[Bug fortran/23368] internal compiler error with NAG routines

-- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23368

[Bug fortran/17379] Generic functions not resolved

--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 21:47 --- This is fixed on mainline and on 4.0. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug target/23360] [4.1 regression] -ffast-math startup broken on i686 (maybe Athlon-xp)

--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2005-08-12 21:51 --- For some reason, ldmxcsr doesn't work on your machine. The assembly code looks correct to me. I don't have any problems on IA32. I can only assume that you have a hardware or OS related issue. Can you verify if ldmxcsr

[Bug c++/23345] Assembler message: symbol is already defined

--- Additional Comments From kreckel at ginac dot de 2005-08-12 21:57 --- (In reply to comment #2) > This is not a gcc bug, you cannot declare a lablel in an inline-asm that is going to be exposed. Okay then, but would adding __attribute__((visibility("hidden"))) to the game prevent the

[Bug c++/23345] Assembler message: symbol is already defined

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 22:00 --- (In reply to comment #5) > Okay then, but would adding __attribute__((visibility("hidden"))) to the game > prevent the function from being cloned? It doesn't seem to help! I don't see > any reason why the

[Bug libgcj/23367] _Jv_FindMethodInCache is not thread-safe

-- What|Removed |Added Severity|critical|normal http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23367

[Bug target/23355] size optimizer did not eliminateing useless Push and pop instructions at ARM/Thumb machine

--- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 22:04 --- Please supply a pre-processed testcase. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug tree-optimization/23350] [4.1 Regression] ICE in vect_update_ivs_after_vectorizer, at tree-vect-transform.c:2418

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 22:10 --- Confirmed, reduced testcase (about 50 lines): typedef struct { long fds_bits[1024 / (8 * 4)]; } fd_set; struct ACE_Hash { unsigned long operator () (int t) const; }; struct ACE_Handle_Set {void s

[Bug libfortran/23356] FLT_EVAL_METHOD not defined on openbsd3.4

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 22:13 --- This is weird as built just fine on openbsd3.1. -- What|Removed |Added Keywords|

[Bug fortran/23368] internal compiler error with NAG routines

--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 22:16 --- How old is your version of gfortran? I can compile your example with troutmask:sgk[220] gfc41 --version GNU Fortran 95 (GCC 4.1.0 20050811 (experimental)) troutmask:sgk[221] gfc --version GNU Fortran 95 (G

[Bug target/23360] [4.1 regression] -ffast-math startup broken on i686 (maybe Athlon-xp)

--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 22:29 --- This also segfaults (see below). I am also seeing the gfortran testsuite failure prompted by this problem on http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-08/msg00694.html and http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testre

[Bug driver/23351] *cpp specs file options are sometimes ignored in Sun builds

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 22:33 --- You can set env variables per user. See -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23351

[Bug fortran/23349] -m64 gives runtime errors in combined Fortran/C programs

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 22:34 --- This is not a bug. You are calling a var-args function basicially what is considered a non var-args prototype in C. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/23359] [4.1 regression] Many Solaris 10/x86 testsuite failures with native as: use of .word

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 22:35 --- Maybe be it is time to remove support for the native assembler. -- What|Removed |Added GCC

[Bug libfortran/23363] gfortran 30 x slower that g77 on random I/O

-- What|Removed |Added GCC host triplet|powerpc-apple-darwin7.9.0 | GCC target triplet||powerpc-apple-darwin7.9.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b

[Bug libfortran/23364] missing format reversion for internal write

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 22:36 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW E

[Bug target/23360] [4.1 regression] -ffast-math startup broken on i686 (maybe Athlon-xp)

-- What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |critical http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23360

[Bug target/23360] [4.1 regression] -ffast-math startup broken on i686 (maybe Athlon-xp)

--- Additional Comments From wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 23:25 --- Checking the Intel IA-32 ASDM, it says that the DAZ bit was introduced in Pentium 4 and Xeon as an SSE2 extension, and that not even all Pentium 4 processors support it. See Volume 1 Section 10.2.2.4 "Denorm

Re: [Bug tree-optimization/23361] Can't eliminate empty loops with power of two step and variable bounds

On Fri, 2005-08-12 at 19:10 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > --- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 > 19:10 --- Personally, i think -funsafe-loop-optimizations should be on by default in -O3, with a warning for when we rely on it. It's *incr

[Bug tree-optimization/23361] Can't eliminate empty loops with power of two step and variable bounds

--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 23:43 --- Subject: Re: Can't eliminate empty loops with power of two step and variable bounds On Fri, 2005-08-12 at 19:10 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > --- Additional Comments From pinsk

[Bug c++/23205] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [C++/unit-at-a-time] stabs debug info omitted for global const variables

--- Additional Comments From wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-13 00:33 --- The problem here is the DECL_RTL_SET_P tests in dbxout_global_decl and dbxout_symbol. Constants have a NULL DECL_RTL, and hence fail this test. This is OK, because we don't use the DECL_RTL when emitting de

