[Bug bootstrap/24562] makebootstrap failed: make[3]: *** No rule to make target `../zlib/libz.a'

--- Comment #8 from luongductruong at gmail dot com 2005-10-28 08:24 --- (In reply to comment #7) > > Following your way, I download zlib at http://www.zlib.net, gunzip and untar > > it at GCC'src directory. > > Don't do that, everything should be included in the GCC archive. > > What

[Bug middle-end/24556] gcc can't inline functions using setjmp

--- Comment #8 from samuel dot thibault at ens-lyon dot org 2005-10-28 08:27 --- Subject: Re: gcc can't inline functions using setjmp pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org, le Fri 28 Oct 2005 01:39:59 -, a écrit : > So this is not a bug. Yes this is a bug. The docs for setjmp are really

[Bug bootstrap/24562] makebootstrap failed: make[3]: *** No rule to make target `../zlib/libz.a'

--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 08:31 --- > I download GCC 4.0.2 from http://gcc.gnu.org. When I untar that source in many > times, It always notices : the directory checksum error. I try another FTP > server, download again but that error doesn't fix.

[Bug fortran/24554] internal compiler error

--- Comment #5 from eedelman at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 11:18 --- (In reply to comment #4) > I don't understand what is the exact solution to my problem. Nobody has said there is a solution at the moment. When Richard Guenther marked this PR as RESOLVED, DUPLICATE, it didn't m

[Bug fortran/17905] allocated arrays not visible with gdb

--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 12:04 --- (In reply to comment #5) > "set lang c" didn't give me that output. What is your configuration, gdb , > gfortran version and so on? Oh, I did a "p array" since whatis is the same as ptype. -- http://gcc.gnu.o

[Bug middle-end/24563] getting internal error

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 12:06 --- Can you attach the preprocessed source, also if you run it again do you hit it still? -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug regression/24565] facerec performance regression

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 12:10 --- (In reply to comment #0) > I could revert the change (only second part) with the new patch unless there > is > a reason (which for the moment I'm not able to understand) for removing the > call to mark_array_ref_add

[Bug middle-end/24556] gcc can't inline functions using setjmp

--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 14:18 --- (In reply to comment #8) > Yes this is a bug. The docs for setjmp are really clear about the fact > automatic variables of the callee might be thrashed, but that doesn't > entail that the callee can't be inlined. Gcc

[Bug middle-end/24362] [4.0/4.1 Regression] internal compiler error: in extract_component, at tree-complex.c:68

--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 14:26 --- Subject: Bug 24362 Author: pinskia Date: Fri Oct 28 14:26:36 2005 New Revision: 105930 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=105930 Log: 2005-10-28 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR

[Bug middle-end/21786] Segmentation fault under FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE-p15

--- Comment #4 from postmaster at t-hosting dot hu 2005-10-28 14:31 --- (In reply to comment #3) > Seems fixed in "3.4.5 20050809". Can you try a newer 3.4.5? > It's okay now, but there's a build error. I susoect the code is not for gcc 3.4.5. I got this: CC='/usr/local/bin/gcc34' mk

[Bug middle-end/24362] [4.0/4.1 Regression] internal compiler error: in extract_component, at tree-complex.c:68

--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 14:32 --- Subject: Bug 24362 Author: pinskia Date: Fri Oct 28 14:26:36 2005 New Revision: 105930 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=105930 Log: 2005-10-28 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR

[Bug middle-end/24362] [4.0/4.1 Regression] internal compiler error: in extract_component, at tree-complex.c:68

--- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 14:40 --- Subject: Bug 24362 Author: pinskia Date: Fri Oct 28 14:39:57 2005 New Revision: 105931 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=105931 Log: 2005-10-28 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR

[Bug middle-end/24362] [4.0/4.1 Regression] internal compiler error: in extract_component, at tree-complex.c:68

--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 14:41 --- Fixed. only 4.1 still have issues with this code but that is PR 24365. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/23426] [4.0/4.1 Regression] Too large array problem gives two error message

--- Comment #16 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 14:50 --- Subject: Bug 23426 Author: pinskia Date: Fri Oct 28 14:50:53 2005 New Revision: 105934 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=105934 Log: 2005-10-28 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR

[Bug c++/23426] [4.0/4.1 Regression] Too large array problem gives two error message

