--- Comment #17 from belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru 2007-09-27
08:01 ---
(In reply to comment #16)
something like this (for gcc.target/i386):
/* { dg-do run } */
/* { dg-require-effective-target lp64 } */
/* { dg-options "-O2"} */
unsigned long a [100];
int main (void)
{
The following test fails:
$ cat test.f90
PROGRAM Test
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: DP=8
REAL(KIND=DP), DIMENSION(1:3) :: A
A = ANINT ( A , DP )
END PROGRAM Test
$ gfortran -c test.f90
test.f90: In function 'MAIN__':
test.f90:1: internal compiler error: in gfc_trans_assignment_1, at
--- Comment #18 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 08:12 ---
Sure, no problem.
/* PR rtl-optimization/33552 */
/* { dg-do run } */
/* { dg-options "-O2" } */
extern void abort (void);
void
__attribute__((noinline))
foo (unsigned long *wp, unsigned long *up, long un, unsigned
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 08:58 ---
Introduced by PR28595 fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=116468
or for 4.1:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=116471
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|R
--- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-09-27 09:08 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] aggregate DSE
disabled
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-26 19:04
> ---
> * gcc.dg/t
On 27 Sep 2007 09:08:17 -, rguenther at suse dot de
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I did wonder what optimized that before... (maybe a separate bug for
> this is more appropriate)
Must_def cause the optimization to work IIRC. In fact this is the
reason why aggregate DSE was added was specifica
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2007-09-27 09:19 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] aggregate DSE disabled
On 27 Sep 2007 09:08:17 -, rguenther at suse dot de
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I did wonder what optimized that before... (maybe a separate bug for
> this is mo
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 09:20 ---
Fixed on the trunk.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|
--- Comment #1 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 09:21 ---
Subject: Bug 33493
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Sep 27 09:20:59 2007
New Revision: 128831
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128831
Log:
/cp
2007-09-27 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR c+
--- Comment #2 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-27 09:24 ---
Fixed in mainline.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|pcarlini at
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 09:41 ---
Most probably introduced by
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-07/msg00902.html
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
Linkage of the following example reports an undefined reference to `A::anInt'.
example.cpp
struct A
{
template
void operator%( T const & object ) {}
static int const anInt = 5;
};
int main( void )
{
A() % A::anInt;
return 0;
}
--
Summary:
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-27 10:10 ---
Indeed, in general you have to add:
const int A::anInt;
At high optimization levels the the static int is "inlined" but this is just
implementation defined behavior...
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
W
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 10:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=14254)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14254&action=view)
restore DCE of killing defs
some ssa updating is broken in dce though:
/space/rguenther/src/svn/pointer_plus/g
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 10:39 ---
Confirmed. Thanks, Ignacio.
This is the fix (the absence of the KIND working and the regression wrt 4.2
were giveaways):
Index: gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c
=
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:[Receiver]$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i486-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,objc,obj-c++,treelang --prefix=/usr
--enable-shared --with-system-zlib --libexecdir=/usr/lib
--without-included-gettext --enable-threads=posix --en
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 11:46 ---
I might as well take it:-)
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 12:09 ---
Weird, I tried essentially the same patch (where I modeled the code after
gfc_conv_intrinsic_nint), but the failure persisted. I wonder what's different
now.
--
tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 12:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=14255)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14255&action=view)
gcc43-pr32565.patch
WIP patch to fix this. As shown in the testcase, I believe trying to handle
ARGUMENT_PACK_P
--- Comment #16 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 12:19 ---
Fixed for 4.3.0.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4
--- Comment #7 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 12:20 ---
Fixed for 4.3.0.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pcarlini at suse dot de
|dot org |
--- Comment #9 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 12:27
---
(In reply to comment #7)
> It doesn't matter if it's bad coding (which I can agree).
> AFAIK, the standard says the code is legal.
After reading the standard, I concur. I think a warning option should be added,
m
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last recon
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 13:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=14256)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14256&action=view)
more complete patch to resture DCE of killing defs
It still breaks in some cases. With the unfortunate fact th
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 13:42 ---
Diego, it sucks that we need to jump through hoops to get V_MUST_DEF "back".
