--- Comment #14 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-01-18 08:05 ---
Fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #29 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 08:35 ---
I asked for two votes:
1) keep removal of pre-iso includes, (ie current sources). Majority approves.
2) reinstate just iostream.h and fstream.h. Majority declines.
Therefore, I am closing this as WONTFIX as per Ric
--- Comment #20 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 08:45 ---
This patch seems good to me. What's the delay here?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27880
--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-01-18 08:58 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I think dwarf2out_switch_text_section() is defined if DWARF2_DEBUGGING_INFO
> is defined. So, it appears the attached change will fix the problem.
No, dwarf2out_switch_text_section() has to go
--- Comment #4 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2008-01-18 08:59 ---
I bisected it using the binaries of Tobias:
gcc-trunk-x86_64-2008-01-15-r131542.tar.gz works
gcc-trunk-x86_64-2008-01-16-r131566.tar.gz is broken
inbetween there exist mainly only 2 relevant commits:
- r131553 Th. Koenig,
--- Comment #30 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-01-18 09:14 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Revision 129442 breaks
libstc++ API
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #29 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 08:35 ---
>
> I asked f
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 09:25 ---
Dang it! I posted the fix for this one on PR34785.
It has to hold until the weekend for reasons described there.
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34784
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 09:22 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I have a fix for this that I will apply as "obvious" overnight (in the EU,
> that
> is:))
> Paul
except that it caused a FAIL on one platform and, on another, the testsuite
hung!!! Anyw
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Keywords||diagnosti
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 09:33 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Sorry, the above is the fix for PR34784.
This one is fixed by:
In trans-array.c (gfc_add_loop_ss_code)
case GFC_SS_CONSTRUCTOR:
if (ss->expr->ts.type == BT_CHARACTER
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 09:33 ---
Looks related to PR34573.
Backtrace:
#0 0x010bacb1 in htab_find_with_hash (htab=0x0,
element=0x2b899b95a300, hash=863155296)
at /space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/libiberty/hashtab.c:566
#1 0x000
--- Comment #4 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-01-18 11:53 ---
Author: uros
Date: Fri Jan 18 09:55:15 2008
New Revision: 131626
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131626
Log:
PR debug/34484
* dwarf2out.c (dwarf2out_switch_text_section): Do not guard
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2008-01-18 11:56 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Missing optimization when storing
structures
> --- Comment #8 from dtemirbulatov at gmail dot com 2008-01-17 18:34
> ---
> This regression happens after the SSA was mer
--- Comment #7 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-01-18 11:54 ---
Sorry, wrong PR number in the ChangeLog.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34484
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 11:48 ---
Reduced testcase:
module krmod
contains
function doit()
implicit none
real :: doit1(100)
real :: doit
doit1 = tm_doit()
return
end function doit
function tm_doit(genloc)
implicit none
chara
--- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 09:56 ---
Subject: Bug 34484
Author: uros
Date: Fri Jan 18 09:55:15 2008
New Revision: 131626
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131626
Log:
PR debug/34484
* dwarf2out.c (dwarf2out_switch_text
--- Comment #14 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 09:47 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
>
> - I do not think this is fine. As end user I want to see my errors the same
> way at any optimization level.
>
We strive to for this when it is feasible and reasonable, but there is a
t
--- Comment #2 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-18 11:27 ---
This is fixed by the same patch which fixes c++/34766
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-18 11:34 ---
I meant c++/34776, sorry.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34486
Gfortran version 4.3.0 20080117 (experimental) [trunk revision 131592] (GCC)
gives an ICE on the following program.