--- Comment #17 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 14:57 --- Subject: Bug 23426 Author: pinskia Date: Fri Oct 28 14:57:30 2005 New Revision: 105936 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=105936 Log: 2005-10-28 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR

[Bug c++/23426] [4.0/4.1 Regression] Too large array problem gives two error message

--- Comment #18 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 14:57 --- Fixed in 4.0.3. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Statu

[Bug c++/24567] New: poor diagnostics

int operator-(foo a, foo b) {} struct bar { int operator-(foo a, foo b) {} }; gets you: ~/ootbc/members/src$ g++ foo.cc foo.cc:1: error: declaration of `operator-' as non-function foo.cc:1: error: `foo' was not declared in this scope foo.cc:1: error: `foo' was not declared in this scope

[Bug c++/24567] poor diagnostics

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 15:17 --- Fixed in 4.0.0 and above at least: t.cc:1: error: declaration of ‘operator-’ as non-function t.cc:1: error: ‘foo’ was not declared in this scope t.cc:1: error: ‘foo’ was not declared in this scope t.cc:4: error: ‘foo

[Bug target/24230] [4.1 Regression] ICE in extract_insn with altivec

--- Comment #13 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 15:58 --- Smaller test case: // Compile with -O2 -maltivec // // Works with GCC 3.3.5 and GCC 4.0.2 // ICEs with GCC 4.1 from today's CVS #include #define REGLIST

[Bug tree-optimization/24568] New: Missed optimization: trivialization of silly code

xgcc (GCC) 4.1.0 20051020 (experimental) can't optimize the following code (from ): int convertToMinutes(long milliDiff) { int negative = 0; int minutesDiff = -1; if (milliDiff < 0) { negative = 1; milliDiff = -milliDiff; // Make positive (is easier) }

[Bug debug/24569] New: [4.1 regression] ICE in add_AT_specification, at dwarf2out.c:4966

Attached file shows a fairly new ICE on x86_64. Compile with -g to get base> c++ geometry_info.ii -g source/geometry_info.cc:354: internal compiler error: in add_AT_specification, at dwarf2out.c:4966 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/b

[Bug debug/24569] [4.1 regression] ICE in add_AT_specification, at dwarf2out.c:4966

--- Comment #1 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-10-28 16:19 --- Created an attachment (id=10076) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10076&action=view) Preprocessed sources -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24569

[Bug target/24230] [4.1 Regression] ICE in extract_insn with altivec

--- Comment #14 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 16:22 --- More background: Starting program: /abuild/stevenb/build/gcc/cc1 -O2 -maltivec t.c -da foo Analyzing compilation unitPerforming intraprocedural optimizations Assembling functions: foo Breakpoint 8, find_reloads (in

[Bug middle-end/24556] gcc can't inline functions using setjmp

--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 16:22 --- I'll re-open this issue as we might indeed follow users advice if he declared the function inline. We only should avoid inlining functions calling setjmp that are not declared inline. I'll be putting this on my l

[Bug middle-end/24556] gcc can't inline functions using setjmp

-- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org

[Bug debug/24569] [4.1 regression] ICE in add_AT_specification, at dwarf2out.c:4966

--- Comment #2 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-10-28 16:26 --- And here's the minimal testcase: - template struct S { static const int u = 2 * dim; static const int p[u]; static int f(); }; template <> inline int S<3>::f () { return 1; } te

[Bug gcov/profile/24487] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] Basic block frequencies inaccurate

--- Comment #2 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 16:32 --- I've benchmarked the change reducing maximum number of iterations predicted for loop with constant bounds to 100 and 10 respectively. 100 makes no actual change to x86-64 SPEC run, 10 seems to result in small degrad

[Bug c++/24569] [4.1 regression] ICE in add_AT_specification, at dwarf2out.c:4966

-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Component|debug |c++ Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0 http://gc

[Bug c++/24569] [4.0/4.1 regression] ICE in add_AT_specification, at dwarf2out.c:4966

-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||4.0.3 Summary|[4.1 regression] ICE in |[4.0/4.1 regres

[Bug c++/24569] [4.0/4.1 regression] ICE in add_AT_specification, at dwarf2out.c:4966

--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 16:43 --- Confirmed, I think this was caused by one of Mark's constant value patches (but I don't know for sure). -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug web/14561] some cvsweb entries missing for branches

--- Comment #2 from kcook at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 16:44 --- I'm closing this bug as the subversion-pushed move to viewcvs has made the problem go away. http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/branches/gcc-3_4-branch/gcc/configure?view=log -- kcook at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