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from dnovillo at google dot com 2007-09-27 13:48 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] aggregate DSE disabled
On 27 Sep 2007 13:42:11 -, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Diego, it sucks that we need to jump through hoops to get V_MUST_DEF "bac
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-09-27 13:59 ---
The patch fixes the test case on this PR, but gives ICE on several of my tests.
The simplest is:
program aint_anint_1
implicit none
real(8) :: s = 42.7D0, s1, s2
s1 = aint(s)
! s2 = aint(s, kind=4)
end pro
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-09-27 14:01 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] aggregate DSE
disabled
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007, dnovillo at google dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #7 from dnovillo at google dot com 2007-09-27 13:48 ---
> Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression
--- Comment #9 from dnovillo at google dot com 2007-09-27 14:12 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] aggregate DSE disabled
On 27 Sep 2007 14:01:18 -, rguenther at suse dot de
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I sort-of agree. Still DCE was able to handle tree-ssa/complex-4.c
> before we
struct foo {
template
void __attribute__((leafify)) bar() {}
};
void bar(void)
{
foo f;
f.bar();
}
--
Summary: [4.3 Regression] ICEs on unknown attributes on template
functions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 14:39 ---
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x00545c5a in is_late_template_attribute (attr=0x2b2f2b957b70,
decl=0x2b2f2f438a00)
at /space/rguenther/src/svn/pointer_plus/gcc/cp/decl2.c:994
994
--- Comment #19 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 14:52 ---
Have a patch on http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-09/msg01968.html .
Fixes also the reload failure on x86 -O2 -fPIC on this testcase (which hits
glibc):
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-O2 -fPIC" } */
ty
--- Comment #20 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-09-27 15:01 ---
Thanks.
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|bonzini at gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 15:53 ---
Fixed now.
--
daney at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
> cat bug.cc
#include
#include
struct Foo { virtual void f() {} };
int main(int argc, char**)
{
std::auto_ptr foo;
if (argc) {
foo.reset(new Foo());
} else {
std::vector v;
}
Foo* p = foo.release();
p->f();
}
> g++
--- Comment #4 from haubi at gentoo dot org 2007-09-27 16:09 ---
Same here on aix5.3 - it seems to be a make problem, not finding the implicit
rule "build/gen%$(build_exeext):" for target 'build/genmodes', defined in
gcc-4.2.0/gcc/Makefile.in line 3026.
Which version of GNU make do you
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-09-27 16:18 ---
With the new patch I still have an ICE on:
reala
real*8 c
print *, (nearest(0.5,-1.0)+0.5)-1.0
a = 8388609.0
print '(3(1PG26.9))', a, anint(a), anint(8388609.0)
a
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 16:33 ---
This is a special case of PR33509.
regenerate_decl_from_template doesn't handle error_mark_node returned from
tsubst_pack_expansion. As tsubst_pack_expansion doesn't issue any error
in this case (it hits the
/* We c
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-27 16:36 ---
I can't reproduce...
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|wrong cod
Compiling the following code with -O2 or higher in g++ 4.1.2 produces incorrect
results. The problem doesn't occur in version 4.2.1.
I compile like this:
g++ -W -Wall -Werror-O2 -fPIC -o gccbug gccbug.cpp
The last line of output should show the number 27, but it shows 0 when
optimizing
--- Comment #1 from karthikkumar at gmail dot com 2007-09-27 17:29 ---
my bad. gcc be good.
--
karthikkumar at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Stat
--- Comment #3 from ian at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 17:31 ---
Subject: Bug 33565
Author: ian
Date: Thu Sep 27 17:31:34 2007
New Revision: 128840
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128840
Log:
./:
PR tree-optimization/33565
* tree-ssa-loop-ch.c (
--- Comment #4 from ian at airs dot com 2007-09-27 17:37 ---
Fixed.
--
ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RE
Hi,
I compiled gcc and gfortran from svn trunk, revision: 128668, date:20070922.
I am compiling mpich and it complains unavailability of getarg and iargc. This
problem seems to have been patched in older version. Did this problem reappear
or am I doing something wrong?
thanks,
Krishna.