$ gfortran -c ia.f90
ia.f90: In function 'doit':
ia.f90:12: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
---
m
--- Comment #7 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 12:09 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> This is also true for C++ unless -pedantic is specified (which is confusing
> since I thought -pedantic-errors was the default for C++, but apparently this
> changed at some point). Using '-Wa
--- Comment #10 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 12:04 ---
Re. comment 7:
What does the initial RTL look like with GCC 3.3 and with a post tree-ssa
compiler?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22141
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 12:08
---
For 3.3-hammer I get (x86_64):
;; Function f
(note 2 0 3 NOTE_INSN_DELETED)
(note 3 2 4 NOTE_INSN_FUNCTION_BEG)
(note 4 3 5 NOTE_INSN_DELETED)
(note 5 4 6 NOTE_INSN_DELETED)
(note 6 5 8 NOTE_INSN_DELETED)
(
--- Comment #12 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 12:35 ---
So 3.3 expanded the initializer into sets of the individual components, but
with ANDs and ORs and a single MEM store, instead of MEM stores to the
individual components.
It seems to me that this is not something you
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Summary|Recursive BLOCK tree|[4.3 Regre
--- Comment #12 from ian at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 15:25 ---
Subject: Bug 33407
Author: ian
Date: Fri Jan 18 15:25:02 2008
New Revision: 131629
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131629
Log:
PR c++/33407
./:
* tree.h (DECL_IS_OPERATOR_NEW): De
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-01-18 16:54 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] ICE on gcc.dg/pr34233.c for
MIPS
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 16:50
> ---
> Confirmed.
--- Comment #5 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 16:33 ---
Suspended for now. We'll pick up the library work again once the C++ committee
has resolved this issue.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from ian at airs dot com 2008-01-18 16:32 ---
When I compile this code with current mainline with -O3 -Wstrict-overflow=3 I
get the following warnings:
Objects/unicodeobject.c: In function unicode_startswith:
Objects/unicodeobject.c:6943: warning: dereferencing type-pun
--- Comment #14 from ian at airs dot com 2008-01-18 16:17 ---
This is now fixed.
--
ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #8 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 16:15 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> But I don't feel strong either way. Your patch looks correct to me.
Thanks! I'll test it with bootstrap®test on x86 and ppc.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34808
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 16:10 ---
> Thanks - how does one get and install the patch ?
Well, that is difficult - he did not post it. It was probably neither in the
final shape nor regression tested to make sure it does not break something of
the test
--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 16:05 ---
I tried to avoid setting XEXP(note,0) twice (once directly and once through
gen_rtx_INSN_LIST.
But I don't feel strong either way. Your patch looks correct to me.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=
--- Comment #3 from myan at microstrategy dot com 2008-01-18 15:35 ---
Created an attachment (id=14970)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14970&action=view)
Java application
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34853
Revision 131576:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2008-01/msg00337.html
miscompiled 178.galgel in SPEC CPU 2000 on Linux/ia32 with -O2 -ffast-math.
178.galgel went into a finite loop.
--
Summary: [4.3 Regression] Revision 131576 miscompiled 178.galgel
Product: gcc
The following change in basic_string.tcc is not valid in my usage. A java
application loads c++ jni shared library that is compiled with
-D_GLIBCXX_FULLY_DYNAMIC_STRING. Please see attached test files.
Revision 95358 - (view) (download) - [select for diffs]
Modified Mon Feb 21 23:25:08 2005 UTC (
With revision 131628, on Intel64 quad-core machine with "make -j 4", I got
/bin/sh: ./config.status: No such file or directory
make[4]: *** [Makefile] Error 127
make[4]: Leaving directory
`/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3'
make[3]: *** [all-target-libs
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 15:09 ---
I have a patch.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 14:53 ---
The recursion is created by set_block_origin_self (), called from
#0 set_block_origin_self (stmt=0x2b4ce448cd80)
at /space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/integrate.c:105
#1 0x0098ca87 in set_decl_origin_s
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 14:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=14967)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14967&action=view)
reduced testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34850
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirme
--- Comment #6 from barry dot j dot mcinnes at noaa dot gov 2008-01-18
14:40 ---
Subject: Re: tab format failure to display properly
(regression vs. g77)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thanks - how does one get and install the patch ?
