[Bug libstdc++/43108] mixed complex multiplication horribly inefficient

2010-02-17 Thread jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl
--- Comment #17 from jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl 2010-02-17 23:28 --- (In reply to comment #16) > Which regression?!? Nothing changed in this code for *years*. I use std::complex. With gcc-4.5.0 the performance of c*f is three times worse than with gcc.4.4.x. T

[Bug libstdc++/43108] mixed complex multiplication horribly inefficient

2010-02-17 Thread jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl
--- Comment #15 from jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl 2010-02-17 23:16 --- (In reply to comment #8) > The patch will make results incorrect regarding the sign of zeros. Does > the C++ standard library allow this? Thus, does it specify multiplication > with a scalar

[Bug libstdc++/43108] mixed complex multiplication horribly inefficient

2010-02-17 Thread jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl
--- Comment #13 from jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl 2010-02-17 22:54 --- (In reply to comment #10) > Regarding the specific semantics, Richard, there is little to say: we want the > C99 semantics, by and large. Maybe there are some missing details, but we > decided alr

[Bug libstdc++/43108] mixed complex multiplication horribly inefficient

2010-02-17 Thread jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl
--- Comment #7 from jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl 2010-02-17 22:16 --- Created an attachment (id=19902) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19902&action=view) changelog entry -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43108

[Bug libstdc++/43108] mixed complex multiplication horribly inefficient

2010-02-17 Thread jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl
--- Comment #5 from jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl 2010-02-17 22:15 --- Created an attachment (id=19901) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19901&action=view) patch -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43108

[Bug libstdc++/43108] mixed complex multiplication horribly inefficient

2010-02-17 Thread jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl
--- Comment #1 from jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl 2010-02-17 21:05 --- Created an attachment (id=19898) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19898&action=view) testcase -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43108

[Bug libstdc++/43108] New: mixed complex multiplication horribly inefficient

2010-02-17 Thread jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl
Product: gcc Version: 4.5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43108

[Bug c++/40274] [regression] ice in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:9289

2009-05-27 Thread jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl
--- Comment #1 from jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl 2009-05-27 16:05 --- I forgot to mention that the ICE disappears when I remove *either* the function template foo, or the function bar. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40274

[Bug c++/40274] New: [regression] ice in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:9289

2009-05-27 Thread jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl
FIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: jan at epgmod dot phys dot tue dot nl GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40274