--- Additional Comments From irar at il dot ibm dot com 2005-07-26 07:07
---
The data dependence issue was solved by this patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
patches/2005-07/msg01195.html (committed). However, this loop is still not
vectorizable because of noncontinuous access.
--
http
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
07:35 ---
Subject: Bug 22486
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-07-26 07:34:58
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog fold-const.c
gcc/t
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
07:37 ---
In principle this is fixed. Of course we either need a tree-combiner or
forwprop on steroids to catch all cases. Which would make this bug a duplicate.
Closed Fixed.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
08:26 ---
These are the only bugs I could find in expand_complex_addition:
Index: tree-complex.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/tree-complex.c,v
ret
In http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-07/msg01369.html and test results
of mine not yet posted, I see that if one tries to run the treelang test suite
multiple times, e.g., with different compile options such as for multilibbed
builds, the first run is done but not more...
To me, this happ
Okul Oncesi Couk ve Anne Baba Egitimi
Okul Oncesi Cocuklar Icın Hazırlanmis Odullu CD'leri Gordunuzmu?
http://www.cocukdunyasi.net
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26 09:44
---
I'm betting it's the same bug that is visible with 1.cc (again, 1.cc indeed
FAILs, does not PASS) on mmix-knuth-mmixware (cutnpaste from log):
/home/hp/combined/mmix-regobj/mmix-knuth-mmixware/libstdc++-v3/includ
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-07-26
09:46 ---
What is the value of 'type' when error() is called?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19932
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
09:46 ---
Subject: Bug 23053
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-07-26 09:46:23
Modified files:
libstdc++-v3 : Change
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-07-26 09:48
---
Fixed for 4.0.2.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
PASSes with "Mon Jul 18 16:34:10 UTC 2005".
FAILs with "Mon Jul 25 22:33:14 UTC 2005".
gcc.log says:
Executing on host: /home/hp/combined/mmix-regobj/gcc/xgcc
-B/home/hp/combined/mmix-regobj/gcc/ /hom\
e/hp/combined/combined/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ifc-20040816-2.c -c -O2
-ftree-vectorize
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26 09:58
---
Created an attachment (id=9362)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9362&action=view)
preprocessed testcase
/home/hp/combined/mmix-regobj/gcc/cc1 -fpreprocessed ifc-20040816-2.i -quiet
-dumpbase
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-07-26 10:06 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for casts and scev
After inlining, we end up with a loop containing the following code:
b.0_3 = (signed char) b_8;
D.1621_4 = (int) b.0_3;
a_5
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
10:18 ---
Let's try this patch then.
Index: passes.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/passes.c,v
retrieving revision 2.105
diff -u -3 -p -r2.105 pass
--- Additional Comments From richard dot guenther at gmail dot com
2005-07-26 10:38 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for casts and scev
You should also add the (two) testcases from the PR.
Richard.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22236
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
10:39 ---
I can reproduce this with the C test case from comment #24 on x86_64-linux
with -march=nocona. With -march=k8 that test case does _not_ abort.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
10:43 ---
Well I'll be damned!
$ ./xgcc -B. t.c -O2 -march=nocona
$ ./a.out
Aborted
$ ./xgcc -B. t.c -O2 -march=nocona -da -fdump-tree-all
$ ./a.out
$
$ ./xgcc -B. t.c -O2 -march=nocona -S -da
$ mv t.s t.s.wi
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
11:18 ---
My version of t.c:
===
void abort ();
typedef struct _Node
{
struct _Node *next, *prev;
} Node;
void __attribute__ ((noinline)) append (Node * q, Node * p)
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
11:43 ---
Smaller test case:
==
void abort ();
typedef struct _Node
{
struct _Node *next, *prev;
} Node;
inline void
swap (Node ** a, Node ** b)
{
--
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P1
Summary|[4.0/4.1 Regression]|[4.0/4.1 Regression] wrong
|std::swap() f
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
12:01 ---
What should we do with this bug? If m32r is no longer affected, then
what is? Maybe suspend this one or close it as WONTFIX?