[Bug web/11335] cvsweb shows incomplete logs for some files

--- Comment #2 from kcook at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 16:46 --- I think we can close this as the subversion push move from cvsweb to viewcvs seems to have just made it go away. http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/trunk/gcc/Makefile.in?view=log -- kcook at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

[Bug c/24570] New: unit-at-a-time: debug info not emitted for unused global variables

Both Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: ../configure --disable-nls --with-dwarf2 Thread model: posix gcc version 4.0.2 and Target: avr Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr/local/avr --target=avr --disable-nls --with-dwarf2 --enable-languages=c Thread model: single gcc version 4.0

[Bug middle-end/24570] unit-at-a-time: debug info not emitted for unused global variables

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 16:50 --- I don't think this is a bug as the unused global variables are removed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug c/24571] New: "error: pthread.h: No such file or directory" while building core gcc for cross-compiler

In using "crosstool" to build a cross-compiler for the SH3, I get the following error in building the early bootstrap gcc: /home/rpjday/results/edge/build-tools/build-gcc-core/./gcc/xgcc -B/home/rpjday/results/edge/build-tools/build-gcc-core/./gcc/ -B/home/rpjday/results/edge/build-tools/gcc-core-

[Bug target/24230] [4.1 Regression] ICE in extract_insn with altivec

--- Comment #15 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 16:59 --- The trouble appears to come from this: case V16QImode: case V8HImode: case V4SFmode: case V4SImode: case V4HImode: case V2SFmode: case V2SImode: case V1DImode: if (CONSTANT_P (o

[Bug c/24571] "error: pthread.h: No such file or directory" while building core gcc for cross-compiler

--- Comment #1 from rpjday at mindspring dot com 2005-10-28 17:00 --- Created an attachment (id=10078) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10078&action=view) A script that generates the error described by this bug. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24571

[Bug target/24230] [4.1 Regression] ICE in extract_insn with altivec

--- Comment #16 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 17:01 --- On IRC it was suggested that we just need to get a version of easy_vector_constant which does the right thing in any mode. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24230

[Bug c/24571] "error: pthread.h: No such file or directory" while building core gcc for cross-compiler

--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 17:01 --- This is not a bug as you need to install glibc's headers. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug java/24572] New: [4.0 regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:3983

seen with 4.0 CVS 20051023, compiling antlr 2.7.5. /usr/bin/gcj-4.0 -shared --classpath= -fassume-compiled -I./src -I. -I/usr/share/java/antlr.jar -I. -g -O2 -c -o antlr.so /usr/share/java/antlr.jar antlr/StringUtils.java: In class 'antlr.StringUtils': antlr/StringUtils.java: In method 'antlr.Stri

[Bug middle-end/24570] unit-at-a-time: debug info not emitted for unused global variables

--- Comment #2 from tomas dot vanek at fbl dot cz 2005-10-28 17:14 --- I'm sure it is. I have to declare variables in other segment than .data for my AVR project and if they are declared in one module and __used__ in some others, they cannot be showed in gdb and AVRstudio (however they d

[Bug middle-end/24570] unit-at-a-time: debug info not emitted for unused global variables

--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 17:18 --- never mind, I read unused and I thought unused static variables. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24570

[Bug middle-end/24570] [4.0 Regression] unit-at-a-time: debug info not emitted for unused global variables

--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 17:23 --- Confirmed, only on the 4.0 branch. It works in 3.4.x and also on the mainline. This is on x86_64-linux-gnu too. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/24570] [4.0 Regression] unit-at-a-time: debug info not emitted for unused global variables

--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 17:24 --- That is the mainline and 3.4.x give: .ascii "unused_variable\0" # DW_AT_name .byte 0x1 # DW_AT_decl_file .byte 0x2 # DW_AT_decl_line .long 0x7c# DW_AT_type

[Bug c++/24573] New: g++: Internal error message while building openh323

* the exact version of GCC; g++ (GCC) 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-13) * the system type; Linux 2.6.8 #1 SMP Tue Oct 4 13:15:08 CEST 2005 i686 GNU/Linux Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz hyperthreading * the options given when GCC was configured/built; GCC got from debian packages (testing) * the comp

[Bug gcov/profile/24487] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] Basic block frequencies inaccurate

