--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
07:06 ---
Subject: Bug 21315
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-19 07:05:46
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
fixincludes: C
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
07:06 ---
Subject: Bug 19933
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-19 07:05:46
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
fixincludes: C
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
07:11 ---
Subject: Bug 19933
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-19 07:11:26
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : Change
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
07:11 ---
Subject: Bug 21315
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-19 07:11:26
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : Change
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
07:14 ---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-05/msg01119.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
07:16 ---
Fixed in 4.0.1 and later. Backporting to 3.4.x.
--
What|Removed |Added
Known to fai
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
07:37 ---
Subject: Bug 21495
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-19 07:37:45
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog
gcc/testsuite : C
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
07:48 ---
Subject: Bug 21495
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-19 07:47:43
Modified files:
gcc/cp : Change
FileDialog does not allow saving files.
A FileDialog created with FileDialog.SAVE mode still comes up
in FileDialog.LOAD ("open file") mode. The wrong title is no
real problem, but without a textfield there is no way to select
a new (non existing) filename...
testcase and screenshot attached.
gi
--- Additional Comments From hendrich at informatik dot uni-hamburg dot de
2005-05-19 08:14 ---
Created an attachment (id=8927)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8927&action=view)
screenshot showing the SAVE-mode filedialog
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c
--- Additional Comments From hendrich at informatik dot uni-hamburg dot de
2005-05-19 08:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=8928)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8928&action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21660
--- Additional Comments From pluto at agmk dot net 2005-05-19 09:04 ---
(In reply to comment #37)
> Reducing a testcase isn't trivial, but I'll try.
try to pass to the ./configure the kde_cv_val_gcc_visibility_bug=yes switch.
rebuild and test artsd. it may help.
currently i h
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
09:36 ---
Subject: Bug 21657
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-19 09:36:02
Modified files:
gcc: Change
In:
template
voidfoo(U u) {}
template
struct bar {
bar(U u) {}
};
int main() {
foo(true);
bar(true);
}
you get:
foo.cc: In function `int main()':
foo.cc:11: error: wrong number of template arguments (1, should be 2)
foo.cc:5: error: provided for `template struct
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
09:42 ---
Subject: Bug 21657
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-19 09:42:27
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/ia64: i
--
Bug 21412 depends on bug 21657, which changed state.
Bug 21657 Summary: [4.0 regression] TLS reference miscompiled
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21657
What|Old Value |New Value
---
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 09:44
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From bernie at develer dot com 2005-05-19 09:45
---
(In reply to comment #38)
> > My backtrace looks suspiciously similar to the backtrace reported in
> > comment #14.
>
> Yep, yours is probably the same bug as that in comment #14, which I don't
> think is relat
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
09:50 ---
Subject: Bug 21390
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-19 09:50:00
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/alpha:
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
09:54 ---
Subject: Bug 21390
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-19 09:53:34
Modified files:
gcc: Change
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 09:56
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From bernie at develer dot com 2005-05-19 10:00
---
(In reply to comment #49)
> > Mark, is
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00180.html
> >
> > OK for mainline as well as 4.0?
>
> It's OK for mainline. It's not OK for 4.0 unless it's a regr
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-05-19
10:10 ---
HP: people are expected to provide preprocessed source code even for bootstrap
failures, let alone unified source tree builds for fancy platforms. This very
bug shows how providing a preprocessed source mad
--- Additional Comments From bernie at develer dot com 2005-05-19 10:42
---
(In reply to comment #39)
> (In reply to comment #37)
>
> > Reducing a testcase isn't trivial, but I'll try.
>
> try to pass to the ./configure the kde_cv_val_gcc_visibility_bug=yes switch.
> rebuild an
--- Additional Comments From bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
11:16 ---
Fixed by patch.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOL
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
11:20 ---
Subject: Bug 17845
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-19 11:16:31
Modified files:
gcc/java : parse.y ChangeLog
Log message:
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |amodra at bigpond dot net
|dot org |dot au
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
11:34 ---
Tried again to build gcc on powerpc-apple-darwin5.5 (MacOS 10.1), with the
workaround for the bug reported in comment #0.
Fails with error message:
../../gcc/gcc/config/rs6000/host-darwin.c:25: sys/uconte
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
11:43 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
#!/bin/sh
rm -rf test
mkdir test
cat > test/Configuration.java < test/Test.java < test/fromsrc
jcf-dump -c test/Test.class.fromclass > test/fromclass
diff -u test/from{src,class}
In libjava build unless --enable-libgcj-multifile is used this has the bad
side effect that libgcj-4*.jar depends on th
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
12:02 ---
This is how C++ works, in the first case since it is a function template, the
second template argument
can be determined by the function argument.
In the second example, the class template's template argu
void
foo (int x, void *y, void *z)
{
typedef struct { char val[x]; } T;
T bar (void *w)
{
__builtin_return (w);
}
*(T *)y = bar (z);
}
ICEs on at least {i386,x86_64,ppc,ppc64}-linux at any optimization level.
Works with 3.4.3 as well as HEAD.
--
Summary: [4.0 Regression]
For
struct {} a[4]; int main() { return &a[2] - &a[1]; }
the C frontend emits
return 0 /[ex] 0;
which will, at -O0 fault at runtime, at -O not due to RTL CSE.
