--- Comment #4 from info dot gnu at rt-labs dot com 2009-04-07 16:52
---
You're right, I tried both examples you mentioned, i'll point this to #35466
that seems to point out the problem you described about.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 35466 ***
--
info dot gnu at
/opt/gcc-4.3.3/bin/gfortran -ffixed-line-length-0 -g-c
-I/Volumes/Users/bmayer/Desktop/download/netcdf-4.0/f90 driver.F90
driver.F90:170.25:
call write_input("crm_input_test.nc", lchnk, 1, icol, plev2, ps, pmid,
&
1
Warning: Character length of actual argument
--- Comment #25 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 17:49 ---
Subject: Bug 25185
Author: jason
Date: Tue Apr 7 17:48:52 2009
New Revision: 145697
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=145697
Log:
PR c++/25185
* c-common.h, c-common.c: Add flag_
--- Comment #1 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 17:51 ---
Could you please attach a (ideally) minimal testcase that reproduces the error?
Thanks.
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 18:28 ---
this dump file is only supposed to be used to debug gcc.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39679
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
Component|c |middle-end
h
The shift isn't necessary. This could have
been re-coded as
return (a-b)<2;
with -fstrict-overflow.
$ cat ga.c
int foo(int a, int b)
{
return (a-b)*4 < 8;
}
$ gcc -S -O2 -fstrict-overflow ga.c
$ cat ga.s
.file "ga.c"
.text
.p2align 4,,15
.globl foo
.typ
--- Comment #18 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-04-07 19:01
---
Created an attachment (id=17604)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17604&action=view)
A bit smaller
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39678
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 20:14 ---
Related to PR 31096.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39683
--- Comment #3 from toon at moene dot org 2009-04-07 18:41 ---
Note that the namelist is overwriting earlier assignments, so it's doubtful
it's legal Fortran.
The original that got my colleague questioning gfortran was:
&namtest
i(1,:)=1,2,3,
i(2,:)=4,5,6,
i(3,:)=7,8,9,
/
which, us
--- Comment #25 from PHHargrove at lbl dot gov 2009-04-07 20:39 ---
Has any progress been made on this bug?
I have hit this problem with gcc-4.3.2 on IRIX with both --disable-fixed-point
and --disable-decimal-float. Since this bug is open with a milestone of 4.3.4
I figured a switch to
--- Comment #26 from rwild at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 20:46 ---
(In reply to comment #25)
> Has any progress been made on this bug?
No, sorry. I hit other places that needed this, too, and don't know how to
work around them easily.
As a workaround, can't you raise the limit in
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-04-07
20:46 ---
Subject: Re: Trouble with new random bits
> Well, *cannot* be still an issue exactly in these terms, because there are no
> log2* functions any more in the code...
You are correct. The log2 fails are gon
--- Comment #19 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-04-07 20:47
---
Created an attachment (id=17605)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17605&action=view)
Smaller...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39678
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-04-07 20:48
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 39629 ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #14 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-04-07 20:48
---
*** Bug 39652 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #9 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-04-07 21:02 ---
The code in comment #1 still does not give the right result. I get
(intel-darwin):
[ibook-dhum] f90/bug% gfc pr38863_1.f90
[ibook-dhum] f90/bug% a.out
12288 -1880941592 -1073751380
[ibook-dhum] f90/bug% gfc -O
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-04-07 21:06 ---
It is caused by revision 145254:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-03/msg00761.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
The following test case is rejected by Comeau but accepted by GCC:
template
struct outer {
template
T search(U, T);
};
template
template
T outer::template search (U, T)
{
return T ();
}
int
main ()
{
int x = 0;
int v = 0;
outer s;
s.search (v, x);
}
"ComeauTest.c", line 9: er
--- Comment #4 from falk at debian dot org 2009-04-07 21:47 ---
Here's a test case:
unsigned long f1();
int f2();
int store_aff_word(int x) {
return (int) (x ? f1() : f2());
}
--
falk at debian dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #20 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-04-07 22:04
---
Created an attachment (id=17606)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17606&action=view)
Even closer to minimal (as C++ code) and more correct
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 22:46 ---
Subject: Bug 39325
Author: janis
Date: Tue Apr 7 22:46:07 2009
New Revision: 145702
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=145702
Log:
2009-04-07 Dominique d'Humieres
PR testsuite/39325
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 22:49 ---
Subject: Bug 39325
Author: janis
Date: Tue Apr 7 22:49:25 2009
New Revision: 145703
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=145703
Log:
2009-04-07 Dominique d'Humieres
PR testsuite/39325
--- Comment #27 from PHHargrove at lbl dot gov 2009-04-07 23:39 ---
(In reply to comment #26)
Ralph,
Thanks for the quick reply.