--- Comment #3 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 17:30 --- The misprediction causes (or at least contributes to) compute_alignments in final.c not aligning the critical loop in longest_match. The recent changes to bb-reorder.c moved the start of the loop from an ideal alignment

[Bug c++/24573] g++: Internal error message while building openh323

-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|blocker |normal Keywords||memory-hog h

[Bug c++/24573] g++: Internal error message while building openh323

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 17:35 --- (In reply to comment #0) > * the preprocessed file (*.i*) that triggers the bug, > Don't know how can to attach it ? You attach it afterwards. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24573

[Bug c++/24573] g++: Internal error message while building openh323

--- Comment #2 from qijcqj8lcwka56m at jetable dot com 2005-10-28 17:40 --- Created an attachment (id=10079) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10079&action=view) gcc temporary .ii file compressed -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24573

[Bug libstdc++/24559] Incorrect definition of wcspbrk in cwchar

--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-10-28 17:45 --- Fixed for 4.0.3. -- pcarlini at suse dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/24573] g++: Internal error message while building openh323

--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 17:51 --- This works for me in 3.3.3. How much memory do you have? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24573

[Bug c++/22153] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] ICE on invalid template specialization

--- Comment #3 from jconner at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 17:59 --- Subject: Bug 22153 Author: jconner Date: Fri Oct 28 17:58:59 2005 New Revision: 105944 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=105944 Log: PR c++/22153 * cp/parser.c (cp_parser_member_declaration): De

[Bug tree-optimization/24568] Missed optimization: trivialization of silly code

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 18:01 --- There is a couple of different bugs in the is code snipit really. Let me file new bugs for each of them. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24568

[Bug tree-optimization/24574] New: a!=0?0:a/10 is not reduced to a/10

Reduced from PR 24568: the followin three fucntions should be equivalent: int f(int i) { if (i == 0) return 0; return i/10; } int f1(int i) { return i?i/10:0; } int f2(int i) { return i/10; } -- Summary: a!=0?0:a/10 is not reduced to a/10 Product: gcc Ver

[Bug tree-optimization/24568] Missed optimization: trivialization of silly code

--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 18:05 --- (In reply to comment #1) > There is a couple of different bugs in the is code snipit really. Let me file > new bugs for each of them. PR 24574 is the first issue which seems like it could happen in really code (tho

[Bug c++/22153] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] ICE on invalid template specialization

--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 18:09 --- Fixed. Thanks Josh. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added St

[Bug tree-optimization/24568] Missed optimization: trivialization of silly code

-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24568

[Bug tree-optimization/24568] Missed optimization: trivialization of silly code

--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 18:11 --- (In reply to comment #2) > PR 24574 is the first issue which seems like it could happen in really code > (though not as much as one thinks). That was for the inner if. I have to see how to reduce the outer ones.

[Bug tree-optimization/24575] New: -(-i / 10) is not foldded to i/10

Another reduced testcase from PR 24568: Note this is only valid for overflow is undefined or for unsafe_math_transformations. nt f(int i) { return -((-i)/10); } int f2(int i) { return i/10; } -- Summary: -(-i / 10) is not foldded to i/10 Product: gcc Version:

[Bug tree-optimization/24568] Missed optimization: trivialization of silly code

--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 18:15 --- Another issue is PR 24575: -(-a/10) is not converted into a/10. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug tree-optimization/24568] Missed optimization: trivialization of silly code

--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 18:18 --- Last but not least is: int f(int i) { if (i < 0) return i/10; return i/10; } int f2(int i) { return i/10; } Which is converted at the rtl level but not at the tree level (I think there is a bug about this al

[Bug tree-optimization/24568] [meta-bugs] Missed optimization: trivialization of silly code

--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 18:19 --- Confirmed, I am changing this into a meta-bug because there are three different issues that this bug depends on now. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Ad

[Bug tree-optimization/24568] [meta-bugs] Missed optimization: trivialization of silly code

--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 18:21 --- Oh, for PR 24575 to do anything useful in this case, we need to a tree based combiner. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug c++/20912] C++ FE emitting assignments to read-only global symbols

--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 18:25 --- Right now after fixing this and PR 23777 should become fixed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug tree-optimization/23286] missed fully redundant expression

--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 18:43 --- Here is another example which comes from PR 24568 (which really comes from thedailywtf): int f(int i) { if (i < 0) return i/10+ i; return i/10 + i; } int f2(int i) { return i/10 + i; } -- pinskia at gcc d