--
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 18:23 ---
Actually, why do you think this is invalid?
template void foo(const T &...) {}
template void foo(T *const ...) {}
etc. are all accepted and I couldn't find in n2152.pdf any word that would
say that const T... is invali
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 18:40 ---
Subject: Bug 33568
Author: pault
Date: Thu Sep 27 18:39:55 2007
New Revision: 128843
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128843
Log:
2007-09-27 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 18:49 ---
After a bit of messing around, this is fixed on trunk.
Cheers
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 18:50 ---
Woops - wrong bug!
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33574
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 18:51 ---
Woops - wrong bug!
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
St
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 18:52 ---
After a bit of messing around, this is fixed on trunk.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|org
libgcc/config/libbid
/home/karthik/WS/act/gcc-mainline-dp-build/./gcc/include
/home/karthik/WS/act/gcc-mainline-dp-build/./gcc/include-fixed
/usr/local/include
/usr/include
End of search list.
GNU C (GCC) version 4.3.0 20070927 (experimental) (i686-pc-linux-gnu)
compiled by GNU C versi
--- Comment #21 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-09-27 19:59 ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> Have a patch on http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-09/msg01968.html .
> Fixes also the reload failure on x86 -O2 -fPIC on this testcase (which hits
> glibc):
Do we need a solution for "%."
--- Comment #6 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 20:19
---
> Actually, why do you think this is invalid?
Hmmm. The code looks valid to me now.
Must have been a temporary lack of coffee...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31434
--- Comment #2 from belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru 2007-09-27
20:20 ---
Could you please attach preprocessed source (.ii file ) and assembly output
(.s) (use -save-temps option to generate them)
--
belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru changed:
What|Re
--- Comment #3 from wouter dot vermaelen at scarlet dot be 2007-09-27
20:30 ---
Created an attachment (id=14257)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14257&action=view)
preprocessed source (reduced)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33572
--- Comment #4 from wouter dot vermaelen at scarlet dot be 2007-09-27
20:31 ---
Created an attachment (id=14258)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14258&action=view)
assembly output (for reduced bug.ii)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33572
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33571
--- Comment #2 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 20:58 ---
Fixed.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 21:03 ---
Confirmed. The reduced testcase gets optimized to
:
D.2145 = operator new (8);
:
((struct Foo *) D.2145)->_vptr.Foo = &_ZTV3Foo[2];
:
D.2147 ={v} 0B->_vptr.Foo;
OBJ_TYPE_REF(*D.2147;0B->0) (0B);
where de
The following trimmed testcase from 464.h264ref is segfaulting.
int a1[6][4][4];
short b1[16];
int c1;
void CalculateQuantParam(void)
{
int i, j, k, temp;
for(k=0; k<6; k++)
for(j=0; j<4; j++)
for(i=0; i<4; i++)
{
temp = (i<<2)+j;
a1[k][j][i] = c1/
--- Comment #6 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-27 21:19 ---
I can see now from the reduced testcase that the library uses mt_alloc, not the
default allocator. Next time, just say it... ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33572
--
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
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 21:31 ---
> This probably caused by:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2007-07/msg00745.html
> r126885 | pault | 2007-07-24 21:15:27 +0200 (Di, 24 Jul 2007) | 36 lines
> 2007-07-24 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> PR 3120
--- Comment #5 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 21:41 ---
I'm unassigning myself for the time being, as I couldn't think of a fix that
does the right thing and doesn't involve overhauling parts of the compiler.
--
tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|R
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 21:50 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Hi,
>
> I compiled gcc and gfortran from svn trunk, revision: 128668, date:20070922.
>
> I am compiling mpich and it complains unavailability of getarg and iargc. This
> problem seems to ha
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 22:04 ---
Confirmed.
The problem is that the loop in c_common_parse_file calls
cpp_undef_all -- which undefines all symbols but does not
mark _cpp_file objects as not seen.
We probably need a new libcpp API for this.
