[Bug c++/26454] New: problem about GCC STL

2006-02-24 Thread cnhome at vip dot sina dot com
I write a file, code as that: #include #include using namespace std; using namespace __gnu_cxx; struct str_hash { size_t operator()(const string& str) const { return __stl_hash_string(str.c_str()); } }; class A { public: hash_map map_body; public:

[Bug c++/26454] problem about GCC STL

2006-02-24 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 10:05 --- /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/3.4.4/../../../../include/c++/3.4.4/bits/stl_pair.h:74: error: `std::pair<_T1, _T2>::second' has incomplete type tt.cpp:14: error: forward declaration of `class A' You cannot use the

[Bug c++/26451] I get segmentation fault when executing this input/output program

2006-02-24 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 10:08 --- Your program is buggy. This bugzilla is not for getting help on writing C programs - try using a debugger and debug yourself. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug c/26449] ICE with -march=pentium4 -ftree-vectorize in matmul_i4.c in loop invaraint motion

2006-02-24 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 10:13 --- Confirmed. Trying to get a small testcase. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug middle-end/26412] ICE with external arrays using OpenMP

2006-02-24 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 10:26 --- Fixed on the trunk. -- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|

[Bug middle-end/26412] ICE with external arrays using OpenMP

2006-02-24 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 10:26 --- Fixed. -- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug rtl-optimization/26449] ICE with -march=pentium4 -ftree-vectorize in matmul_i4.c in loop invaraint motion

2006-02-24 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 10:29 --- Testcase: -O1 -ftree-vectorize -march=pentium4 void matmul_i4 (int bbase_yn, int xcount) { int x; int * restrict dest_y; const int * abase_n; for (x = 0; x < xcount; x++) { dest_y[x]

[Bug rtl-optimization/26449] ICE with -march=pentium4 -ftree-vectorize in matmul_i4.c in loop invaraint motion

2006-02-24 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 10:46 --- "Don't worry, Jim. I'm monitoring the situation. I'm on top of things." -- steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug fortran/25395] equivalence to common block array broken

2006-02-24 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 10:51 --- Subject: Bug 25395 Author: pault Date: Fri Feb 24 10:51:42 2006 New Revision: 111416 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=111416 Log: 2006-02-24 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR fortran/

[Bug fortran/24519] gfortran slow because of incomplete dependency checking

2006-02-24 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 10:51 --- Subject: Bug 24519 Author: pault Date: Fri Feb 24 10:51:42 2006 New Revision: 111416 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=111416 Log: 2006-02-24 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR fortran/

[Bug fortran/25395] equivalence to common block array broken

2006-02-24 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 10:53 --- Fixed on trunk. As soon as 4.1 is reopened, it will be fixed there too. Paul -- pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug fortran/24519] gfortran slow because of incomplete dependency checking

2006-02-24 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 10:53 --- Fixed on trunk. As soon as 4.1 is reopened, it will be fixed there too. Paul -- pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug fortran/26440] ICE in expand_copysign, at optabs.c:2930 with using -ff2c

2006-02-24 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 11:28 --- gfc_sym_type() if (gfc_option.flag_f2c && sym->attr.function && sym->ts.type == BT_REAL && sym->ts.kind == gfc_default_real_kind && !sym->attr.always_explicit) { /* Special case:

[Bug c++/26455] New: g++ 3.x ICE on typeid(typeid(*object))

2006-02-24 Thread com dot d2 at free dot fr
The code below generates an ICE with g++ 3.3 (debian stable), g++ 3.4 (debian testing): [pollindd] ~ >g++-3.3 -c ice-typeid.cc ice-typeid.cc: In function `int bug5(BaseB*)': ice-typeid.cc:43: internal compiler error: in expand_expr, at expr.c:8833 P

[Bug c++/26455] g++ 3.x ICE on typeid(typeid(*object))

