--- Comment #3 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 12:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=13367)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13367&action=view)
updated patch
Updated patch.
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #4 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 12:39 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > This creates a smaller binary and may also create a faster binary. The
> > former
> > is the main motivation from my POV.
>
> Do you have figures to justify the
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 13:08 ---
Fixed on trunk
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Statu
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 13:10 ---
Fixed on trunk
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
Build failure as follows:
/opt/local/src/gcc-mipsel/./gcc/xgcc -B/opt/local/src/gcc-mipsel/./gcc/
-B/opt/local/mipsel-elf/bin/ -B/opt/local/mipsel-elf/lib
/ -isystem /opt/local/mipsel-elf/include -isystem
/opt/local/mipsel-elf/sys-include -O2 -O2 -O -DIN_GCC -DCROSS_COMPILE -W
-Wall -Wwrite-
ead model: posix
gcc version 4.2.0 20070415 (prerelease)
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2007-01-09 11:01:44 |2007-04-15 15:55:28
--- Comment #16 from hhinnant at apple dot com 2007-04-15 16:13 ---
(In reply to comment #15)
This makes clean up / rethrow during cancellation awkward. Code would have to
check for two (or more) different kinds of cancellation: Am I executing in an
OS thread, or in a thread pool?
-
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 16:28 ---
Subject: Bug 31204
Author: pault
Date: Sun Apr 15 16:28:06 2007
New Revision: 123849
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123849
Log:
2007-04-15 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
Executing on host: /home/dave/gnu/gcc-4.2/objdir/gcc/xgcc
-B/home/dave/gnu/gcc-4
.2/objdir/gcc/ /home/dave/gnu/gcc-4.2/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gnu89-init-4.c
-std=gnu89 -W -Wall -O2 -fno-show-column -lm -o ./gnu89-init-4.exe
(timeou
t = 300)
/usr/lib/crt1.o: In function `_start':
/build/buil
g++ crashes when compiling the attached code:
/tmp/build/src/oldloader.cpp:1638: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
--- Comment #1 from us15 at os dot inf dot tu-dresden dot de 2007-04-15
17:23 ---
Created an attachment (id=13368)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13368&action=view)
preprocessed code that triggers ICE
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31579
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 17:48 ---
This is my fault, this is what I get for copy manually the testcase, I forgot
the dg-do compile part.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 18:39 ---
Minimal example:
program test
implicit none
type data_type
integer :: i=2
end type data_type
type(data_type) :: d
d%i = 4
call set(d,d)
contains
subroutine set(x1,x2)
type(data_type),intent(out)
--- Comment #17 from jason at redhat dot com 2007-04-15 19:01 ---
Subject: Re: C++ (throw() and catch(...) {/* fall through
*/ } ) and pthread cancellation are incompatible (at least with NPTL)
hhinnant at apple dot com wrote:
> This makes clean up / rethrow during cancellation awkwa
Example:
implicit none
real :: a,b
if(a .nonex. b) stop
end
Expected:
Error: Unknown user operator 'nonex' at (1)
Current gfortran result:
Error: Operands of user operator 'nonex' at (1) are REAL(4)/REAL(4)
NAG f95:
Error: x.f90, line 3: Unknown operator .NONEX.
ifort:
fortcom:
--- Comment #5 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 20:08 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > It appears that spurious ICE messages are a general problem with GCC.
>
> Well, it's true that an ICE on invalid code *and* after a sensible error
> message has b
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 20:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=13369)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13369&action=view)
Updated patch
This patch handles almost everything except of
operator() => operator(.user.)
where could be e.
cc -c -O -DIN_GCC -DCROSS_COMPILE-DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.
-I../../gcc-4.1.2/gcc -I../../gcc-4.1.2/gcc/. -I../../gcc-4.1.2/gcc/../include
-I./../intl -I../../gcc-4.1.2/gcc/../libcpp/include
../../gcc-4.1.2/gcc/combine.c -o combine.o
"./insn-attr.h", line 78: identifier redeclared: TUNE_
".
ix86_expand_vec_set_builtin is used to expand builtin funtions like
v4hi __builtin_ia32_vec_set_v4hi (v4hi, short, const int);
for pattens like
[(set (match_operand:V8HI 0 "register_operand" "=x")
(vec_merge:V8HI
(vec_duplicate:V8HI
(match_operand:HI 2 "nonimmedia
--- Comment #1 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-04-15 20:48 ---
A patch is posted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg00938.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31582
configured with:
env CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/bash CC=cc CFLAGS=-O bash ../gcc-4.1.2/configure
--target=powerpc-elf --prefix=/opt/local --enable-languages=c,c++
/opt/local/src/gcc-powerpc/./gcc/xgcc -B/opt/local/src/gcc-powerpc/./gcc/
-B/opt/local/powerpc-elf/bin/ -B/opt/local/powerpc-elf/lib/ -isystem
Hi!
The following code snippet leads to an ICE, but I am not sure
whether the stuff I am trying to do is valid.