On 1/18/08 7:25 AM, jvdelisle at
Compilation of the attached testcase hangs in
0x0056aedc in cp_print_error_function (context=0x15c5a60,
diagnostic=0x7fff955f6c30)
at /space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/cp/error.c:2426
2426 while (TREE_CODE (ao) == BLOCK &&
BLOCK_ABSTRACT_ORIGIN (ao))
2427
--- Comment #5 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 14:42 ---
With the patch in #4, .166r.split1 looks like:
(insn:HI 100 103 179 15 xxx.c:74 (set (subreg:SI (reg:DI 198 [ regno ]) 0)
(reg/v:SI 159 [ regno ])) 172 {movsi_ie} (insn_list:REG_LIBCALL 180
(expr_list:REG_NO
--- Comment #3 from ramana dot radhakrishnan at celunite dot com
2008-01-18 14:37 ---
Add CC
--
ramana dot radhakrishnan at celunite dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from ramana dot radhakrishnan at celunite dot com
2008-01-18 14:35 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Which optimization level?
-O2 .
>
> Why does cross-jumping not optimize this?
>
Will check on cross-jumping and get back.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c
--- Comment #1 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 14:26 ---
Which optimization level?
Why does cross-jumping not optimize this?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34849
Whilst investigating a missed optimization oppurtunity in comparison to gcc 3.4
I came across this case.
void foo (int n, int in[], int res[])
{
int i;
for (i=0; i:
if (n > 0)
goto ;
else
goto ;
:
i = 0;
ivtmp.19 = 0;
:
if (MEM[base: in, index: ivtmp.19] != 0)
goto ;
--- Comment #15 from sergstesh at yahoo dot com 2008-01-18 14:08 ---
With CFLAGS='-O2 -Wstrict-overflow=5' still there is no warnings in
'make_check.log':
"
[EMAIL
PROTECTED]:/mnt/sda8/sergei/gcc4.2.x-O2_bug/gcc-4.2.2-O2/libsndfile-1.0.17>
grep -i warn make.log
sndfile.c:491: warning:
--- Comment #4 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 14:03 ---
Created an attachment (id=14966)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14966&action=view)
Handle REG_RETVAL notes in try_split
Untested, etc. But the ICE for the test case goes away. This patch needs
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 12:58 ---
Subject: Bug 34801
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jan 18 12:57:42 2008
New Revision: 131628
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131628
Log:
2008-01-18 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
P
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 12:47 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 12:43
---
The patch should indeed work and I suggest we go forward with it for 4.3.
For 4.4, can we use this sort of flag (name it no_tbaa_for_result) to handle
both the operator new and the placement new case where for the
--- Comment #13 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 12:45
---
Right. You also need to watch for TBAA problems in the RTL you create.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 12:45 ---
It's a regression - and I might be guilty of it with my Bind(C) patches...
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 16:53 ---
The offending insn is already produced in "expand".
GCC ICEs the first time it calls recog() on it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34831
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 16:50 ---
Confirmed.
ignoring nonexistent directory
"/usr/local/lib/gcc/mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu/4.3.0/include"
ignoring nonexistent directory
"/usr/local/lib/gcc/mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu/4.3.0/include-fixed"
ignoring nonexist
--- Comment #3 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2008-01-18 16:41
---
Looks like -Wall being at the end disables this warning uh oh. This is invalid,
sorry for taking your time.
--
ismail at pardus dot org dot tr changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 16:32 ---
Confirmed. This is the right behavior according to the C++0x specification, but
the backward-compatibility issue with push_back is a problem. The C++ committee
is aware is the issue.
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #6 from gin at mo dot msk dot ru 2008-01-18 16:21 ---
Subject: Re: wrong code for dereferencing type-punned pointer
> looks good for 4.2.
