http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
--- Comment #15 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Joost VandeVondele from comment #14)
> (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #13)
> > Will -fsanitize=undefined catch these? If so, perhaps the message shown
> > before reporting a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
--- Comment #14 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #13)
> Will -fsanitize=undefined catch these? If so, perhaps the message shown
> before reporting a bug should mention trying this first.
I guess -fsanitiz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
David Kaufmann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WORKSFORME |INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #12
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
David Kaufmann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
--- Comment #10 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to David Kaufmann from comment #9)
> (In reply to Joost VandeVondele from comment #7)
> > (In reply to David Kaufmann from comment #5)
> > > Created attachment 31320 [details]
> > > preprocess
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
--- Comment #9 from David Kaufmann ---
(In reply to Joost VandeVondele from comment #7)
> (In reply to David Kaufmann from comment #5)
> > Created attachment 31320 [details]
> > preprocessor output
> > the buggy function is on line 18136, but it d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
--- Comment #8 from David Kaufmann ---
Created attachment 31323
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31323&action=edit
gdb "backtrace full" when segfaulting
backtrace from gdb when opening xfig with provided testcase.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
--- Comment #6 from David Kaufmann ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> Please attach a testcase or at least preprocessed source of w_drawprim.c.
a testcase is the first attachment to this bug with either xfig version 3.2.5b
or 3.2.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
--- Comment #5 from David Kaufmann ---
Created attachment 31320
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31320&action=edit
preprocessor output
i hope this is the proper preprocessed source, i generated it with the "-E"
parameter.
the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
--- Comment #3 from David Kaufmann ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > What is the size of fl ?
>
> What I mean are you going past the bounds of the array fl?
yes, i am, but if the co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> What is the size of fl ?
What I mean are you going past the bounds of the array fl?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59320
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
What is the size of fl ?
16 matches
Mail list logo