2006-02-24 Thread com dot d2 at free dot fr
--- Comment #1 from com dot d2 at free dot fr 2006-02-24 12:38 --- Created an attachment (id=10907) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10907&action=view) Code leading to ICE Compile it with -DBUG=xyz to activate bug xyz -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?i

[Bug c++/26455] g++ 3.x ICE on typeid(typeid(*object))

2006-02-24 Thread com dot d2 at free dot fr
--- Comment #2 from com dot d2 at free dot fr 2006-02-24 12:40 --- Created an attachment (id=10908) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10908&action=view) Preprocessor output (gcc 3.4.4) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26455

[Bug tree-optimization/26443] [4.2 regression] ICE in add_virtual_operand, at tree-ssa-operands.c:1867

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot |

[Bug tree-optimization/26443] [4.2 regression] ICE in add_virtual_operand, at tree-ssa-operands.c:1867

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 13:04 --- Actually this happens after VRP2 which might mean it is a bug for Jeff Law to look into. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26443

[Bug tree-optimization/26443] [4.2 regression] ICE in add_virtual_operand, at tree-ssa-operands.c:1867

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 13:06 --- Confirmed. Though VRP2 is just doing constant propagation at this point. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug target/26445] SSE byte-by-byte load instruction fails to compile

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 13:11 --- can you give the full output of gcc -v? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26445

[Bug fortran/26409] [4.2 regression] ICE on Assumed shape nested subroutine

2006-02-24 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 13:15 --- (In reply to comment #7) > A few binary search steps later: Works with revision 111270, fails with > 111271. > It seems to be related to the patch > First, I am sorry to be a "doubting Thomas" - I finally succeeded

[Bug fortran/26409] [4.2 regression] ICE on Assumed shape nested subroutine

2006-02-24 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 13:54 --- Subject: Bug 26409 Author: pault Date: Fri Feb 24 13:54:06 2006 New Revision: 111417 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=111417 Log: 2006-02-24 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR fortran/

[Bug fortran/26409] [4.2 regression] ICE on Assumed shape nested subroutine

2006-02-24 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 14:15 --- First, I am sorry to be a "doubting Thomas" - I finally succeeded in reproducing the problem. Second, I unpatched the above and find that this is indeed the problem. I will try to understand why but: (i) I have po

[Bug c/26456] New: OpenMP program deadlocks when executed

2006-02-24 Thread eloranta at jyu dot fi
OpenMP C programs deadlock immediately after starting when OMP_NUM_THREADS is > 1. For example, the following simple code just hangs: #include main() { int i; #pragma omp parallel for private(i) for (i = 0; i < 100; i++) printf("Thread = %d.\n", omp_get_thread_num()); } This occurs on

[Bug libgomp/26456] OpenMP program deadlocks when executed

2006-02-24 Thread eloranta at jyu dot fi
--- Comment #1 from eloranta at jyu dot fi 2006-02-24 14:23 --- Most likely this is just OS X specific bug. -- eloranta at jyu dot fi changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug java/21206] gcj seems not to pass the option to ld correctly

2006-02-24 Thread Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de
--- Comment #13 from Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de 2006-02-24 14:57 --- (In reply to comment #12) > It appears that the LT stands for libtool. So the first one (LIBICONV) is > supposed to be used for linking if you aren't using libtool, and the second > one > (LTLIBICONV) is used

[Bug c/26457] New: -fstack-protector leaks the upper bits of RAX

2006-02-24 Thread arjan at linux dot intel dot com
The following code snippet, compiled with -Os -fstack-protector: #include int StringChecksum(char *s) { char buffer[2048]; int i; int checksum = 0; memset(buffer, 0, 2048); strcpy(buffer, s); for (i=0; i<2048; i++) checksum += bu

[Bug libfortran/26423] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Error on binary I/O for large array

2006-02-24 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 15:08 --- Patch submitted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2006-02/msg00498.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26423

