--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-01-13 21:06 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] templates, enumerations,
overflow, ice
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, tbptbp at gmail dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #5 from tbptbp at gmail dot com 2008-01-13 19:47 ---
> Thanks a lo
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfi
--- Comment #4 from pluto at agmk dot net 2008-01-13 21:07 ---
invalid testcase.
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Comment #7 from tbptbp at gmail dot com 2008-01-13 21:20 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] templates, enumerations, overflow, ice
On 13 Jan 2008 21:06:07 -, rguenther at suse dot de
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No idea, but I doubt so ;)
Fantastic.
Now i also see the ld
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 21:29 ---
Subject: Bug 34759
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Jan 13 21:28:30 2008
New Revision: 131511
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131511
Log:
2008-01-13 Tobias Burnus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fort
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 21:30 ---
Subject: Bug 34763
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Jan 13 21:29:49 2008
New Revision: 131512
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131512
Log:
2008-01-13 Tobias Burnus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fort
--- Comment #8 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 21:36 ---
Subject: Bug 34665
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Jan 13 21:35:33 2008
New Revision: 131513
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131513
Log:
2008-01-13 Tobias Burnus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fort
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 21:49 ---
Fixed on the trunk (4.3.0).
Thanks for the report!
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 21:49 ---
Fixed on the trunk (4.3.0).
Thanks for the report!
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #9 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 21:49 ---
Fixed on the trunk (4.3.0).
Thanks for the report!
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 21:54 ---
Jakub, is there any chance that it can still get fixed for 4.3.0?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33880
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 22:10 ---
> It turns out this is not a gfortran bug. My apologies for any time wasted.
Closing then as invalid. Thanks for re-checking.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 22:14 ---
Subject: Bug 34746
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Jan 13 22:13:52 2008
New Revision: 131514
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131514
Log:
2008-01-13 Thomas Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR li
--- Comment #4 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 22:15 ---
Fixed, closing.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 4.1.0:
===
template struct A
{
T::X<0> x;
};
A a;
===
bug.cc:3: error: non-template 'X' used as template
bug.cc:3: note: use 'T::template X' to indicate that it is a tem
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34776
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 22:49 ---
match_variable is called for "istat" in the subroutine. For the first match, it
is FL_UNKNOWN and then - without PRIVATE - it is set to FL_VARIABLE. With
public/private, it remains FL_UNKNOWN.
As for ALLOCATE sym->at
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 22:57 ---
Regression, caused by the fix for PR 32760.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 23:00 ---
See also notes/patch attempt in PR 32489.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20923
--- Comment #2 from andry at inbox dot ru 2008-01-14 00:06 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> /cygdrive/e/Work/gcc_4_3_trunk_2008-01-13_build/./gcc/xgcc: No such file or
> directory
>
> figure out why the stage1 compile did not generate that.
>
Yes, may be i had know why :(
http://cygwin.
--- Comment #2 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 00:42 ---
Good catch!
Well, there is something weird going on
$ cc1 -fdump-tree-original -O winit-self.c
{
int i = i;
int i = i;
return i;
}
$ cc1plus -fdump-tree-original -O winit-self.c
{
int i;
int i;
<>
--- Comment #3 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 00:55 ---
The quoted paragraph does not apply to the first code example, because an
"inline definition" is defined in paragraph 6 as:
If all of the file scope declarations for a function in a translation
unit include the inline
--- Comment #3 from olly at survex dot com 2008-01-14 00:58 ---
If by "delete this option from the C++ FE" you mean that `g++ -Winit-self
[...]' would give an error, I'm not sure that's the best approach if the option
is likely to be sorted out for C++ in the future. Removing it now wil
--- Comment #8 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 01:01 ---
This is confirmed, isn't it?
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 01:11
---
Patch submitted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2008-01/msg00170.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34556
--- Comment #4 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 01:27 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I think it would be better to fix the documentation to reflect the current
> behaviour for C++/ObjC++, and mark this bug as an enhancement request.
It is a bit misleading providing -Winit-sel
--- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 01:35 ---
Actually. Winit-self was introduced in GCC 3.4 but the init-self trick was
probably introduced earlier. So this may actually be a regression from much
earlier. Anyway, documenting that it doesn't work seems the right th
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 01:45 ---
This should work, if it does not then it is a bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34772
--- Comment #7 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 02:08 ---
So it seems this worked in 3.3, so it is a regression after all.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de 2008-01-14 07:42
---
This fails with both -m32 and -m64 (but I'm not quite sure if it
still reproduces the original issue):
typedef unsigned long size_t;
template struct array { };
template
struct my_table: public array { };
templ
101 - 130 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