Can we see (assembler) output of that 4.2, with those same
`-fno-strict-aliasing -O3 -fno-strict-aliasing' optimization options,
for th
--- Comment #7 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 16:07 ---
Ah, and of course gen_rtx_INSN_LIST does not set XEXP(0) of the REG_LIBCALL
note. Silly me ;-)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34808
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-01-18 16:56 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] ICE on gcc.dg/pr34233.c for
MIPS
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 16:53
> ---
> The offend
--- Comment #13 from ian at airs dot com 2008-01-18 16:01 ---
I think you're right. If the call to placement new is not inlined, and if we
don't know anything special about it (which we currently don't), then it seems
to me that everything is bound to work OK. It is only the inlining t
--- Comment #9 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 17:02 ---
Does not fail unless -march=sb1 is given.
Thus not a regression until proven that older GCCs did not fail with this
option.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #11 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 18:15 ---
It is a regression, this works:
$ mipsel-linux-gcc -march=sb1 -ffast-math -c pr34233.c
$ mipsel-linux-gcc --version
mipsel-linux-gcc (GCC) 3.4.3
This doesn't:
$ gcc -march=sb1 -ffast-math -c pr34233.c
pr34233.c: In
--- Comment #5 from myan at microstrategy dot com 2008-01-18 15:35 ---
Created an attachment (id=14972)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14972&action=view)
shell script to run the test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34853
--enable-threads
--disable-multilib --disable-libgomp --disable-libmudflap --disable-libssp
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.3.0 20080118 (experimental) (GCC)
Given that i don't build c++, should fix-headers be installed in the first
place (for use a different compiler, perhaps)?
--
aldot a
I think both testcases below are valid, but gfortran rejects the
second one. They only differ in the order of USE statements.
$ cat test.f90
module common_init_conf
integer, allocatable, dimension(:,:) :: Nmoltype_phase
end module common_init_conf
subroutine read_initial_config_nml()
use common
--- Comment #4 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2008-01-18 17:19
---
Actually I am reopening this because after talking to Richi we agree that -Wall
should not reset -Wstrict-overflow. But of course final decision is up to iant.
--
ismail at pardus dot org dot tr changed:
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-01-18 20:52 ---
On i686-apple-darwin9, I get:
pr34856.c: In function 'f1':
pr34856.c:16: error: invalid reference prefix
{(unsigned int) &g[16]}
pr34856.c:16: internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/
--- Comment #8 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 21:52 ---
Changing component; the patch here doesn't touch the preprocessor at all.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
The qdelg.f subroutine, a part of SciPy, fails to build if -O3 optimization is
turned on. The error given is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] quadpack]$ gfortran -c -ffixed-form -fno-second-underscore
-fPIC
-O3 -funroll-loops -c dqelg.f -o /tmp/dqelg.o
dqelg.f: In function 'dqelg':
dqelg.f:1: internal compil
--- Comment #1 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-01-18 23:32 ---
Confirmed on i686-apple-darwin9, rev. 131629 (trunk) and gfortran 4.2.2.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34861
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 23:54 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 34860 ***
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO||32834
nThis||
St
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO||32834
nThis||
St
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 23:49 ---
FIXED on the trunk (4.3.0).
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #20 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-19 00:22 ---
There is a bug (PR32102) where -Wall after -Wstrict-overflow resets the latter
to its default value. I think this is why you didn't get the warning. Removing
-Wall or moving -Wstrict-overflow=5 after it should generate
--- Comment #1 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-19 00:39 ---
Subject: Bug 33768
Author: manu
Date: Sat Jan 19 00:39:08 2008
New Revision: 131650
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131650
Log:
2008-01-19 Manuel Lopez-Ibanez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR ot
--- Comment #4 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-19 00:50 ---
*** Bug 34807 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-19 00:45 ---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32868 .