[Bug libgomp/26456] OpenMP program deadlocks when executed

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 15:09 --- This is Darwin specific. This is a dup of bug 25978. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 25978 *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug libgomp/25978] All libgomp tests timeout on ppc-darwin

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 15:09 --- *** Bug 26456 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug libgomp/25978] All libgomp tests timeout on ppc-darwin

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 15:10 --- More information about this issue is at the following thread: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00167.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25978

[Bug target/26457] -fstack-protector leaks the upper bits of RAX

2006-02-24 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 15:11 --- To my knowledge xorl %eax, %eax is just a shorter form of xorq %rax, %rax, both clear all 64 bits of %rax. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26457

[Bug target/26457] -fstack-protector leaks the upper bits of RAX

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 15:12 --- This is an issue of agrument passing really as eax is used to pass 0 to memset though I don't know if this is really an issue or not. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26457

[Bug middle-end/26316] [4.2 Regression] loop-invariant miscompiles openmp.c

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #15 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 15:20 --- Fixed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNE

[Bug target/26290] [4.1 Regression]: code pessimization wrt. GCC 4.0 probably due to TARGET_MEM_REF

2006-02-24 Thread rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #14 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 15:20 --- Ivopts fail to use the complex addressing mode, thus forcing one more biv into inner loop. Since this makes it impossible to allocate registers for the loop, we get another penalty for spilling. Changing the ini

[Bug c++/26458] New: Passing a NULL char* into output stream now breaks the output stream

2006-02-24 Thread phil at mitre dot org
Prior behavior handled passing a char* with a NULL value into an output stream; the result was that nothing printed. As of versions 3 and later this behavior has changed. Perhaps a bug, perhaps a new enforcement. The result is that the output stream no longer writes anything (to file or stdout)

[Bug libstdc++/26458] Passing a NULL char* into output stream now breaks the output stream

2006-02-24 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-02-24 16:53 --- The change is certainly intended and the important point is that is not true that there is no indication of the failure, quite to the contrary the badbit is set. Try changing your test like this: char *str = NULL; cout

[Bug fortran/26440] ICE in expand_copysign, at optabs.c:2930 with using -ff2c

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 17:25 --- I want to say this is exactly the same issue as PR 25392, looking at the fact it is the return value which is causing the issue. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug middle-end/26439] [4.2 Regression] missing VOPs for complex assignments

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 17:32 --- Actually I could not reproduce this with "4.2.0 20060221"? Is it only with the patch to fix PR 26421? -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug middle-end/26439] [4.2 Regression] missing VOPs for complex assignments

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26439

[Bug middle-end/26439] [4.2 Regression] missing VOPs for complex assignments

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 17:34 --- Actually this looks like it is x86 specific. Please next time add the target if you think it is x86 specific and also pelase mention this was also using the C++ front-end. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org chang

[Bug middle-end/26439] [4.2 Regression] missing VOPs for complex assignments

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 17:36 --- Actually I cannot reproduce this with "4.2.0 20060218" either on x86? What were you doing to reproduce this? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26439

[Bug c/8268] no compile time array index checking

2006-02-24 Thread dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment #37 from dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2006-02-24 17:38 --- (In reply to comment #33) > Created an attachment (id=10902) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10902&action=view) [edit] > updated patch. > > better patch. I'm going to post that one when regtesting co

[Bug fortran/26440] ICE in expand_copysign, at optabs.c:2930 with using -ff2c

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 17:40 --- Actually looking at the simplified testcase this is a dup of bug 25392. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 25392 *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug fortran/25392] ICEs with -ff2c

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 17:40 --- *** Bug 26440 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug fortran/26444] gfortran does not compile cp2k

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 17:42 --- I cannot reproduce this with "4.2.0 20060218". -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26444

[Bug middle-end/26439] [4.2 Regression] missing VOPs for complex assignments

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 17:46 --- (In reply to comment #6) > Actually I cannot reproduce this with "4.2.0 20060218" either on x86? What > were you doing to reproduce this? Or even the 20th. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26439