[Bug target/23360] [4.1 regression] -ffast-math startup broken on i686 (maybe Athlon-xp)

--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2005-08-13 00:34 --- A patch is posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-08/msg00787.html -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug rtl-optimization/23369] New: [4.0.x regression] Generates wrong code for funcptr comparison

Compiling the attached testcase with gcc -O2 -S signals.c, the generated asm contains: .loc 1 51 0 bl __canonicalize_funcptr_for_compare,%r2 ldo -2(%r7),%r26 ldi -4,%r26 bl __canonicalize_funcptr_for_compare,%r2 copy %r28,%r4 .loc 1 52 0

[Bug rtl-optimization/23369] [4.0.x regression] Generates wrong code for funcptr comparison

--- Additional Comments From tausq at debian dot org 2005-08-13 02:51 --- Created an attachment (id=9487) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9487&action=view) Testcase Compile with gcc -O2 -S -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23369

[Bug rtl-optimization/23369] [4.0.x regression] Generates wrong code for funcptr comparison

-- What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Known to fail||4.0.1 Known to work|

[Bug rtl-optimization/23369] [4.0.x regression] Generates wrong code for funcptr comparison

--- Additional Comments From tausq at debian dot org 2005-08-13 03:08 --- The line of code in question is: 51 if (old == SIG_IGN || old == SIG_DFL || old == SIG_ERR) after preprocessing, this becomes if (old == ((__sighandler_t) 1) || old == ((__sighandler_t)

[Bug rtl-optimization/23369] [4.0.x regression] Generates wrong code for funcptr comparison

-- What|Removed |Added CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh

[Bug rtl-optimization/23369] [4.0.x regression] Generates wrong code for funcptr comparison

--- Additional Comments From danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-13 03:30 --- Actually, I believe that this is a tree optimization bug. The comparison of old - 2 against -4 appears in the initial rtl generation. Could you also provide the preprocessed source? -- http://gcc.gnu.o

[Bug rtl-optimization/23369] [4.0.x regression] Generates wrong code for funcptr comparison

--- Additional Comments From tausq at debian dot org 2005-08-13 03:46 --- Created an attachment (id=9488) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9488&action=view) Preprocessed source -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23369

[Bug c++/23370] New: No error at -O1 for static const class member passed by reference

The invalid code below gives an "undefined reference" linker error on GCC 4.0.1 at -O0, but not at - O1; GCC 3.3.4 gives an error at both optimizations. This may not be a bug, if the version 4 optimizer is being cleverer than the version 3 optimizer; but the failure to reject the invalid code

[Bug c++/23370] No error at -O1 for static const class member passed by reference

--- Additional Comments From flash at pobox dot com 2005-08-13 04:13 --- Created an attachment (id=9489) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9489&action=view) Llamagrahpics_static_constant_by_ref.cpp -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23370

[Bug c++/23370] No error at -O1 for static const class member passed by reference

--- Additional Comments From flash at pobox dot com 2005-08-13 04:18 --- Here's the discussion in our developer forum about the validity of this code; the rejection was originally reported as a bug against our compiler. At 4:34 PM -0500 2/16/04, Stuart A. Malone wrote: >But when I com

Re: [Bug c/23365] Declaration within case statement produces syntax error

jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:- > > --- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 > 20:54 --- > Labels can only be applied to statements, not declarations; see the C99 > standard. That would be a much better error message.

[Bug c/23365] Declaration within case statement produces syntax error

--- Additional Comments From neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk 2005-08-13 05:30 --- Subject: Re: Declaration within case statement produces syntax error jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:- > > --- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12 > 20:54 --- >

[Bug fortran/23371] New: internal compiler error when missing a module procedure

The following code is not standard Fortran, but generates an internal compiler error. "gfortran-4.0 -c a.F90". I stumbled across it while trying to reduce the code to reproduce another bug. Version is Debian 4.0.1-2. Regards, Daniel. module SYSTEM_MODULE implicit none interface index_

[Bug c++/23370] No error at -O1 for static const class member passed by reference

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-13 06:42 --- Since the static const can be "inlined" at higher level of optimizations which is allowed by the C++ standard, this is not a bug. -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug middle-end/23369] [4.0.x regression] Generates wrong code for funcptr comparison

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-13 06:44 --- This is a middle-end bug rather than a rtl optimization issue. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/23369] [4.0.x regression] Generates wrong code for funcptr comparison

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-13 06:47 --- I am starting to think canonicalize_funcptr_for_compare is just wrong for any target and shoud be fixed the ABI level and not in GCC. -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug fortran/23371] internal compiler error when missing a module procedure

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-13 06:50 --- Confirmed, here is the backtrace: #0 error_string (p=0x0) at /home/peshtigo/pinskia/src/gnu/gcc/src/gcc/fortran/error.c:112 #1 0x0805c8ba in error_print (type=0x851b8ed "Error:", format0=Variable "format

<    1   2