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
12:03 ---
Rainer, can you look into those failures a bit more closely? Maybe you can
see in the testsuite log how they fail?
--
What|Removed |Added
In g77 you define a typeless BOZ constant that can be assigned to any other
type, using the formats ''X, ''Z etc. This allows PARAMETERs to be
defined like:
PROGRAM TLBOZ
DOUBLE PRECISION inf, nan
PARAMETER ( inf = '7FF0'Z )
PARAMETER ( nan = 'FFF80
Compiling
int foo (void)
{
return;
}
with -ansi -pedantic gives two warnings; with GCC 3.3 it only gave one. As a
QOI issue 3.3's behaviour is superior - warning about control reaching the end
of the function is a bit odd.
--
Summary: Redundant / bogus warning
Product
--- Additional Comments From neil at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26 12:13
---
I meant to add -Wall to the warning list.
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Redundant /
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23070
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
12:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=9363)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9363&action=view)
Smaller testcase
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
12:58 ---
Confirmed, I cannot reduce the testcase any further. Removing any little
unneeded code makes the bug
go away.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
The follwing program:
#include
#define LOG
FILE *log_file;
int f2 (int x)
{
#ifdef LOG
static long toto = 0;
static const char *fname = __func__;
static void __attribute__ ((destructor)) f (void) {
fprintf (log_file, "%s: toto=%ld\n", fname, toto);
}
toto += x;
#endif
return 42
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:03 ---
This isn't just related, this is a dup of PR 18026.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 18026 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:03 ---
*** Bug 23074 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
Hello,
I do apologize if my ignorance is the problem here, but I am having a strange
problem with the version of gcc included in suse 9.3: gcc version 3.3.5
20050117 (prerelease) (SUSE Linux). The same problem was observed with gcc
3.3.1. I have not tried later versions, but I can't find the pr
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:05 ---
Just remove the static and it will work.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:06 ---
I should note static functions inside a function is invalid code.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23076
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:10 ---
I have (with whatever load of patches applied...)
;; Function ListSwap (ListSwap)
ListSwap (x, y)
{
struct Node * tmp;
struct _Node * D.1292;
:
tmp = x->next;
if (tmp != 0B) goto ; else goto ;
:;
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:11 ---
Confirmed, one warning comes from the front-end and the other bogus warning
comes from the
middle-end. I have not looked to see if we set TREE_NO_WARNING on the return
and if the middle-end
looks at tha
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
Keywords|
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:14 ---
We have one now :)
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RE
--
Bug 19104 depends on bug 21445, which changed state.
Bug 21445 Summary: [meta-bug] we need a reassociate pass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21445
What|Old Value |New Value
--
Bug 15878 depends on bug 21445, which changed state.
Bug 21445 Summary: [meta-bug] we need a reassociate pass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21445
What|Old Value |New Value
--
Bug 19105 depends on bug 21445, which changed state.
Bug 21445 Summary: [meta-bug] we need a reassociate pass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21445
What|Old Value |New Value
--
Bug 16157 depends on bug 21445, which changed state.
Bug 21445 Summary: [meta-bug] we need a reassociate pass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21445
What|Old Value |New Value
--
Bug 17955 depends on bug 21445, which changed state.
Bug 21445 Summary: [meta-bug] we need a reassociate pass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21445
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:14 ---
Confirmed based on what Apple's GCC does and what Geoff said.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:16 ---
This has moved very much off my radar since it was fixed in 4.1.0 and 4.0.0
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-07-26 13:17
---
Yes, but why P1 -> P2?!?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22591
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:18 ---
Richard guenther is working on aliasing for arrays, i'll leave this one for him
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:21 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-07/msg01608.html does not help
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:21 ---
I still don't believe this is a bug.
As the alignment of whole struct is still 8 as double is first, even if the
alignment of that double is 4.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From p dot w dot draper at durham dot ac dot uk
2005-07-26 13:28 ---
Andrew, I've said this is related to bug 18026, rather than a duplicate, as the
actual format used for these typeless BOZ constants is none standard and not
the same as in bug 18026.