Any pointer to info about that also appreciated.
Target: i586-suse-linux
Configured with: ../configure --enable-threads=posix --prefix=/usr
--with-local-prefix=/usr/local --infodir=/usr
--- Comment #6 from zackw at panix dot com 2007-04-15 21:22 ---
Bugs where the compiler proper crashes when run under the driver, but not when
run directly, can often be reproduced by varying the amount of space taken up
by environment variables, e.g.
x=
while :; do
x="x$x"
X=$x ./f
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 21:47 ---
First, the target powerpc-elf is really not useful.
Second ": warning: null character(s) ignored" seems like the compiler
is being miscompiled, what compiler are using to build the cross compiler with?
Third, you fo
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 21:50 ---
Can you attach the preprocessed source? Compiling a cross compiler not with
GCC is semi unsupported. I bet this is really a bug in Sun's CC.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Remov
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30222
--- Comment #13 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 22:12
---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Now all that's left is to translate that into C and tree representations :-)
The tree stuff is hard, btw. Still trying :-)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30694
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 22:38 ---
Subject: Bug 31578
Author: pinskia
Date: Sun Apr 15 22:38:47 2007
New Revision: 123854
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123854
Log:
2007-04-14 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR te
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 22:40 ---
Subject: Bug 31578
Author: pinskia
Date: Sun Apr 15 22:40:30 2007
New Revision: 123855
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123855
Log:
2007-04-14 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR te
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 22:42 ---
I am having issues with my hard drive right now so I cannot apply this to the
4.1 branch yet.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31578
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 22:45 ---
Subject: Bug 31578
Author: pinskia
Date: Sun Apr 15 22:45:43 2007
New Revision: 123856
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123856
Log:
2007-04-15 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR te
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 22:46 ---
Fixed sorry about the failure.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 23:06
---
P2, rather than P1, because of the use of statement-expressions.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31338
--- Comment #14 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 23:10
---
I think we can all agree that this is an important bug, even if we're not all
agreed about exactly how to fix it. This seems likely be to a frequent
problem.
Therefore, despite the fact this is "just" a missed o
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31411
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31419
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31446
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31448
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31498
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31513
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31517
--- Comment #7 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2007-04-15 23:45
---
I can't find "other bugs like this" and I think this PR should be re-opened
until it's fixed. (I'm on my third attempt today trying to build gcc-4.1.2 on
powerpc-darwin on a G4, and failing late in the bootstrap
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-16 00:30 ---
> re-opened
suspended does not mean this bug is closed, in fact this bug is still opened
and I think it was fixed on the trunk already. It turns out this was really an
automake/libtool bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.o
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-16 00:56 ---
This was introduced by the fix for PR 21478.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mark at codesourcery dot com
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-16 02:55 ---
Don't remember if this is fixed, but not working anymore on it
--
dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #7 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-16 02:56 ---
The version I produced was turned down, and I have not had time to rewrite it
to be what others wanted
--
dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-16 03:12 ---
PRE actually would perform the optimization on these two cases, but it sees the
cast as an induction variable.
Found partial redundancy for expression (short unsigned int) VH.29 (VH.37)
Skipping insertion of phi for
--- Comment #2 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-16 03:15 ---
PS, I will fix this sometime after we have LTO.
Until then, -fipa-pta is not worth it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31068
--- Comment #3 from kevina at gnu dot org 2007-04-16 04:53 ---
There has not been any movement on this bug in over a year.
Could someone explain to me the reason for the cryptic error message.
Why can't gcc just report something like:
no match for operator!=(, )
--
http://gcc.gn
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-16 06:52
---
And make sure to follow the build instructions.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-16 07:00
---
Do really have a SuperSPARC? If no, remove the -mcpu=supersparc option, it is
totally untested these days. If so, I'd suggest to stick with a 3.x compiler
on this presumably old machine.
--
ebotcazou at gcc
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gmail dot com 2007-04-16 07:03 ---
Subject: Re: ICE at -O1 -fipa-pta
> PS, I will fix this sometime after we have LTO.
> Until then, -fipa-pta is not worth it.
Can it be made an undocumented option, then, for the time being?
Because it's still an ICE
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-16 07:43 ---
The trunk gives:
t.cc: In member function 'void C::DoSomething(int) [with C::Inner I = c,
T = double]':
t.cc:32: instantiated from here
t.cc:24: error: incomplete type 'C::Dispatcher' used in nested
name specifier
These tests all start to fail after the fix for PR 31361 was committed to SVN.
FAILing tests test SSE intrinsics by:
--quote--
/* Test that the intrinsics compile with optimization. All of them are
defined as inline functions in mmintrin.h that reference the proper
builtin functions. Defin
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-16 07:56 ---
Reduced testcase:
struct Industry {
unsigned char produced_cargo[2];
};
unsigned int a = (((unsigned long)&reinterpret_castIndustry*)(char*)8)->produced_cargo[0]))) - 8);
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org ch
57 matches
Mail list logo
