--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
08:04 ---
Subject: Bug 18820
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-14 08:03:22
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog varasm.c
gcc/tests
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
08:06 ---
Patch applied.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RES
--- Additional Comments From SWElef at post dot sk 2005-01-14 08:24 ---
I was a little in a hurry, so I'll add a comment on the test programm now.
The "reference time" of std::list ctor taking range must be linear. Thus it
makes sence to have a look at the quotient of the second and third
--- Additional Comments From jbeulich at novell dot com 2005-01-14 08:58
---
Isn't the MEM case moving things in the wrong direction? If so, and since I
tried to fix this myself before submitting the bug, simply swapping the operands
of emit_move_insn doesn't seem to work (made the compi
--- Additional Comments From baldrick at free dot fr 2005-01-14 08:59
---
Subject: Re: New: ACATS CXA4009, CXA4020 - valgrind detects bad code
(overlapping memcpy)
Here is a much simplified version:
> gnatmake -s -g -O2 tt
> valgrind --tool=memcheck ./tt
==10048== Memcheck, a memory
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
09:04 ---
Other possible patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg00796.html
--
What|Removed |Added
Sorry to bug you here guys, but I have no idea where to ask about it.
I have downloaded via cvs current snapshot, and it doesn't compile:
config.status: executing default commands
make[1]: Entering directory
`/home/users/gj/Projects/gcc-4.0/gcc/build-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/libiberty'
if [ x"" !
The following code compiled as C++ (does not happen when compiled as C), issues
a wrong warning:
void test()
{
unsigned int i = 0;
int val = i ? i : -1;
}
$ gcc -c test.cpp
test.cpp: In function `void test()':
test.cpp:4: warning: converting of negative value `-0x1'
--- Additional Comments From Woebbeking at web dot de 2005-01-14 09:56
---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] name lookup is broken with friends
On Thursday 13 January 2005 15:52, lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> > So B's ctor uses the global A without the friend declaration and w
I downloaded and installed cygwin, version of cygwin1.dll is 1.5.12-1.
I downloaded gcc-3.4.3 sources, gcc-3.4.3.tar.gz, and unpacked it to
/home/gcc-3.4.3
Then I wanted to build a gcc cross-compiler for target powerpc-eabi (mpc5xx)
I used this to configure:
@ /home/gcc-3.4.3: mkdir obj
@ /home/gc
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.0 regression] ICE with |[4.0 regression] ICE with
|solf-float on m68k |soft-float on m68k
http://gcc.gnu.o
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
10:29 ---
At this point the cross-compiler itself is built. You need a cross-assembler to
proceed, i.e you need to have an 'as' with --target=powerpc-eabi and properly
declare it when configuring the cross-compiler
The following invalid code snippet is accepted (since at least gcc 2.95.3).
It is rejected when A gets instantiated, but that could be diagnosed at
definition time IMHO.
===
template struct A
{
~A() {}
~A() {}
};
===
--
Summary:
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
10:50 ---
Subject: Bug 19084
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-14 10:50:19
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog basic-block.h recog.c
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
10:50 ---
Subject: Bug 19348
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-14 10:50:19
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog basic-block.h recog.c
The following IMHO invalid code snippet is accepted
(since at least gcc 2.95.3).
===
template struct A
{
~A<0>();
};
===
--
Summary: Invalid destructor declaration in template class
accepted
Product: gc
The following invalid code snippet causes an ICE in gcc 3.4.x:
==
template struct A
{
A::~A() {}
};
==
bug.cc:3: error: type/value mismatch at argument 1 in template parameter list
for `template > struct A'
bug.cc:3: error: exp
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-14 11:50
---
> I was a little in a hurry, so I'll add a comment on the test programm now.
> The "reference time" of std::list ctor taking range must be linear. Thus it
> makes sence to have a look at the quotient of the second
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-01-14 12:10
---
Note that this test has been deactivated vi testsuite/ada/acats/norun.lst
so it doesn't show up in testresults anymore.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18817
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-01-14 12:14
---
Does it still hang? Eric just commited a fix for PR18820 that is likely to have
fixed this problem.
--
What|Removed |Added
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
The log10 operator in gfortran (cygwin build 20041213) does not work properly if
the statement is operated on a variable, but it works fine when operating on a
constant. The plain log statement works fine regardless. If the following
program is executed, one can observer that log for the two meth
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:00 ---
*** Bug 19442 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:00 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19428 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:01 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:01 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:04 ---
This works for me on ppc-darwin, are you sure that is not a bug in cygwin as
fortran just calls log10f
(which might call log10 if your target does not have the C99 math functions).
