--- Comment #9 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-26 12:15 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Hm, I only can see references to "symbol" not to either function or variable
> declaration in the documentation. Can you cite the part that makes you think
> it r
--- Comment #7 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-26 11:51 ---
I looked up 'weakref' in the GCC documentation because I'd forgotten exactly
what it was supposed to do, and noticed that it's actually documented as
applying only to functions. So, maybe we coul
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
|org
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
|org
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
|org
--- Comment #10 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-28 07:34 ---
Yes, the test is still valid. It is reporting a real problem. I will suggest
a change to __GCC_HAVE_DWARF2_CFI_ASM that permits the testcase to continue
working.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #6 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-12 19:44 ---
Confirmed, the regression tester sees it too.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-21 16:43 ---
I suspect that the patch changed bad code generation into a crash, which is not
a regression...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34621
--- Comment #3 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 00:55 ---
The quoted paragraph does not apply to the first code example, because an
"inline definition" is defined in paragraph 6 as:
If all of the file scope declarations for a function in a translation
unit i
--- Comment #14 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-30 03:44 ---
I don't fully understand the linker error message. It seems to me that if
there's a reference to the typeinfo name then that just means the linker
shouldn't be discarding it.
The original problem
--- Comment #8 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-18 04:53 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Icc generates:
>0: 66 0f 6e cf movd %edi,%xmm1
>4: 66 0f f2 c1 pslld %xmm1,%xmm0
Right, that's what icc's documentation would
--- Comment #6 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-17 21:28 ---
Shouldn't you have to use
_mm_sll_epi32(s, _mm_cvtsi32_si128 (c))
instead? Or does the 'i' in 'slli' stand for 'int' not 'immediate'?
I thought that the list of _mm_s
--- Comment #2 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-13 22:56 ---
I'm not even sure this is a bug; maybe it's a clue that you should have
instantiated baz() with an unsigned type.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21755
--- Comment #2 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-10 23:09 ---
Subject: Bug 32617
Author: geoffk
Date: Tue Jul 10 23:08:52 2007
New Revision: 126529
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126529
Log:
2007-07-09 Geoffrey Keating <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #4 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-09 19:34 ---
'external linkage' is not the same thing as 'the declaration contains the
keyword "extern"'.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32692
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32617
--- Comment #12 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-03 00:45 ---
[Here's what I sent to gcc-patches as a review of this patch:]
Doing this will certainly break many tools which parse the output of GCC,
especially in the case of a successful compilation which produced
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
|org
--- Comment #15 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-26 01:18 ---
Subject: Bug 20216
Author: geoffk
Date: Tue Jun 26 01:18:08 2007
New Revision: 126014
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126014
Log:
PR 20216
* gcc.dg/pr20216.c: New
--- Comment #15 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 18:31 ---
Doesn't fail on powerpc-darwin (nor apparently on powerpc-aix).
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #3 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 01:24 ---
I split out the problem with 'i' to PR 32445.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32444
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: i386-*-*
http://gcc.gnu.org/b
--- Comment #2 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 01:13 ---
The problem with 'i' is ivopts.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32444
--- Comment #1 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 01:08 ---
Happens even with -O1. One of the causes is SRA, but there's more...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32444
gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32444
--- Comment #11 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-14 21:11 ---
Should be fixed with this change:
r125721 | geoffk | 2007-06-14 13:56:25 -0700 (Thu, 14 Jun 2007) | 4 lines
PR 31093
* decl2
--- Comment #3 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-14 20:56 ---
Subject: Bug 31093
Author: geoffk
Date: Thu Jun 14 20:56:25 2007
New Revision: 125721
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125721
Log:
PR 31093
* decl2.c (determine_vi
--- Comment #10 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-13 22:31 ---
I think this problem is limited to just typeinfo.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: *-*-darwin*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32161
--- Comment #9 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-13 23:18 ---
No DECL whose mangled name includes the name of an anonymous namespace should
be TREE_PUBLIC. That is the bug here.