[Bug c++/22153] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] ICE on invalid template specialization

--- Comment #5 from jconner at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 18:47 --- Subject: Bug 22153 Author: jconner Date: Fri Oct 28 18:47:28 2005 New Revision: 105946 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=105946 Log: Merged from mainline change #105944: PR c++/22153 * cp/parse

[Bug c++/22153] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] ICE on invalid template specialization

--- Comment #6 from jconner at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 18:57 --- Subject: Bug 22153 Author: jconner Date: Fri Oct 28 18:57:33 2005 New Revision: 105947 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=105947 Log: Merged from mainline change #105944: PR c++/22153 * cp/parse

[Bug c++/22153] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] ICE on invalid template specialization

--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 18:58 --- Fixed in all open branches. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Kn

[Bug target/24230] [4.1 Regression] ICE in extract_insn with altivec

--- Comment #17 from paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch 2005-10-28 19:16 --- Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE in extract_insn with altivec >On IRC it was suggested that we just need to get a version of >easy_vector_constant which does the right thing in any mode. > Yes, it lo

[Bug fortran/24545] gfortran bug regarding interface block with named END INTERFACE statements

--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 20:06 --- Subject: Bug 24545 Author: kargl Date: Fri Oct 28 20:05:56 2005 New Revision: 105953 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=105953 Log: PR fortran/24545 * interface.c (gfc_match_end_interface): Fix typ

[Bug fortran/24545] gfortran bug regarding interface block with named END INTERFACE statements

--- Comment #4 from sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu 2005-10-28 20:07 --- Subject: Re: gfortran bug regarding interface block with named END INTERFACE statements On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 06:54:10PM -, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > > Index: interface.c > ===

[Bug c++/24511] [4.0/4.1 Regression] explicit instantiation/extern template unsats on symbols defined later

--- Comment #2 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 20:25 --- This is not a bug. All member templates must be defined before an explicit instantiation of the class. The existing standard requires an error on this case, but a future DR will change the standard to match the g++ b

[Bug c++/23229] [4.0/4.1 Regression] g++ gives incorrect error message with void main() and a void function

--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 20:26 --- Subject: Bug 23229 Author: pinskia Date: Fri Oct 28 20:25:55 2005 New Revision: 105960 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=105960 Log: 2005-10-28 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR C+

[Bug c++/24511] [4.0/4.1 Regression] explicit instantiation/extern template unsats on symbols defined later

--- Comment #3 from sebor at roguewave dot com 2005-10-28 20:34 --- Jason, I respectfully disagree. In bug 22263 I explained why I believe gcc is wrong. Do you see a problem with my reasoning there? If not, you must surely agree that this is just another example of the same bug. -- s

[Bug c++/23229] [4.0/4.1 Regression] g++ gives incorrect error message with void main() and a void function

--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 20:52 --- Subject: Bug 23229 Author: pinskia Date: Fri Oct 28 20:52:44 2005 New Revision: 105961 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=105961 Log: 2005-10-28 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR C+

[Bug fortran/24545] gfortran bug regarding interface block with named END INTERFACE statements

--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 20:57 --- Subject: Bug 24545 Author: kargl Date: Fri Oct 28 20:57:17 2005 New Revision: 105962 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=105962 Log: PR fortran/24545 * interface.c (gfc_match_end_interface): Fix typ

[Bug fortran/24545] gfortran bug regarding interface block with named END INTERFACE statements

--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 20:58 --- Fixed. -- kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug fortran/24545] gfortran bug regarding interface block with named END INTERFACE statements

-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.1.0 |4.0.3 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24545

[Bug c++/23229] [4.0/4.1 Regression] g++ gives incorrect error message with void main() and a void function

--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 21:02 --- Fixed in 4.0.3. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|

[Bug c++/24569] [4.0/4.1 regression] ICE in add_AT_specification, at dwarf2out.c:4966

-- jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org

[Bug c++/24511] [4.0/4.1 Regression] explicit instantiation/extern template unsats on symbols defined later

--- Comment #4 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 21:19 --- I do disagree with your reasoning on the other bug. This DR clarifies 14.7.2: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#470 If indeed all other compilers accept this code, then perhaps the DR is

[Bug fortran/24576] New: Fortran I/O to same unit number in main program and in a shared library