--
http://gcc.gnu.or
--- Additional Comments From uros at kss-loka dot si 2005-01-14 13:08
---
It looks that the problem with FP compares forcing constant into wrong register
part of this bug is solved. However, register allocator can still be confused
when a variable is initialized to constant value:
grep
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:16 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> It looks that the problem with FP compares forcing constant into wrong
> register
> part of this bug is solved. However, register allocator can still be confused
> when a variable
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:19 ---
The warning is correct.
To get a warning in C you have to use -Wconversion.
pr19437.c:4: warning: negative integer implicitly converted to unsigned type
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From mgilbert at airborne dot nrl dot navy dot mil
2005-01-14 13:20 ---
I tried the exact same code with g95 on cygwin, and it worked flawlessly.
gfortran must have access to the math library because it is able to evaluate log
properly, right? How do you suggest
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:20 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:20 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
The implementation in cvs for GCJ's java.net.URI does currently not store the
hostname attribute from a URI. It seems as if this variable is just forgotten
to be assigned in the URI(String) constructor. The effect of this is that a
getHost() method call always returns null because its underlying
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:25 ---
Try this c code:
#include
#include
int main(void)
{
printf("%f\n", 10*log10(1.0e-5));
return 0;
}
It might also be the bug that isfinite does not work on cygwin which is a
different bug.
--
http
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:27 ---
Broken:
: Search converges between 2003-08-06-trunk (#316) and 2003-08-07-trunk (#317).
Fixed on the mainline
: Search converges between 2004-09-12-trunk (#538) and 2004-09-14-trunk (#539).
--
W
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:28 ---
Fixed on the mainline by:
2005-01-13 Graydon Hoare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* include/jni.h (_Jv_JNIEnv::bottom_locals): New field.
* include/jvm.h (_Jv_FreeJNIEnv): Declare.
--
Bug 12725 depends on bug 12957, which changed state.
Bug 12957 Summary: JNI Performance Issues
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12957
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:29 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-01-
--- Additional Comments From SWElef at post dot sk 2005-01-14 13:33 ---
It took me quite a long time to realise that the best performance tests are
those where we count the elementary operations. The best way to expose the
O(n log n) complexity in non-fixed case is to supply the container
--- Additional Comments From mgilbert at airborne dot nrl dot navy dot mil
2005-01-14 13:34 ---
That c code above worked properly, and running g95 on my test code works fine
also, so I think that pretty much indicates that the issue is with gfortran.
and gfortran works fine when i do lo
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:38 ---
Hmm, try this (if might be that log10f is broken):
#include
#include
int main(void)
{
float t = 1.0e-5;
printf("%f\n", 10*log10f(t));
return 0;
}
If this does not link (try -lm), otherwise I don't
--- Additional Comments From mgilbert at airborne dot nrl dot navy dot mil
2005-01-14 13:42 ---
That code works properly also. I'm downloading an older snapshot of cygwin
gfortran to see if the bug is in there also.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19443
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:51 ---
Then this might be a dup of bug 19363, if both of those C programs worked.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19443
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:53 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancemen
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
13:59 ---
Subject: Bug 7525
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-14 13:58:42
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/arm : ar
--- Additional Comments From uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14 14:13
---
Register constraints are wrong for movv2sf* patterns. "movlps" can't handle the
combination of x/x registers.
Uros.
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
14:17 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg00813.html
Fixed for the common case, but not for caller super-inteworking. I don't intend
to change that case, since that's outside the EABI and I still think
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
14:18 ---
Hmm, I cannot reproduce it on 20050113 with a cross from ppc-darwin compiled at
-O0.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19421
--- Additional Comments From oliverst at online dot de 2005-01-14 14:26
---
Ah, OK. Why is there warning at all. "-1" is being assigned to an "int" and not
to an "unsigned int".
Writing it without the "? :" operator, the following code should be the same.
unsigned int i = 0;
int val;
if
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-14 14:28
---
Yes, we are already using something similar, elsewhere (e.g., our copy_tracker
class). For the present needs, a tweaked version of your test program will do
rather well: even with std::allocator, the new numbers ar
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Last reconfirmed|2004-10-08 18:44:35 |2005-01-14 14:30:56
date|
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
14:30 ---
int val = i ? i : -1;
we convert it to unsigned because it gets promoted to unsigned because i is
unsigned and then there is
an implicit cast to int. so the type of "i ? i : -1" is unsigned and t
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
14:34 ---
Suspending as this has been broken for a long time and no movement in fixing
this regression. I would
proposed this target to be removed since it looks like it is no longer being
maintained.