As in gfort
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:29 ---
For a reduced array with only 4 elements (I know - this should be a --param) we
now get in .vars (with the array aliasing patch):
f (n)
{
int n.39;
unsigned int ivtmp.33;
int lsm_tmp.32;
int lsm_tmp
--- Additional Comments From dorit at il dot ibm dot com 2005-07-26 13:59
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for casts and
scev
Hi Sebastian,
The modifications you suggest will make the tests uninteresting - they were
introduced with unknown loop-bound/offset on purpose
--- Additional Comments From dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26 14:08
---
The ABI specifies the alignment of the entire record is doubleword if the
first field is an FP double, regardless of the alignment of the type itself.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
14:27 ---
Subject: Bug 22606
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-07-26 14:27:33
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
libobjc: C
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
14:28 ---
Fixed, added your testcase also.
Also I noticed that your testcase fails with the next runtime, oh well. Not my
bug.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
14:32 ---
I think I see the same thing at -O2 on a couple of tests on ppc-darwin.
Is the execution a missing symbol?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21992
Source code:
#include
int main (int argc, char * argv[])
{
unsigned int t[2] = {1, 1};
*((double *)t) = 0.0;
printf("%d\n", t[1]);
}
This code prints "1" insted of "0" when with: gcc foo.c -o foo -O2
Output of gcc -v foo.c -o foo2 -O2:
Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
14:36 ---
No this is not bad alias analysis, You are invoking undefined code by
violating aliasing rules in C/C++.
This is a dup of bug 21920.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21920 ***
--
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
14:37 ---
*** Bug 23077 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
14:46 ---
(In reply to comment #31)
> Smaller test case:
>
This works for me. The original test case does abort, though.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22591
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-07-26 15:15 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for casts and scev
Dorit Naishlos wrote:
>
> The modifications you suggest will make the tests uninteresting - they were
> introduced with unknown loop-
--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
15:21 ---
Confirmed.
The following testcase crashes on i686-pc-linux-gnu when compiled with
"-O -ftree-vectorize -msse2":
==
void foo(int* __restrict__ p, int* __
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
15:26 ---
Here is the backtrace:
#0 0x00424b88 in fwrite () from /lib/tls/libc.so.6
#1 0x081381fd in vect_analyze_data_refs_alignment (loop_vinfo=0xa3bebb0) at
/home/peshtigo/
pinskia/src/gnu/gcc/src/gcc/tree-vect-
g++ -O3 -Iboxes -Ierrors -Ievaluate -Igenerator -Iparser -Ipropagate -Isignals
-Itlib -Idraw-c -o boxes/boxtype.o boxes/boxtype.cpp
boxes/boxtype.cpp: In function 'void getBoxType(CTree*, int*, int*)':
boxes/boxtype.cpp:74: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug re
--- Additional Comments From wouter at grep dot be 2005-07-26 15:29 ---
Created an attachment (id=9364)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9364&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23078
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
15:31 ---
This fails on PPC-darwin also.
--
What|Removed |Added
GCC target triplet|mmix-knuth-mmixware
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
15:34 ---
I wonder why this does not fail on i686-pc-linux-gnu.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21992
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23078
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
15:39 ---
=== objc Summary ===
# of expected passes1309
# of unexpected failures328
# of unresolved testcases 3
# of unsupported tests 1
Those are what I get on ppc
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
15:52 ---
I think libobjc is also being miscompiled which is why some fails at -O0.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21992
When I compile the small program with the actual snapshot of
gcc41 (20050723) I get an ICE.
Michael Cieslinski
unsigned int foo ()
{
unsigned int y[256];
unsigned int* x;
for (x = y + 1; x < y + 256; ++x) *x += x[-1];
return y[0];
}
gcc41h -O -ftree-vectorize -c sort.i -o sort
--- Additional Comments From micis at gmx dot de 2005-07-26 16:14 ---
last working snapshot is gcc-4.1-20050508
first failing snapshot is gcc-4.1-20050528
(between these 2 I didn't compile other snapshots)
gcc401 is working correctly
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
16:19 ---
Testing patch. The shortcut we were taking in may_alias_p is invalid even with
strict aliasing.