--
tro
I am trying to install xpdf 3.02 on a AIX 5.3.0.5 machine. The following is
the information I have at hand:
the exact version of GCC;
Reading specs from /opt/freeware/lib/gcc-lib/powerpc-ibm-aix5.2.0.0/3.3.2/specs
Configured with: ../configure --with-as=/usr/bin/as --with-ld=/usr/bin/ld
--disabl
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 22:11 ---
A regression hunt on mainline using the submitter's testcase identified the
following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=114023
r114023 | mmitchel | 2006-05-23 20:45:44 + (Tue, 23 May 2006)
--- Comment #2 from dooglus at gmail dot com 2007-09-27 23:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=14260)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14260&action=view)
the Makefile
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33573
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 22:46 ---
How did you invoke configure?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33575
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-27 22:46 ---
>g++: Internal error: Segmentation fault (program as)
as is crashing so I am assuming you don't have an updated as from IBM.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33577
--- Comment #1 from dooglus at gmail dot com 2007-09-27 23:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=14259)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14259&action=view)
the source file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33573
--- Comment #2 from cabanasg at metro dot net 2007-09-27 23:35 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> >g++: Internal error: Segmentation fault (program as)
> as is crashing so I am assuming you don't have an updated as from IBM.
You mean I should upgrade my GNU++ compiler? I have version 3.3.2
/develop/svn/trunk/build/mingw32/libstdc++-v3/include/parallel/compatibility.h:
In function 'void __gnu_parallel::yield()':
/develop/svn/trunk/build/mingw32/libstdc++-v3/include/parallel/compatibility.h:331:
error: 'Sleep' was not declared in this scope
make[4]: *** [parallel_list.lo] Error 1
make[
--- Comment #3 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-28 00:57 ---
Fixed on trunk.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33436
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-28
01:41 ---
Subject: Re: New: INIT_PRIORITY is broken
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 01:35:04AM -, danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> FAIL: gcc.dg/initpri1.c execution test
I've attached the assembler output and t
--- Comment #5 from jeff at jeffunit dot com 2007-09-28 01:37 ---
I am using gnu make-3.81
I just verified that the problem is still present.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32272
FAIL: gcc.dg/initpri1.c execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/special/conpr-2.C execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/special/conpr-4.C execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/special/initp1.C execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/special/initpri1.C execution test
On January 4, 2003, I installed a patch which in included support for
init_
--- Comment #2 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-28 00:54 ---
Subject: Bug 33436
Author: danglin
Date: Fri Sep 28 00:54:29 2007
New Revision: 128855
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128855
Log:
PR middle-end/33436
* expr.c (emit_group_load
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-28 00:10 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > >g++: Internal error: Segmentation fault (program as)
> > as is crashing so I am assuming you don't have an updated as from IBM.
>
> You mean I should upgrade my GNU+
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-28 01:03 ---
Subject: Bug 7003
Author: pinskia
Date: Fri Sep 28 01:02:30 2007
New Revision: 128856
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128856
Log:
2007-09-27 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR mid
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-28 03:10
---
I have reverted the offending patch and will reopen pr33253, the least of the
two evils. This is one of those bugs where the fix for one breaks the other.
I am still trying to puzzle it out.
--
jvdelisle at
--- Comment #4 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-28 03:01 ---
On the otherhand, maybe the tests should use __builtin_inff.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31828
It may be a duplicate of 31899.
Compiling Boost lambda library test control_structures.cpp with -g results in
"internal compiler error: in reference_to_unused, at dwarf2out.c:10010".
Without -g, it compiles cleanly. This is on HP-UX ia64 with gcc 4.2.1
How to reproduce: download Boost 1.34.1 and
--- Comment #3 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-28 02:45 ---
Is the use of macro FP_INFINITE in these tests a typo? It seems to me
that the tests should be using the C99 macro INFINITY. In which case,
the tests should be conditional on c99_runtime.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-28 02:57
---
Subject: Bug 33421
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Sep 28 02:57:41 2007
New Revision: 128857
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128857
Log:
2007-09-27 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-28 03:16
---
Reverted the patch to close pr33421. Reopening this to find the right
solution.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31108
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31174
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32452
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-28 03:55
---
Andrew, thanks for the analysis. But, I'm not very happy with the patch. Can
we change the compiler so that we set has_visibility on a binding level when
the binding level is created -- and never reset it, ever?
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33131
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-28 03:59
---
I think Joseph's code is valid. All he's doing is initializing various parts
of complex numbers and then using them. If using a fully initialized value
results in a floating-point exception, that's a bug.
--
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33008
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32901
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25672
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30663
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