--
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Component|c++ |middle-end
Ever Confirmed|
--- Additional Comments From joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14 14:39
---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Hmm, I cannot reproduce it on 20050113 with a cross from ppc-darwin compiled
at -O0.
Can you reproduce it at -O2?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19421
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
14:40 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > Hmm, I cannot reproduce it on 20050113 with a cross from ppc-darwin compiled
> at -O0.
>
> Can you reproduce it at -O2?
No what I had meant is that cc
--- Additional Comments From joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14 14:45
---
Wierd.. we are on x86-gnu-linux so would be using a totally different host
compiler. I am using a gcc 3.4.3 and don't know what Ralf is using.
Does it fail when cc1 is compiled at a higher optimization level?
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
14:45 ---
Actually this is not a middle-end after all.
The problem is that __throw_bad_alloc is not marked as noreturn as it should be.
"In the if-part, the function either (a) returns, from the while-loop;
or (b) t
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
14:50 ---
What options are used to configure gcc, maybe it has something to do with that
(what I mean a
different default CPU is done).
I configured with "../configure --target=m68k-rtems4.7"
--
http://gcc.gnu.o
--- Additional Comments From corsepiu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
15:15 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
I on Fedora Core 3 and am using FC3's toolchain.
> What options are used to configure gcc, maybe it has something to do
> with that (what I mean a different default CPU is done).
>
--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2005-01-14 16:06 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] name lookup is broken with friends
"Woebbeking at web dot de" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] name lookup is broken with friends
|
| On Thu
--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2005-01-14 16:10 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] name lookup is broken with friends
"pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| (In reply to comment #2)
| > Excuse me?
|
| You are right, but what is
--- Additional Comments From mgilbert at airborne dot nrl dot navy dot mil
2005-01-14 16:51 ---
My test code works perfectly with the 20041114 cygwin gfortran and earlier
snapshots.
I agree, this could be related to #19363 since the dates of working/non-working
code are similar. I gues
$ time g++-snapshot -O -c list1.ii
real0m3.617s
user0m3.515s
sys 0m0.043s
$ time g++-3.4 -O -c list1.ii
real0m0.068s
user0m0.028s
sys 0m0.007s
$ g++-snapshot -v
Using built-in specs.
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --enable-languages=c,c++,java,objc,ada
--prefix=/u
--- Additional Comments From phil at fsel dot com 2005-01-14 16:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=7959)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7959&action=view)
.ii file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19445
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
17:02 ---
Can you check with --disable-checking as checking is turned on by default on
the mainline of 4.0.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
Hello!
There was a similar question to this on the mailing list archives, but
I could not
find the answer.
I would like to combine __builtin_choose_expr with __builtin_constant_p, in
something like this:
#define SHIFTLEFT(a,b) __builtin_choose_expr(__builtin_constant_p(b), \
((a) << (b)
When building avr-gcc from the CVS repository (trunk), configured as follows:
../gcc/configure --target=avr --enable-languages=c --disable-nls
I get an internal error:
/home/degay/avr-gcc-build/gcc/xgcc -B/home/degay/avr-gcc-build/gcc/
-B/usr/local/avr/bin/ -B/usr/local/avr/lib/ -isystem /usr/local
When building today's (2005-01-14) gcc-trunk for different (cross-) targets on
FC3, I am seeing many (several 10ths) warnings of this kind:
...
gcc -c -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -DCROSS_COMPILE -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings
-Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wold-style-definition -fno-common
-DHAVE_CO
The gcc compiler information:
Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc/ppc64-redhat-linux/3.4.3/specs
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man --
infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --disable-
checking --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit --disable-
--- Additional Comments From yanliu at ca dot ibm dot com 2005-01-14 18:21
---
Created an attachment (id=7960)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7960&action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19448
--- Additional Comments From ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de
2005-01-14 18:25 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] libjava bootstrap failure on Tru64 UNIX:
CPPFLAGS changed in libltdl
kcook at gcc dot gnu dot org writes:
> Could someone please verify that this patch fixes the Alp
--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14 18:35
---
Are you sure this is not just a bug in valgrind?