[Bug fortran/26444] gfortran does not compile cp2k

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 17:47 --- I can reproduce this on the 20th though. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26444

[Bug fortran/26444] gfortran does not compile cp2k

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 17:48 --- So what this means I could not have caused this as the only patch after my 18th GCC and my 20th GCC is not a patch which I committed that would have caused this. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26

[Bug fortran/26444] gfortran does not compile cp2k

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 17:53 --- Note -O3 enables complete unrolling at the tree level, I think there might be another related bug to this one. I bet it is failing in VRP2 also, just like the other one. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bu

[Bug target/378] [AIX] gcc cannot compile huge c file

2006-02-24 Thread ska at resqnet dot com
--- Comment #8 from ska at resqnet dot com 2006-02-24 17:53 --- Any chances to get it resolved ? This severe bug is a showstopper for using OpenCobol with GCC on AIX platform because all C programs are generated and there are no way to reduce the size of the programs automatically due t

[Bug fortran/26444] gfortran does not compile cp2k

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 17:54 --- (In reply to comment #10) > Note -O3 enables complete unrolling at the tree level, I think there might be > another related bug to this one. I bet it is failing in VRP2 also, just like > the other one. That would

[Bug rtl-optimization/26449] [4.2 Regression] ICE with -march=pentium4 -ftree-vectorize in matmul_i4.c in loop invariant motion

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||build Summary|ICE with -march=pentium4 - |[4.2 Regression

[Bug tree-optimization/26444] [4.2 Regression] gfortran does not compile cp2k

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 18:14 --- (In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #10) > > Note -O3 enables complete unrolling at the tree level, I think there might > > be > > another related bug to this one. I bet it is failing in VRP2 also, j

[Bug libfortran/26423] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Error on binary I/O for large array

2006-02-24 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #13 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 18:16 --- Subject: Bug 26423 Author: jvdelisle Date: Fri Feb 24 18:16:25 2006 New Revision: 111420 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=111420 Log: 2006-02-24 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

[Bug middle-end/26439] [4.2 Regression] missing VOPs for complex assignments

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 18:22 --- Actually never mind I see the issue now but I still say this is a latent bug and not really my bug. And the patch is wrong anyways in general as most of those places really should have been testing something like

[Bug libgomp/26452] Internal compiler error with openmp

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 18:23 --- Actually this is still a bug. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libfortran/26423] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Error on binary I/O for large array

2006-02-24 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #14 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 18:23 --- Subject: Bug 26423 Author: jvdelisle Date: Fri Feb 24 18:23:38 2006 New Revision: 111421 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=111421 Log: 2006-02-24 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

[Bug libgomp/26452] Internal compiler error with openmp

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 18:24 --- This is a dup of bug 25952. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 25952 *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c++/25952] -fopenmp causes ICE on valid code

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 18:24 --- *** Bug 26452 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c++/26455] g++ 3.x ICE on typeid(typeid(*object))

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 18:30 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26417 *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug c++/26417] typeid(typeid(*object)) ICE on g++ 3.x / i686

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 18:30 --- *** Bug 26455 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c/26459] New: gcc-4.1.0 RC2 fails to build on certain PowerPC targets

2006-02-24 Thread edmar at freescale dot com
When configuring gcc with: --target=powerpc-unknown-linux-gnuspe --host=powerpc-unknown-linux-gnuspe --enable-e500_double this file will be included: gcc/config/rs6000/e500-double.h which in turn uses the variable rs6000_float_gprs_string which is not defined anywhere. (So the build stops with unde

[Bug target/26459] [4.1/4.2 Regression] gcc-4.1.0 RC2 fails to build on powerpc e500-double targets

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 18:42 --- It is obvious that it was caused by: 2005-05-05 Aldy Hernandez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> David Edelsohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * config.gcc: Add .opt magic for the rs6000 ports. . -- pinskia at