A fortran main program and a fortran shared library dlopen'ed from the main program use the same unit number to report results to two different files (explicitely opened in the main program and in the library, see example below) With GCC 3.x when one links with libg2c.a to produce the shared libr

[Bug awt/16741] Toolkit.loadSystemColor unimplemented

--- Comment #2 from sven at physto dot se 2005-10-28 21:27 --- Can we close this? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16741

[Bug gcov/profile/24487] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] Basic block frequencies inaccurate

--- Comment #4 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2005-10-28 21:29 --- Subject: Re: [Bug gcov/profile/24487] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] Basic block frequencies inaccurate > > > --- Comment #3 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 17:30 --- > The misprediction causes (or at least c

[Bug c++/24511] explicit instantiation/extern template unsats on symbols defined later

--- Comment #5 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 21:34 --- Actually, I'm sympathetic to the behavior you would like to see, so I'm reopening the bug. But I think the current behavior is clearly correct under the DR, so I'm changing the severity to enhancement. -- jason at

[Bug libfortran/24576] Fortran I/O to same unit number in main program and in a shared library

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 21:40 --- Why are you not linking against the shared library version of libgfortran? What you are doing seems wrong and unsupported. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug c++/24511] explicit instantiation/extern template unsats on symbols defined later

-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.0.3 |--- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24511

[Bug libfortran/24576] Fortran I/O to same unit number in main program and in a shared library

--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 21:43 --- Anyways I think this is really a dup of bug 22298. Also note the static library really needs to be compiled with -fPIC if you are linking it in a shared library (by default it is not). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugz

[Bug target/24230] [4.1 Regression] ICE in extract_insn with altivec

--- Comment #18 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 21:47 --- Aldy, Can you look into this bug? -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug middle-end/24573] g++: Internal error message while building openh323

--- Comment #4 from qijcqj8lcwka56m at jetable dot com 2005-10-28 22:13 --- (In reply to comment #3) > This works for me in 3.3.3. > How much memory do you have? > I have 248 Mb of memory -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24573

[Bug c++/24577] New: diagnostic informative note labelled "error"

void foo(){ int a = b; } gets you: foo.cc: In function `void foo()': foo.cc:1: error: `b' undeclared (first use this function) foo.cc:1: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in.) Other informative notes are labeled "note:". Because this is labelle

[Bug libfortran/24576] Fortran I/O to same unit number in main program and in a shared library

--- Comment #3 from iwan at irs dot phy dot nrc dot ca 2005-10-28 23:22 --- Subject: Re: Fortran I/O to same unit number in main program and in a shared library >--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 21:40 >Why are you not linking against the shared

[Bug c++/24569] [4.0/4.1 regression] ICE in add_AT_specification, at dwarf2out.c:4966

--- Comment #4 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 23:38 --- Yes, this was introduced by 2005-10-10 Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR c++/24277 * pt.c (instantiate_decl): Call finish_static_data_member_decl for static data members. After this chan

[Bug c/24577] diagnostic informative note labelled "error"

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 23:44 --- This is only a C bug now: t.c:1: error: 'b' undeclared (first use in this function) t.c:1: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once t.c:1: error: for each function it appears in.) Confirmed, the C++

[Bug c/24577] diagnostic informative note labelled "error"

-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |trivial http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24577

[Bug c++/11987] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] Accepts-invalid with inherited nested type

-- jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |minor http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11987

[Bug libfortran/24576] Fortran I/O to same unit number in main program and in a shared library

--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-29 00:14 --- Intel and PGI are wrong according to the standard. Gfortran is doing the right thing. See section 9.4 File Connection. In particular "The external unit identified by a particular value of a scalar-int-expr is the

[Bug c/24578] New: compiler emits call to floorf() instead of floor()

Compiling the following code on MIPS emits a function call to floorf (not floor). This is a problem when one's libc does not contain a floorf function. void func (float *dest, float *src) { *dest = floor (*src); } Compile using 'mipsel-linux-uclibc-gcc -O2 -save-temps -c it.c'. --

[Bug target/24578] compiler emits call to floorf() instead of floor()

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-29 00:52 --- First this is a target bug and second floorf is a C99 function and really uclibc should have it. If you want to declare this a gcc bug, you first need to add an uclibc target and make it so it does not declare that

[Bug tree-optimization/23346] [4.1 Regression] FRE before DCE makes a mess of loads or need to sink loads

-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |minor http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23346

  1   2   >