The change for bug 31399 makes the "DO" variable inconsistent after loop:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] loop-1]$ cat foo.f90
integer(kind=1) :: i
integer(kind=8) :: c = 0
do i = 1, 5, 1
c = c + 1
end do
print *, i
if (i /= 6) call abort
do i = 1, 5, 2
c = c + 1
end do
print *, i
--- Comment #1 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-05-21 22:48 ---
This patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-05/msg01387.html
works.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32027
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-21 23:02
---
Subject: Bug 32027
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Mon May 21 22:02:26 2007
New Revision: 124923
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124923
Log:
PR fortran/32027
* trans-stmt.c (gfc_tr
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-21 23:04
---
Fixed.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCO
--- Comment #4 from bliss1940-bbs at yahoo dot com 2007-05-21 23:22 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
I'm using arm-elf. Thanks for the __attribute__((packed)). That does indeed
remove the hole at the end.
I think we should agree to disagree. You say it's an ABI issue but that seems
impo
--- Comment #6 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-21 23:25 ---
Subject: Bug 32002
Author: dfranke
Date: Mon May 21 22:24:55 2007
New Revision: 124924
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124924
Log:
gcc/fortran:
2005-05-21 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #5 from bliss1940-bbs at yahoo dot com 2007-05-21 23:48 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Try:
> struct a33
> {
> struct Char1 a1;
> struct Char1 a2;
> };
> And see what size/offset the structs are at. Again this is an ABI issue
Simply saying it's an ABI issue doesn't mak
--- Comment #7 from pbrook at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-21 23:55 ---
On arm-elf structures are padded/aligned to a 4-byte boundary. This is a
"feature" of the ABI. The microsoft compiler obviously conforms to a different
ABI, which is why you get different results. Both are "correct".
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-21 23:53 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #3)
>
> > Try:
> > struct a33
> > {
> > struct Char1 a1;
> > struct Char1 a2;
> > };
> > And see what size/offset the structs are at. Again this is an ABI issue
>
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31995
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-22 00:09 ---
Subject: Bug 31995
Author: pinskia
Date: Mon May 21 23:08:54 2007
New Revision: 124927
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124927
Log:
2007-05-21 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR mi
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-22 00:09 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #8 from bliss1940-bbs at yahoo dot com 2007-05-22 01:16 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> On arm-elf structures are padded/aligned to a 4-byte boundary. This is a
> "feature" of the ABI. The microsoft compiler obviously conforms to a different
> ABI, which is why you get differe
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-22 01:37 ---
Mine, this is fixed on the pointer plus branch where aliasing is not confused
anymore.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-22 01:38 ---
PR 18412 is not really a flow sensitive issue, it is just may_alias getting
confused by pointer addition which will be fixed with the merge of the pointer
plus branch.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-22 01:51 ---
Mine, we always get the correct answer on the pointer plus branch.
On the trunk:
ANYTHING = &ANYTHING
READONLY = &ANYTHING
INTEGER = &ANYTHING
a = &ANYTHING
c_1 = &a
b = &ANYTHING
c_1 = &b
c_6 = c_1 + 32
D.1639_11
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-22 02:09 ---
pointer plus branch helps out with the heap allocated memory, may_alias gets
less confused with them. It does not fully fix this bug but it does help out.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2462
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-22 02:50 ---
Fixed, thanks for testing out this branch.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-22 02:51 ---
Subject: Bug 32015
Author: pinskia
Date: Tue May 22 01:50:42 2007
New Revision: 124935
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124935
Log:
2007-05-21 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR tr
--- Comment #3 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2007-05-22 03:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=13598)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13598&action=view)
Notes: diffs of 4.2.1 and 4.3.0 fold-const.c and ICE
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32024
Compiling gcc 4.3.0 20070521 using "--with-gjdoc" fails. It works on 4.2.0/1. I
don't know enough about gjdoc scripting or Java to go poking around so I leave
the fix to someone more capable.
For anyone who compiled using "--with-gjdoc" and broke their make there is a
&q
When there is a default template parameter based on a templated class member
type, the compiler dies a nasty death. As far as I can tell, gcc prior to 4.1
branch works fine, but all of the 4.1 branch seems to have this problem.
Quick summary... This works:
template::template Factory > class
thi
--- Comment #1 from ejt at andrew dot cmu dot edu 2007-05-22 05:00 ---
Created an attachment (id=13599)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13599&action=view)
Original source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32029
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-22 05:01
---
The following simplistic patch solves this problem. Sometimes I think we get
overzealous with definitions and fancy configury. We all know the size is 10
bytes and 12 works.
This works:
Index: size_from_kind.c
--- Comment #2 from ejt at andrew dot cmu dot edu 2007-05-22 05:01 ---
Created an attachment (id=13600)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13600&action=view)
Preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32029
--- Comment #9 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-22 05:38 ---
Confirmed on a cross compiler configured:
../t1/configure --target=mipsel-linux
--with-sysroot=/usr/local/mipsel-linux-test
--prefix=/usr/local/mipsel-linux-test --with-arch=mips32 --with-float=soft
--disable-java-awt
--- Comment #7 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-22 06:52 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> The following simplistic patch solves this problem. Sometimes I think we get
> overzealous with definitions and fancy configury. We all know the size is 10
> bytes and 12 works.
No. The non-p
101 - 127 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