[Bug target/26459] [4.1/4.2 Regression] gcc fails to build on powerpc e500-double targets

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 18:43 --- It also tells us that testing powerpc-linux-gnuspe is not important as it has been broken for over a half of a year. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Ad

[Bug libstdc++/26458] Passing a NULL char* into output stream now breaks the output stream

2006-02-24 Thread phil at mitre dot org
--- Comment #2 from phil at mitre dot org 2006-02-24 18:45 --- Subject: RE: Passing a NULL char* into output stream now breaks the output stream Thanks for the quick response. This came up when some old systems were ported from Solaris using gcc-2.9.5 or so and out output files just s

[Bug libgcj/26441] Old libltdl may cause memory leak in Class.forName()

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 18:48 --- Confirmed, had 3.4 was the last import. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug target/26459] [4.1/4.2 Regression] gcc fails to build on powerpc e500-double targets

2006-02-24 Thread edmar at freescale dot com
--- Comment #3 from edmar at freescale dot com 2006-02-24 18:49 --- (In reply to comment #2) > It also tells us that testing powerpc-linux-gnuspe is not important as it has > been broken for over a half of a year. > We test all releases, the last one was 4.0.2 and it was OK. -- ht

[Bug libstdc++/26458] Passing a NULL char* into output stream now breaks the output stream

2006-02-24 Thread phil at mitre dot org
--- Comment #3 from phil at mitre dot org 2006-02-24 18:54 --- See comment #2. -- phil at mitre dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED

[Bug libstdc++/26458] Passing a NULL char* into output stream now breaks the output stream

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 18:55 --- I think Paolo forgot to mention this is required by the C++ standard. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug tree-optimization/26447] verify_flow_info failed

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 18:59 --- Well this one class file is not enough to reproduce this failure as I get errors: java/util/Comparator.java: In class 'org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.parser.AbstractCommentParser': java/util/Comparator.java: In co

[Bug libstdc++/26458] Passing a NULL char* into output stream now breaks the output stream

2006-02-24 Thread phil at mitre dot org
--- Comment #5 from phil at mitre dot org 2006-02-24 19:00 --- (In reply to comment #4) > I think Paolo forgot to mention this is required by the C++ standard. Well that's different then. I realize that many non-standard things were allowed pre gcc-3.0 and that 3+ was starting to enfor

[Bug target/26459] [4.1/4.2 Regression] gcc fails to build on powerpc e500-double targets

2006-02-24 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 19:04 --- Edmar -- Does changing: if (rs6000_float_gprs_string == NULL) \ rs6000_float_gprs = 2; too: if (!rs6000_explicit_options.float_gprs) \ rs6000_float_gprs = 2; work? Not just compile, but also gener

[Bug target/26459] [4.1/4.2 Regression] gcc fails to build on powerpc e500-double targets

2006-02-24 Thread edmar at freescale dot com
--- Comment #5 from edmar at freescale dot com 2006-02-24 19:10 --- (In reply to comment #4) > Edmar -- > > Does changing: > > if (rs6000_float_gprs_string == NULL) \ > rs6000_float_gprs = 2; > > too: > > if (!rs6000_explicit_options.float_gprs) \ > rs6000_float_gprs = 2;

[Bug libmudflap/26442] ICE on valid unreachable code (and no name) when compiling with -fmudflap

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 19:13 --- This is ICEing when printing a warning: 1038warning (0, "mudflap cannot track %qs in stub function", 1039 IDENTIFIER_POINTER (DECL_NAME (decl))); DECL_NAME (decl) is NULL as t

[Bug target/26459] [4.1/4.2 Regression] gcc fails to build on powerpc e500-double targets

2006-02-24 Thread mark at codesourcery dot com
--- Comment #6 from mark at codesourcery dot com 2006-02-24 19:14 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] gcc fails to build on powerpc e500-double targets edmar at freescale dot com wrote: > I started a build. This is a very slow target, it will take several hours... If you've got a