--- tree-ssa-alias.c25 Jul 2005 12:04:50 - 2.107
+++ tree-ssa-alias.c26 Jul 2005 16:16:34
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
16:19 ---
Confirmed, also fails with 20050714.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From sabre at nondot dot org 2005-07-26 16:25
---
Okay, in that case, how does one change the alignment of the structure? The
only way I'm aware of to
do this is with attribute packed, but that will also modify the inter-field
padding of the structure. For
e
cc -c -O4 -DSYSINC -I/usr/include/lam -Df77IsF2C -DBlacsDebugLvl=0
-DUseMpi2 BI_BeComb.c
BI_BeComb.c: In function 'BI_BeComb':
BI_BeComb.c:102: internal compiler error: Segmentatie fout
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug
--- Additional Comments From wouter at grep dot be 2005-07-26 16:29 ---
Created an attachment (id=9365)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9365&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23080
It would be nice to complete the implementation in time for 4.1: a few members
are more or less trivial, like front(), back() and data()...
--
Summary: Finish the implementation of tr1::array
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-07-26
16:39 ---
The testcase in PR18602 does not cause a segfault anymore for GCC 3.4 CVS. Is
this bug fixed then? Or do we need a new testcase?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18462
When the attached is compiled as follows, it generates an ICE:
pluto> gcc -c -O1 -ftree-vectorize a.c
a.c: In function a:
a.c:4: internal compiler error: tree check: expected ssa_name, have var_decl in
verify_ssa, at tree-ssa.c:746
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if app
--- Additional Comments From p dot van-hoof at qub dot ac dot uk
2005-07-26 16:46 ---
Created an attachment (id=9366)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9366&action=view)
code that causes the ICE
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23082
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Summary|internal compiler error:|[4.1 Regression] internal
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2005-07-26 16:55 ---
The whole point of attribute ((packed)) is to change the ABI. If it can't
change the ABI, it is meaningless. So I don't find the argument based on the
ABI to be particularly convincing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
--- Additional Comments From dje at watson dot ibm dot com 2005-07-26
16:58 ---
Subject: Re: Darwin alignment ignores "attribute packed" for first 'double'
element of a struct
If Chris and Apple want to change the behavior for Darwin, be my
guest.
David
--
http://gcc.g
--- Additional Comments From dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26 17:02
---
reopen
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|dje at watson dot ibm dot |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
|com |dot org
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
17:03 ---
Confirmed, this worked on the 18th.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From uttamp at us dot ibm dot com 2005-07-26 17:27
---
Steven's patch has fixed the galgel failure. I've verified it on Powerpc.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22504
--- Additional Comments From sabre at nondot dot org 2005-07-26 17:35
---
Potential patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-07/msg01732.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23067
The attached code causes the compiler to crash when compiled as follows:
pluto> gcc -c -O1 -ftree-vectorize m.c
m.c: In function C:
m.c:7: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for i
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
17:37 ---
Patch does not get the following correct:
struct f
{
long long i;
int j;
};
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23067
--- Additional Comments From p dot van-hoof at qub dot ac dot uk
2005-07-26 17:37 ---
Created an attachment (id=9367)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9367&action=view)
code fragment that causes the crash
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23083
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
17:39 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 23073 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
17:39 ---
*** Bug 23083 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
17:42 ---
Also the patch needs a testcase or two.
For an example:
/* { dg-do compile { powerpc*-darwin* } } */
struct f
{
long long ll;
int i;
};
int f[sizeof(struct f)!=16?-1:1];
---
/* { dg-do compile { po
--- Additional Comments From sabre at nondot dot org 2005-07-26 17:46
---
Corrected patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-07/msg01736.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23067
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||pluto at agmk dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22313
1 - 100 of 189 matches
Mail list logo