There are no problems with typeinfo on systems where typeinfo is compared by
address, which
--- Comment #6 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-06 01:27 ---
That should do it.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-06 01:01 ---
Subject: Bug 31775
Author: geoffk
Date: Sun May 6 00:01:36 2007
New Revision: 124467
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124467
Log:
Index: libiberty/ChangeLog
2007-05-04 Geoffrey
--- Comment #4 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-03 20:14 ---
The following testcase should be equivalent to the original one but not involve
IMA:
void f1()
{
static __gthrw_pthread_once __attribute__ ((__weakref__ ("pthread_once")));
}
void f2()
{
--- Comment #2 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-02 21:23 ---
Since these are both 'static', shouldn't they be named things like
__gthrw_pthread_once.247 in the assembler?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31537
--- Comment #4 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-02 01:46 ---
I just happen to have a patch which fixes this.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-02 00:54 ---
You would add a translation unit that says
int i;
or similar. It's not "main::i", it's "::i", because of [basic.link] paragraph
7:
When a block scope declaration of an entity with li
--- Comment #1 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-01 19:56 ---
This testcase is the same principle, but might use a different code path in the
compiler:
extern "C" void abort();
extern int *p;
int main()
{
extern int i;
i = 1;
*p = 2;
if (i == 2)
abort ()
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31775
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #3 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 19:49 ---
I'm fairly sure this is in fact a bug in GCC. The problem is that in a routine
which uses setjmp, alloca() must ensure that the previous stack backchain is
preserved, which means it needs to allocate enough
--- Comment #34 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 00:14 ---
I don't know what patches you're referring to, so no.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26792
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #4 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-16 20:12 ---
Confirmed. (Yes, this means I'm finally able to reproduce it!)
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #6 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-10 00:00 ---
Subject: Bug 31013
Author: geoffk
Date: Sat Mar 10 00:00:09 2007
New Revision: 122774
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122774
Log:
PR 31013
* gccspec.c (lang_specifi
--- Comment #5 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-08 20:31 ---
This should be fixed now.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-08 19:56 ---
Subject: Bug 31013
Author: geoffk
Date: Thu Mar 8 19:56:37 2007
New Revision: 122709
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122709
Log:
PR 31013
* gccspec.c (lang_specifi
duct: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: driver
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31089
--- Comment #11 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-07 02:01 ---
No, I take it back, the back-end is involved.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30762
--- Comment #10 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-07 01:52 ---
c_types_compatible_p says the two types are compatible, but it never gets
called. I don't think the back-end is involved.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30762
--- Comment #9 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-07 01:38 ---
Confirmed.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #2 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-07 00:16 ---
The change to gccspec.c was made by Franz Sirl on 2001-06-16, revision 43421.
The mail on gcc-patches is at
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2001-04/msg01394.html>. There's further
discussi
--- Comment #1 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-02 18:59 ---
This is because gccspec.c is adding -shared-libgcc when it sees an Objective-C
file, but inconsistently; it doesn't handle -x options, it doesn't handle the
-objC flag. On Darwin, it's wrong to add
--- Comment #8 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-27 17:25 ---
I'm confident that my patch could not possibly have affected targets other than
Darwin, and should not have significantly affected code generation even there.
Complex arithmetic testcases will fail for other re
--- Comment #4 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-26 00:23 ---
This is probably because the mingw math.h header does not support C99.
Francois, where does this header come from?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30589
--- Comment #16 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-26 00:05 ---
This should be fixed now in the trunk and 4.2 branches.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-26 00:04 ---
Subject: Bug 25127
Author: geoffk
Date: Fri Jan 26 00:03:28 2007
New Revision: 121190
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=121190
Log:
2007-01-24 Geoffrey Keating <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #14 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-25 20:32 ---
Subject: Bug 25127
Author: geoffk
Date: Thu Jan 25 20:32:06 2007
New Revision: 121184
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=121184
Log:
2007-01-24 Geoffrey Keating <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #13 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-25 19:20 ---
... at least, I think I have a patch which will fix it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25127
--- Comment #12 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-25 19:18 ---
I'm working on this.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #3 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-25 06:01 ---
It's optional, but if you support Annex F of the C99 standard then F.4 says:
If the floating value is infinite or NaN or if the integral part of the
floating value exceeds
the range of the integer type, the
--- Comment #1 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-24 22:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=12952)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12952&action=view)
tflt2int.c testcase
>From <http://www.tybor.com/tflt2int.c>.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
ssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30580
org
ReportedBy: geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30569
--- Comment #1 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-24 02:11 ---
Other builtins where this can apply are pow() and lround().