I have verified that with current CVS I get
ERROR SUMMARY: 37 errors from 21 contexts (suppressed: 12 from 1)
while if I rebuild stage1's combine.o with Roger's
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
18:36 ---
Invalid, the warnings were correct for compiling 3.4.x but are not correct when
compiling 4.0.0 but you
have to compile with 4.0.0 to get correct warnings for this case.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
18:37 ---
*** Bug 19446 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
18:37 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19378 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
19:01 ---
Hmm, are you sure that you are not comparing against gcc for ppc-darwin and gcc
for ppc-linux
because the default sign-ness of char is different between them.
On ppc-darwin, the char is signed by default
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
19:06 ---
I will just have a note here from what the standard say about this issue:
" in such cases the extra bits are used for padding and do not participate in
the value representation of
the bit-field" (9.6P1)
"
Given the following code:
#define SHIFTLEFT(a,b) __builtin_choose_expr(__builtin_constant_p(b), \
((a) << (b)), \
((a) << (MIN(31,MAX(-31,(b))
int foo(int a, int b) { return SHIFTLEFT (a, b); }
the compiler will error:
gcc -O4 gcctest.c
gcctest.c: In function `foo':
gcctest.c:5:
gcc generates incorrect code for static members in some cases. Consider the
following code:
struct C {
static __thread int x;
static __thread int y;
};
__thread int C::x;
void g() {
int z = C::x;
z = C::y;
}
When this is compiled on an x86 machine with gcc -S,
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19449
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
19:15 ---
Subject: Bug 18987
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_3-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-14 19:15:41
Modified files:
gcc: Change
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
19:15 ---
Subject: Bug 13158
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_3-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-14 19:15:41
Modified files:
gcc: Change
--- Additional Comments From eplondke at gmail dot com 2005-01-14 19:22
---
Created an attachment (id=7961)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7961&action=view)
Test case as a file.
Test case as a file.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19449
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
19:26 ---
The problem is the __builtin_constant_p is delayed for evalutation until
optimizations are run but
__builtin_choose_expr needs an answer right away.
What we could do is for when processing the first argu
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
19:31 ---
It does not work with 20041211 but that is the last gcc which I have access to
which has __thread
support.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-01-14 19:40
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> int val = i ? i : -1;
>
> we convert it to unsigned because it gets promoted to unsigned because i is
> unsigned and then
> there is an implicit cast to int. so the type of "
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
19:45 ---
Subject: Bug 13158
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-14 19:45:23
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
Added files:
gcc/t
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
19:45 ---
Subject: Bug 18987
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-14 19:45:23
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
Added files:
gcc/t
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
19:50 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Then either the semantic definition of the middle-end's w = (x ? y : z) needs
> to preserve y : z types,
> or it can not be considered equilvelent to if(x){ w = y; w = z;}, it wou
--- Additional Comments From wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
19:51 ---
Fixed on mainline, gcc-3.4, and gcc-3.3. Testcase added to mainline.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
Bug 18987 depends on bug 13158, which changed state.
Bug 13158 Summary: [ia64] bad unwind info as a result of sibcall
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13158
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
19:52 ---
Fixed on mainline, gcc-3.4 branch, and gcc-3.3 branch. Testcase added to
mainline.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
$ cat open+write.f90
program main
character(len=10) a
call system("rm -f asdf.dat; touch asdf.dat; chmod u-w asdf.dat")
open(file="asdf.dat",unit=10,err=999,action="read")
write(10,*,err=20) "Hello, world"
print *,"write to read-only file succeeded"
call abort
20 continue
! rewind(10)
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|fortran |libfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19451
--- Additional Comments From yanliu at ca dot ibm dot com 2005-01-14 20:10
---
You are right, I was using linux and darwin two different compilers. In thse
two situations, the gcc results are both right.
I have another question for you for the same testcase: if initializing the
bitfi
--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14 20:20
---
BTW, if I replace all
subl$-2147483648, %eax
instructions in real.s by:
xorl$-2147483648, %eax
(note that all such instructions are followed either by shrl, or addl, so
any differences in
ix
gcc version 4.0.0 20050114 (experimental)
$ time /scribble/phil/gcc/install/bin/g++ -O -c
list1.cpp
real0m1.758s
user0m1.677s
sys 0m0.035s
$ time gcc-3.4 -O -c list1.cpp
real0m0.101s
user0m0.069s
sys 0m0.009s
cheers, Phil
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19445
1 - 100 of 181 matches
Mail list logo
