlying representation is set, this particular
implementation of printf prints -nan. There is no standard that says that i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61319
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> No they are supposed to generate -nan. If it does not then there is a bug
> somewhere else.
According to [1], "The sign bit does not matter". As I understand this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61256
--- Comment #1 from Igor Zamyatin ---
Fixed by r210672
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61239
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikestump at comcast dot net,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61320
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61223
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59195
--- Comment #5 from Pedro Alves ---
Likely bug 61233 too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59195
Pedro Alves changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||palves at redhat dot com
--- Comment #4 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61256
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61126
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61182
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61321
Bug ID: 61321
Summary: demangler crash on casts in template parameters
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59498
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61190
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61156
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61084
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59388
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking, wrong-code
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54733
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61320
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
The load may be converted to unaligned - does sparc-solaris properly handle
unaligned (non-vector) loads?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61320
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||thomas.preudhomme at arm dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Undefined behaviour does not mean you get a compiler error.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61320
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61320
Bug ID: 61320
Summary: [4.10 regression] ICE in jcf-parse.c:1622
(parse_class_file
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61098
--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Mon May 26 13:09:48 2014
New Revision: 210932
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210932&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/61098
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_emit_set_const): Rem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
--- Comment #5 from Richard Riley ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> http://c-faq.com/expr/seqpoints.html
If that is the case, shouldn't a[i] = i++ and such statements be flagged as a
compiler error?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60641
--- Comment #2 from Alex Kruppa ---
With gcc-4.9.0, compiled from the official tarball, the foo() function does NOT
produce the double movzwl instruction any more, but the bar() function still
does.
Dump of assembler code for function foo:
0x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61294
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61294
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.1
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61294
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Happens on an isolated path where GCC optimized
if (len)
memset (p, val, len);
to
if (len == 0)
{
memset (p, val, 0);
}
else
{
.
memset (p, val, len);
}
can hap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61301
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61304
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
http://c-faq.com/expr/seqpoints.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61306
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
16 bit load in host endianness found at: b.3_7 = (int) load_dst_10;
at least the dumping is confusing as well ;)
But the issue seems to be that we are missing that a.0_2 and c.1_3
sign-extend.
a.0_2 = a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61306
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61314
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60925
--- Comment #8 from Carlos O'Donell ---
On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 2:30 PM, John David Anglin
wrote:
> On 25-May-14, at 7:11 AM, aaro.koskinen at iki dot fi wrote:
>
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60925
>>
>> --- Comment #6 from Aa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Riley from comment #2)
> "When postfix ++ is applied to an lvalue the result is the value of the
> object referred to by the lvalue. After the result is noted, the object is
> incremente
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
--- Comment #2 from Richard Riley ---
"When postfix ++ is applied to an lvalue the result is the value of the object
referred to by the lvalue. After the result is noted, the object is
incremented in the same manner as for the prefix ++ operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43453
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|gcc-bugs at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61191
--- Comment #2 from Kirill Yukhin ---
Author: kyukhin
Date: Mon May 26 10:04:01 2014
New Revision: 210930
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210930&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/c/
PR c/61191
* c-array-notation.c (fix_builtin_array_notatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61191
--- Comment #1 from Kirill Yukhin ---
Author: kyukhin
Date: Mon May 26 10:00:23 2014
New Revision: 210929
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210929&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/c/
PR c/61191
* c-array-notation.c (fix_builtin_array_notatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #212 from Steffen Hau ---
Hi Jan,
I have binutils version 2.24 with the patch from Markus Trippelsdorf for early
plugin loading, so I have no wrappers for ar, nm and ranlib. I've also
symlinked the liblto_plugin.so in binutils bfd-pl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60143
Torbjörn Gard changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61319
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|testsuite |target
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61315
--- Comment #4 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
This sounds a lot like believing you can build the better product by assigning
"blame" to others, not by building something that works for users. I'm sorry if
that's become the GCC philosophy.
I'n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61319
Bug ID: 61319
Summary: The tests
c-c++-common/ubsan/float-cast-overflow-(1|2|4).c fail
on x86_64-apple-darwin*
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61315
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61318
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61315
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61318
Bug ID: 61318
Summary: Improve error diagnostic by pointing to the expression
and not to declared-at of a USE-associated variable
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61315
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
Bug ID: 61317
Summary: ones complement fails when using increment(++) into an
array
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61316
Bug ID: 61316
Summary: gccgo: spurious "incompatible types in assignment"
error [GoSmith]
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61279
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61249
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
--- Comment #24 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 26 May 2014, vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
>
> --- Comment #23 from vincenzo Innocente
> ---
> Which Syntax?
> I want to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
--- Comment #23 from vincenzo Innocente ---
Which Syntax?
I want to reuse the same code for the various architecture and let gcc deal
with vectorization details.
The best I manage to do to share code is something like this
namespace {
inline
flo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61279
--- Comment #5 from Arseny Solokha ---
OK, it seems to be accidentally fixed somewhere between the two snapshots as
now I'm also unable to reproduce it w/ 4.10.0-alpha20140525.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61315
Bug ID: 61315
Summary: wide-int.cc cannot be built by darwin system compiler
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61314
Bug ID: 61314
Summary: Building GCC 4.9.0 breaks in libbacktrace on Ubuntu
Lucid Lynx
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
--- Comment #22 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Sun, 25 May 2014, vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
>
> vincenzo Innocente changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61249
--- Comment #11 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon May 26 07:45:09 2014
New Revision: 210925
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210925&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/61249
* doc/extend.texi (X86 Built-in Functions)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61249
--- Comment #10 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon May 26 07:39:55 2014
New Revision: 210924
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210924&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/61249
* doc/extend.texi: Fix parameter lists of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61249
--- Comment #9 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon May 26 07:19:25 2014
New Revision: 210923
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210923&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/61249
* doc/extend.texi: Fix parameter lists of _
99 matches
Mail list logo