Unfortunately, I am not in control of the machine in question and thus cannot
raise the ARG_MAX limit on my own. I will send email to the admins to see if
--- Comment #4 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 23:42 ---
Testing a patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39614
--- Comment #5 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 23:43 ---
Testing a patch.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|una
--- Comment #8 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 23:46 ---
The expression is indeed not an integer constant expression and so not
valid for a case label in ISO C. But I'll look at restricting the error
in this case to a pedwarn-if-pedantic if the case label folds to an intege
Hi,
I am considering working on fixing the pre-pass scheduling problem on
x86 (Bug 38403). The pre-pass instruction scheduler currently increases
register pressure to a degree that causes the register allocator to
fail. Before I commit to this task, I would like to gather as much
information as po
Shobaki, Ghassan wrote:
Hi,
I am considering working on fixing the pre-pass scheduling problem on
x86 (Bug 38403). The pre-pass instruction scheduler currently increases
register pressure to a degree that causes the register allocator to
fail. Before I commit to this task, I would like to gather
--- Comment #14 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-08 03:45 ---
Subject: Bug 34691
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 8 03:44:48 2009
New Revision: 145709
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=145709
Log:
PR c++/34691
* name-lookup.c (merge_functions):
--- Comment #15 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-08 03:55 ---
Subject: Bug 34691
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 8 03:55:00 2009
New Revision: 145710
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=145710
Log:
PR c++/34691
* name-lookup.c (merge_functions):
--- Comment #16 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-08 03:56 ---
Fixed for 4.4/4.5, not going to fix in 4.3.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-08 04:32 ---
Reopen based on comment #9.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Compile the below testcase with -O3 -funroll-all-loops option, using
crx-elf-gcc vesion 4.5.0 20080307 (sources from trunk).
Command line:
crx-elf-gcc test.c -o3 -funroll-all-loops
test.c:187: error: insn does not satisfy its constraints:
(insn 8 119 130 2 /scratch/user/swami/test.c:149 (set (mem/
--- Comment #4 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-04-08
04:59 ---
How exactly are you supposed to copy a file into a build subdirectory before it
is created?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39161
--- Comment #5 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-04-08
05:01 ---
I should add that I am seeing this on i686-apple-darwin9 with the
gcc-4.4.0-20090407 snapshot.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39161
--- Comment #1 from MR dot Swami dot Reddy at nsc dot com 2009-04-08 05:09
---
Created an attachment (id=17607)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17607&action=view)
Bug testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39685
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #8 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-08 06:06 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Then we should fix this bug by requiring 64-bit HOST_WIDE_INT for x86 targets
This is just the special case of GCC generating different code for the same
target from different *hosts*; you'd ha
--
irar at il dot ibm dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |irar at il dot ibm dot com
|dot org
--- Comment #23 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-08 06:47 ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> you should then figure out why the configure-time tests do not enable
> _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_STDINT_TR1.
conftest.cc: In function 'int main()':
conftest.cc:99: error: 'INTPTR_MAX' was not declare
--- Comment #17 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-08 06:55 ---
Adding the libstdc++ regressions I've seen as a dependent, see PR39644 comment
#23.
(That is, the PR448 solution in progress relies on newlib providing the missing
INTPTR_MAX, INTPTR_MIN and UINTPTR_MAX which it doesn't
101 - 142 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