Can you try a newer snapshot since I think this has changed back to a warning.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34859
--- Comment #54 from zadeck at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-19 00:39 ---
Subject: Bug 34400
Author: zadeck
Date: Sat Jan 19 00:38:34 2008
New Revision: 131649
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131649
Log:
2008-01-18 Kenneth Zadeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
St
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 23:54 ---
*** Bug 34863 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34860
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 23:46 ---
Subject: Bug 32616
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Jan 18 23:46:04 2008
New Revision: 131643
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131643
Log:
2008-01-18 Tobias Burnus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fort
--- Comment #1 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-01-18 23:36 ---
Works for me on i686-apple-darwin9 (Intel Core2Duo OSX 10.5.1), rev. 131629
(trunk) and gfortran 4.2.2.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34860
The qdelg.f subroutine, a part of SciPy, fails to build if -O3 optimization is
turned on. The error given is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] quadpack]$ gfortran -c -ffixed-form -fno-second-underscore
-fPIC
-O3 -funroll-loops -c dqelg.f -o /tmp/dqelg.o
dqelg.f: In function 'dqelg':
dqelg.f:1: internal compil
Have a situation where some ugly make recursion is causing -D related cflags
for compilation to be duplicated (only for one file out of thousands)
When that duplication happens to include -D__STDC_LIMIT_MACROS the g++ 4.3
(using 20080111 snapshot) ends up with the following error:
: error: "__STD
The following generates:
i_1_mods_bug.f:10.72:
END FUNCTION
1
Internal Error at (1):
gfc_compare_array_spec(): Array spec clobbered
4.3.0 20080109 (experimental) [trunk revision 131426] (GCC)
It works fine if I delete
--
kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #9 from ISPARRY at BROCADE dot COM 2008-01-19 00:53 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Changing component; the patch here doesn't touch the preprocessor at all.
>
If you are changing the component, would not a better choice be "driver" than
"c"?
I agree the patch does not tou
--- Comment #30 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-19 00:51 ---
I tried that myself (patch in comment #11) and got no regressions. It's a
reasonable possibility, but isn't it a bit too early to close the bug? :-)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33887
--- Comment #3 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-19 00:50 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 34777 ***
--
kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #5 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-19 00:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=14973)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14973&action=view)
reduced testcase
I think Richard's comment is the case. Here is a reduced testcase.
The PIC memory access on
--- Comment #19 from sergstesh at yahoo dot com 2008-01-18 23:33 ---
Regarding "BTW, is your makefile adding -Wstrict-overflow after or before -Wall
-Wextra?".
Here is how the first action line in 'make.log' looks:
"
23 if /bin/sh ../../libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile
/maxtor5/ser
Have a class that defines a placement new like varient that updates a pointer
to raw storage via a reference argument. Here's a stripped down code fragment:
#include // size_t
class T
{
public:
void *operator new(size_t size, char *&p);
T( int &rc);
} ;
void *T::operator new(size_t size
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 23:16
---
On x86-64:
==11867== 208 bytes in 26 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 1 of 5
==11867==at 0x4A059F6: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:149)
==11867==by 0xB4C018: __gmp_default_allocate (in /mnt/sdb2/obj
--- Comment #7 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-19 01:40 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
>
> Your fix looks quite obvious, could you send it to gcc-patches so we can fix
> this before the freeze? Thanks for the quick fix btw.
>
That fix is too simple. It doesn't handle -Wno-stric
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-19 01:05 ---
This is not a bug as const_var (in this case) is not an integal constant
expression in either C or C++.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 22:23
---
Subject: Bug 34782
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Jan 18 22:22:21 2008
New Revision: 131641
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131641
Log:
2007-01-18 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #12 from jkenisto at us dot ibm dot com 2008-01-18 22:20
---
(In reply to comment #11)
> (In reply to comment #9)
> > > Since this topic came up, I've seen various suggestions for how to
> > > guarantee
> > that a function gets inlined -- e.g., make it a varargs function, o
1 - 100 of 156 matches
Mail list logo