Is this even well-defined? Should the C-frontend rather emit
return 0;
? Of course this contradicts the C standard, but that doe
--- Additional Comments From hp at bitrange dot com 2005-05-19 14:07
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 regression] ADDR_EXPR invariancy
not recomputed
On Thu, 19 May 2005, giovannibajo at libero dot it wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-05-19
> 10:10 --
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
14:18 ---
Actually this is not a regression, see PR 8081. There is a patch included
there but I don't know the
status about it though. I think it was waiting on copyright assignment but I
could be wrong.
*** Thi
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
14:18 ---
*** Bug 21663 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
The following does not compile with g++ 3.4.2 on Solaris and 3.2.3 on Linux, but
probably should, and does with other compilers.
class PropertyId;
class ArraySegment;
class StringSegment;
class EnumStateSet;
class PropertyCatalog;
class PropertyCatalog;
class Time;
class PropertyId {
};
extern c
--- Additional Comments From johill at lanl dot gov 2005-05-19 14:30
---
Here is a truncated version of the compiler output
~/tmp$ g++ tmp11.cpp >& tmp.txt
~/tmp$ vi tmp.txt
tmp11.cpp: In static member function `static void
MyContainer::traverseTempl(C*, PropertyManipulator&) [with
--- Additional Comments From johill at lanl dot gov 2005-05-19 14:31
---
Bugzilla appears to have inserted a newline in the following comment. That will
need to be fixed before seeing the "no matching function for call to" diagnostic
// - begin property implementation
--
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
14:48 ---
This code is invalid, and here is why:
manipulator.reveal ( PROPERTY < int > ( propertyX, pContainer, &
MyContainer::x ) );
so you are passing a rvalue to a non constant reference.
This does not compi
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
14:48 ---
A 20050513 dump shows:
...
/mnt/scratch/nightly/2005-05-13/srcw/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-none.c:171:
note: not vectorized: complicated access pattern.
/mnt/scratch/nightly/2005-05-13/srcw/gcc/testsuite
--- Additional Comments From hchapman-gcc-bugs at 3gfp dot com 2005-05-19
15:09 ---
gcc has this problem as well. Although, it will let you have an expression using
only constants like
case 'A' + ('B'<<8):
but not
case *((uint16_t *)"AB"):
A gcc example:
#include
int main()
{
un
--- Additional Comments From falk at debian dot org 2005-05-19 15:27
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> gcc has this problem as well. Although, it will let you have an expression
> using
> only constants like
>
> case 'A' + ('B'<<8):
>
> but not
>
> case *((uint16_t *)"AB"):
Since C req
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
15:33 ---
A break-up of this test is currently discussed on gcc-patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-05/msg01963.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From johill at lanl dot gov 2005-05-19 16:07
---
Sorry about the invalid entry.
I understand now, and after receiving enlightenment I cant even complain about
the message other than perhaps that there could be a leading message for bozos
that says a match was f
--- Additional Comments From johill at lanl dot gov 2005-05-19 16:10
---
Subject: RE: template template parameter function overload not recognized
Sorry about the invalid entry.
I understand now, and after receiving enlightenment I can't even
complain about the message other than per
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 16:25
---
See the second constraint in 11.4 (f95 draft)
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFI
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 16:30
---
No gfortran devleoper has hpux. Can you find some details about the error?
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 16:43
---
Can you be a little more specific on what you're trying to do and why you think
that what gfortran does is wrong?
I don't think the standard requires sequential access files to be in any
reliable format. I fi
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression]|[3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression]
|Acess failure in accessing |[DR515] Access failure in
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 16:44
---
Um, I meant to set this to waiting ...
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
16:50 ---
Confirmed, this also fails on powerpc-darwin.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCO
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 16:51
---
Confirmed. The problem is that the default LOGICAL ex gets promoted to
LOGICAL*8, but we pass a (int4_t *)&ex to the library, which can't work.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 16:51
---
Confirmed. The problem is that the default LOGICAL ex gets promoted to
LOGICAL*8, but we pass (int4_t *)&ex to the library, which can't work.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Keywords||accepts-
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Keywords||accepts-
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Keywords||accepts-
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 17:06
---
*** Bug 20887 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20886
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 17:06
---
Correct me if I missed something, but this looks exactly like the testcase in
PR20886.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 20886 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
17:07 ---
Patch using new approach for 4.1:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-05/msg01992.html
(Note this is part 4 in a series, earlier parts are also required)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi
--- Additional Comments From lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
17:09 ---
Patch using new approach for 4.1:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-05/msg01992.html
(Note this is part 4 in a series, earlier parts are also required)
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 17:09
---
2005-04-06 Tobias Schl"uter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* expr.c (gfc_check_assign): Don't allow NULL as rhs in a
non-pointer assignment.
fixed only part of the cases where NULL is not allowed.
--
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 17:12
---
I was sure this was a duplicate but I couldn't find it.
--
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependin
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 17:14
---
see the last paragraph on page 79 (§6.3.1)
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRME
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Keywords||accepts-
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 17:19
---
to avoid confusion about what's wrong: MAX(A1,A2,A3) is legal with A1, A2 scalar
and A3 array-valued.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Keywords||accepts-
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21312
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20563
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16035
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17332
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21536
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16194
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18273
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16002
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15914
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18738
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14777
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21015
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21383
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11224
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19395
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21421
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15855
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18155
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16276
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20126
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12863
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21659
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11707
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19628
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18368
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21627
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17972
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19063
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18462
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18512
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17796
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20383
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17594
1 - 100 of 287 matches
Mail list logo