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30568
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target tripl
rity: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30566
--- Comment #2 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-20 03:25 ---
collect2 already does this on platforms which don't use GNU ld.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30205
--- Comment #1 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-07 20:34 ---
This function was added in revision 118240, with
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-10/msg01646.html>.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
tus: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30094
--- Comment #5 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-17 00:04 ---
I mean, see rejects-valid example in bug 29873.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7221
--- Comment #2 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-17 00:04 ---
Yes, this is a duplicate of 7221 as well. (This is the rejects-valid case.)
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 7221 ***
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #4 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-17 00:04 ---
*** Bug 29873 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-16 23:47 ---
See rejects-valid example in 29356.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-16 23:46 ---
Yes, it definitely is. Thank you!
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
.. } x;'
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29873
--- Comment #1 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-09 21:49 ---
There is a contradiction here in the ABI. The formal syntax in the ABI says
that a cannot appear inside a , but the example I
mentioned is trying to show that it does. However, the formal syntax in the
ABI also
NCONFIRMED
Keywords: ABI
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29773
--- Comment #7 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 05:40 ---
This should now be fixed.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #28 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 05:39 ---
All these testcases are now fixed. I don't promise that the two compilers have
exactly the same ABI, especially for C++, but the testcases pass.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #17 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 05:38 ---
This should now be behaving correctly.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 05:37 ---
I can't tell if this bug is fixed. However, Darwin now has
NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C set.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #26 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 05:28 ---
Subject: Bug 23067
Author: geoffk
Date: Wed Nov 1 05:28:41 2006
New Revision: 118365
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118365
Log:
In gcc/:
PR 23067
* c-decl.c (star
--- Comment #9 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 04:53 ---
Subject: Bug 15834
Author: geoffk
Date: Wed Nov 1 04:53:33 2006
New Revision: 118358
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118358
Log:
PR 15834
* config/
--- Comment #6 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 04:48 ---
Subject: Bug 11377
Author: geoffk
Date: Wed Nov 1 04:48:15 2006
New Revision: 118357
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118357
Log:
* c-decl.c (grokdeclarator): Don't set
--- Comment #14 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 04:48 ---
Subject: Bug 16622
Author: geoffk
Date: Wed Nov 1 04:48:15 2006
New Revision: 118357
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118357
Log:
* c-decl.c (grokdeclarator): Don't set
--- Comment #13 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 04:47 ---
Subject: Bug 16622
Author: geoffk
Date: Wed Nov 1 04:47:30 2006
New Revision: 118356
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118356
Log:
* c-decl.c (grokdeclarator): Don't set
--- Comment #5 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 04:47 ---
Subject: Bug 11377
Author: geoffk
Date: Wed Nov 1 04:47:30 2006
New Revision: 118356
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118356
Log:
* c-decl.c (grokdeclarator): Don't set
--- Comment #11 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-31 01:03 ---
Please do not add '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' to the CC list of any bugzilla bug.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #10 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-31 01:02 ---
Hi Jack,
I have no idea what's causing this, and I don't know why you think I do. I am
the one asking you to provide a testcase in the Radar. You're claiming that
this is a bug in Xcode 2.4 (which
--- Comment #7 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-29 20:29 ---
I think I'll just declare that GCC requires a shared libgcc on Darwin.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #8 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-18 18:41 ---
The stabs numbering should probably match whatever AIX does.
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-18 17:08 ---
Isn't this a dup of bug 28834?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29436
--- Comment #7 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-16 21:58 ---
This should work now for DWARF, so only stabs uses strange numbering.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3920
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23067
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16622
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15834
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11377
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #25 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-16 21:46 ---
*** Bug 25630 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
1 - 100 of 214 matches
Mail list logo