[Bug middle-end/24952] ICE: RTL check: expected code 'set' or 'clobber', have 'unspec' in try_combine, at combine.c:2898

2006-02-24 Thread sayle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from sayle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 19:29 --- Subject: Bug 24952 Author: sayle Date: Fri Feb 24 19:29:34 2006 New Revision: 111425 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=111425 Log: PR middle-end/24952 * combine.c (try_combine): E

[Bug middle-end/24952] ICE: RTL check: expected code 'set' or 'clobber', have 'unspec' in try_combine, at combine.c:2898

2006-02-24 Thread roger at eyesopen dot com
--- Comment #3 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2006-02-24 19:37 --- This has now been fixed on mainline. -- roger at eyesopen dot com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug other/26208] Serious problem with unwinding through signal frames

2006-02-24 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #23 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 19:45 --- Created an attachment (id=10909) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10909&action=view) gcc-trunk-pr26208.patch -- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug other/26208] Serious problem with unwinding through signal frames

2006-02-24 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #24 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 19:45 --- Created an attachment (id=10910) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10910&action=view) binutils-trunk-pr26208.patch -- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug other/26208] Serious problem with unwinding through signal frames

2006-02-24 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #25 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 19:56 --- Updated patches. Unfortunately, it seems even this is not enough as Java (and C++ as well, but there we aren't expecting to throw through signal frames), the personality routine does the same as uw_frame_state_for wa

[Bug libstdc++/26458] Passing a NULL char* into output stream now breaks the output stream

2006-02-24 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
--- Comment #6 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-02-24 19:56 --- (In reply to comment #2) > Otherwise, there's great potential that the output stream (the data) > will become corrupted, even if you manage to check it state. By the way, there is no such thing as a "corrupted stream". Eit

[Bug libstdc++/26458] Passing a NULL char* into output stream now breaks the output stream

2006-02-24 Thread phil at mitre dot org
--- Comment #7 from phil at mitre dot org 2006-02-24 20:40 --- Subject: RE: Passing a NULL char* into output stream now breaks the output stream Agreed, the stream object itself hopfully doesn't get corrupted (bad), but what I was refering to was "the data" itself, not the stream objec

[Bug target/26459] [4.1/4.2 Regression] gcc fails to build on powerpc e500-double targets

2006-02-24 Thread edmar at freescale dot com
--- Comment #7 from edmar at freescale dot com 2006-02-24 20:45 --- Created an attachment (id=10911) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10911&action=view) Input program that causes ICE on gcc-4.1.0 RC2 No deal. I got an ICE now: [root:/local/edmar/obj_gcc/powerpc-unkn

[Bug rtl-optimization/26449] [4.2 Regression] ICE with -march=pentium4 -ftree-vectorize in matmul_i4.c in loop invariant motion

2006-02-24 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 20:48 --- I'm not sure how to fix this. The debug trace here says it all: We try to force something into an operand using an optab with a mode for which we have no handler: Starting program: /home/steven/devel/build-trunk/gcc

[Bug rtl-optimization/26449] [4.2 Regression] ICE with -march=pentium4 -ftree-vectorize in matmul_i4.c in loop invariant motion

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26449

[Bug c/26461] New: liveness of thread local references across function calls

2006-02-24 Thread yichen dot xie at gmail dot com
I ran into this problem with stock gcc-4.0.2 on Fedora Core 2. The problem shows when the following code is compiled with -O2: the address of "array" seems to be cached and reused across calls to function "h". This becomes a problem when function h saves its execution context in one thread and resu

[Bug libfortran/26423] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Error on binary I/O for large array

