[Bug middle-end/28545] [4.1 only] Wrong code for hoisted multiplication

2006-07-30 Thread ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk
--- Comment #4 from ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk 2006-07-30 20:11 --- Works on a 2006-02-18 snapshot of 4.2 Fails on a 2005-11-24 snapshot of 4.1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28545

[Bug middle-end/28545] Wrong code for hoisted multiplication

2006-07-30 Thread ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk
--- Comment #2 from ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk 2006-07-30 19:02 --- This code appears to be compiled correctly with a 2006-07-21 snapshot. This doesn't necessarily mean the underlying bug has gone away, though. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28545

[Bug c/28545] Wrong code for hoisted multiplication

2006-07-30 Thread ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk
--- Comment #1 from ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk 2006-07-30 18:46 --- Created an attachment (id=11974) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11974&action=view) test case Test case. It should produce the output "Difficulty rating: Extreme (complex n

[Bug c/28545] New: Wrong code for hoisted multiplication

2006-07-30 Thread ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk
Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk GCC build triplet: i486-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: i486-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: i486

[Bug c++/27227] [4.0 Regression] rejects valid code with some extern "C"

2006-06-30 Thread ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk
--- Comment #8 from ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk 2006-06-30 17:48 --- The standard says in 7.5/5: "If two declarations of the same function or object specify different linkage-specifications [...] the program is ill-formed if the declarations appear in the same translation

[Bug c++/7302] -Wnon-virtual-dtor should't complain of protected dtor

2006-05-27 Thread ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk
--- Comment #8 from ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk 2006-05-27 15:30 --- Created an attachment (id=11520) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11520&action=view) proposed patch (with doc and test changes) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7302

[Bug c++/9278] Illegal use of typedef to "void"

2006-04-23 Thread ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk
--- Comment #21 from ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk 2006-04-23 23:44 --- I have submitted a defect report about the difference from C in this respect; this is now C++ core DR 577: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#577 Please could the "fix"

[Bug c++/27252] New: Special case for void parameter list differs from C

2006-04-21 Thread ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk
MED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27252

[Bug c++/26755] [4.1 regression?] may fail to generate code for base destructor defined inline

2006-03-25 Thread ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk
--- Comment #7 from ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk 2006-03-26 02:07 --- Here's a trivial test case: $ cat test.hpp #ifdef USE_PRAGMA #pragma interface #endif class foo { public: virtual ~foo() {} }; class bar : public foo { public : ~bar(); }; $ cat test.cpp #in

[Bug libgcj/24170] natFilePosix.cc seems to have a security problem

2005-11-10 Thread ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk
--- Comment #7 from ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk 2005-11-10 11:33 --- I have no interest in constructing buffer overflow exploits, but if someone were to construct shell-code in a filename it should be possible to use it against a privileged user of libgcj that reads user

[Bug libgcj/24170] natFilePosix.cc seems to have a security problem

2005-10-02 Thread ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk
--- Comment #4 from ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk 2005-10-02 23:38 --- Andrew, I agree this is a problem with readdir_r, hence my original subject (and the fact that I'm reporting bugs in a large number of other programs). I'm not going to publish the advisory until 1s

[Bug libgcj/24170] [SECURITY] readdir_r considered harmful

2005-10-02 Thread ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk
--- Comment #1 from ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk 2005-10-02 23:16 --- Can someone please remove this from public view, as Mozilla does for security bugs on their Bugzilla? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24170

[Bug libgcj/24170] New: [SECURITY] readdir_r considered harmful

2005-10-02 Thread ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk
: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major Priority: P1 Component: libgcj AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: ben at decadentplace dot org dot uk http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24170