2006-02-24 Thread dir at lanl dot gov
stop end [dir:~/tests/gfortran-D] dir% gfortran --v Using built-in specs. Target: powerpc-apple-darwin8.5.0 Configured with: ../gcc/configure --prefix=/Users/dir/gfortran --enable-languages=c,f95 Thread model: posix gcc version 4.2.0 20060224 (experimental) [dir:~/tests/gfortran-D] dir

[Bug other/26462] New: initializer element is not computable at load time

2006-02-24 Thread pluto at agmk dot net
$ cat const.c #define B0 (+1.0l/5/1/6) const double c0 = B0; // initializer element is not computable at load time const double c0_tab[1] = { B0 }; // initializer element is not constant #define B1 (+1.0l/5) const double c1 = B1; // ok. const double c1_tab[1] = { B1 }; // initializer element is

[Bug libstdc++/26458] Passing a NULL char* into output stream now breaks the output stream

2006-02-24 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
--- Comment #8 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-02-24 21:03 --- (In reply to comment #7) > . In my recent example I was > explaining how, even if I asserted ostream state and detected that an > error had occurred, I would not be able to determine

[Bug other/26462] initializer element is not computable at load time

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 21:04 --- This is a dup of bug 26374. The problem is that the middle-end does not fold IBM 128bit long double format currently. See PR 19405 for history on why. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26374 *** --

[Bug middle-end/26374] Compile failure on long double

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 21:04 --- *** Bug 26462 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug target/26459] [4.1/4.2 Regression] gcc fails to build on powerpc e500-double targets

2006-02-24 Thread mark at codesourcery dot com
--- Comment #8 from mark at codesourcery dot com 2006-02-24 21:07 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] gcc fails to build on powerpc e500-double targets edmar at freescale dot com wrote: > --- Comment #7 from edmar at freescale dot com 2006-02-24 20:45 --- > Created an attac

[Bug libstdc++/26458] Passing a NULL char* into output stream now breaks the output stream

2006-02-24 Thread phil at mitre dot org
--- Comment #9 from phil at mitre dot org 2006-02-24 21:14 --- Subject: RE: Passing a NULL char* into output stream now breaks the output stream Yup. But by providing the ability to batch stream inserts, per the standard I presume otherwise it's not much of a stream, then you create t

[Bug target/26459] [4.1/4.2 Regression] gcc fails to build on powerpc e500-double targets

2006-02-24 Thread edmar at freescale dot com
--- Comment #9 from edmar at freescale dot com 2006-02-24 21:15 --- (In reply to comment #8) > Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] gcc fails to build on > powerpc e500-double targets > > > > Bummer. > > Please attach preprocessed source and configuration options so that we > have a s

[Bug rtl-optimization/26449] [4.2 Regression] ICE with -march=pentium4 -ftree-vectorize in matmul_i4.c in loop invariant motion

2006-02-24 Thread rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz
--- Comment #5 from rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2006-02-24 21:17 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] ICE with -march=pentium4 -ftree-vectorize in matmul_i4.c in loop invariant motion > I'm not sure how to fix this. The debug trace here says it all: We try to > f

[Bug libstdc++/26458] Passing a NULL char* into output stream now breaks the output stream

2006-02-24 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
--- Comment #10 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-02-24 21:22 --- (In reply to comment #9) > ... If the standard says you can > string together inserts, and that a failed insert will "disable" the > stream until the error is cleared, but not allowing

[Bug c/26461] liveness of thread local references across function calls

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 21:32 --- Why do you think this can ever work in general? Also why do you need this to work this way? It seems like you are trying to deal with your own threading system instead of allowing the OS do its work. -- pinskia

[Bug middle-end/26461] liveness of thread local references across function calls

2006-02-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Component|c |middle-end

[Bug libfortran/26423] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Error on binary I/O for large array

2006-02-24 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #16 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-24 21:40 --- I will have to revert back a bit and see if this too is a regression or something new. (yer killin me man! ;) ) Seriuously, though. We'll take all the testing we can get, even if it is frustrating. Thanks. -

  1   2   >