--- Comment #5 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2009-12-11 09:30
---
there's no ICE with 4.1.2 or 4.4.2
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42350
--- Comment #1 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 09:53 ---
Is a dup of PR41399
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 41399 ***
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #15 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 09:53 ---
*** Bug 42351 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |ramana at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 10:31 ---
Subject: Bug 41939
Author: ramana
Date: Fri Dec 11 10:31:13 2009
New Revision: 155154
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155154
Log:
2009-12-11 Ramana Radhakrishnan
PR target/41939
--- Comment #5 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2009-12-11 10:39
---
(In reply to comment #4)
> > But I'm not convinced that doing this is always a mistake.
>
> Since we don't care about the object, we must care about the constructor side
> effect. I seem to be under the impressio
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 10:56 ---
Subject: Bug 42320
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Dec 11 10:56:17 2009
New Revision: 155155
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155155
Log:
2009-12-11 Richard Guenther
PR lto/42320
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 10:56 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #6 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 11:17 ---
Fixed.
--
hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #13 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 11:17
---
Fixed.
--
hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNE
--- Comment #11 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 11:21 ---
Subject: Bug 41574
Author: ramana
Date: Fri Dec 11 11:21:33 2009
New Revision: 155157
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155157
Log:
Fix PR41574 on 4.4 branch.
2009-12-11 Ramana Radhakrishnan
--- Comment #5 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 11:30 ---
I am testing the attached patch. We should not re-walk bodies of clones. I
wonder if this makes struct-reorg useable?
Honza
Index: ipa-type-escape.c
===
--- Comment #2 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 11:34 ---
Seems to work in today snapshot. The ICE meant visibility bug produced by
frotnend, so probably it was fixed in meantime.
--
hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #2 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 11:37 ---
ipa nothrow is hidden in ipa-pure-const (that should be renamed eventually).
However issue here is that at IPA stage we should not touch function bodies, so
we should not do these updates. This is why fixup pass exi
--- Comment #7 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 11:39 ---
I would vote for LTO frotnend simply sorrying when seeing units with and
without exceptions.
Honza
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41756
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 11:46
---
This is now darwin specific, the lto issue is PR41915.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 11:49 ---
Confirmed. Fails everywhere.
The issue is that flag_complex_method is not the same in lto1 compared to cc1
so we lower the complex multiplication differently.
The specific issue is that we fold
D.2036_6 = __com
--- Comment #9 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 11:54 ---
Subject: Bug 41196
Author: ramana
Date: Fri Dec 11 11:53:46 2009
New Revision: 155158
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155158
Log:
Fix target/41196
2009-12-11 Ramana Radhakrishnan
P
--- Comment #10 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 11:54 ---
Fixed.
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED
--- Comment #6 from kkylheku at gmail dot com 2009-12-11 11:57 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > > But I'm not convinced that doing this is always a mistake.
> >
> > Since we don't care about the object, we must care about the constructor
> > side
> > effect.
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 12:16 ---
I wonder if we should simply ignore -fno-exceptions/-fexceptions passed to
lto1 and rely on the automated discovery.
The testcase btw works for me on i?86.
The proposed patch would delete handling of OPT_fexception
--- Comment #7 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 12:25 ---
Subject: Bug 42251
Author: dodji
Date: Fri Dec 11 12:25:19 2009
New Revision: 155159
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155159
Log:
Fix PR c++/42251
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c++/42251
--- Comment #8 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 12:27 ---
Fixed in 4.5
--
dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNE
--- Comment #2 from developer at sandoe-acoustics dot co dot uk 2009-12-11
13:35 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> In general you can answer what we think is best by checking the llvm-gcc
> sources from llvm, and in this case, we are using:
>
> /* { dg-options "-fnext-runtime -fno-constan
--- Comment #3 from developer at sandoe-acoustics dot co dot uk 2009-12-11
14:08 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > For template-4.mm:
> >
> > /* { dg-do run { target powerpc*-*-darwin* } } */
>
> why is this being restricted to darwin (and powerpc at that)?
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 14:25 ---
The issue with strcpy-chk.c is that with WHOPR we end up streaming
const char s1[] = "123";
as DECL_WEAK which causes string_constant () to not look at DECL_INITIAL
and thus the test fails. Likely the other two ar
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 14:30 ---
Seems to fail everywhere.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
GCC buil
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 14:33 ---
I'm going to test the TREE_ASM_WRITTEN variant.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #6 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 14:36 ---
Subject: Bug 42225
Author: dodji
Date: Fri Dec 11 14:36:05 2009
New Revision: 155160
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155160
Log:
Fix PR c++/42225
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c++/42225
--- Comment #7 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 14:37 ---
Fixed in trunk (4.5)
--
dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 14:40 ---
Subject: Bug 42335
Author: janus
Date: Fri Dec 11 14:40:36 2009
New Revision: 155162
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155162
Log:
gcc/fortran/
2009-12-11 Janus Weil
PR fortran/42335
--- Comment #7 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 14:42 ---
Daniel, is there anything going to happen with those patches you attached? :)
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 14:35 ---
I will look at this.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assign
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 14:46 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 14:46 ---
Subject: Bug 41662
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Dec 11 14:46:09 2009
New Revision: 155163
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155163
Log:
2009-12-11 Richard Guenther
PR lto/41662
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 14:49 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 14:49 ---
Subject: Bug 41915
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Dec 11 14:49:35 2009
New Revision: 155164
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155164
Log:
2009-12-11 Richard Guenther
PR lto/41915
--- Comment #8 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 14:58 ---
Well, on 10th of August I posted this to the mailing list to get comments about
what to do with this PR and some other. I did so far never get any replies :)
So actually I'd like to work things out here and either fi
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 15:02 ---
Fixed with r155162. Thanks for the report.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #6 from mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 15:32
---
Subject: Bug 36047
Author: mkuvyrkov
Date: Fri Dec 11 15:32:08 2009
New Revision: 155165
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155165
Log:
2009-12-11 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
PR targ
--- Comment #7 from mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 15:35
---
This is now fixed with the above patch by Sebastian.
--
mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 15:44 ---
Nothing new.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASS
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 15:53 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 15:53 ---
Subject: Bug 42037
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Dec 11 15:52:57 2009
New Revision: 155166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155166
Log:
2009-12-11 Richard Guenther
PR lto/42037
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 15:54 ---
Here is a patch which fixes the ICE:
Index: gcc/fortran/module.c
===
--- gcc/fortran/module.c(revision 155160)
+++ gcc/fortran/module.c(w
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 15:55 ---
I believe this should get fixed with the fix for PR41657 I am going to check
in soon. Please update this PR accordingly.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 16:09 ---
I think this one can be closed.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 16:21 ---
I can't reproduce this, thus fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 16:31 ---
The problem is that we create a FUNCTION_TYPE with error_mark_node parameter
type for error recovery, and then ptr_reasonably_similar tries to consider
conversions that are almost right in order to give better error me
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 16:40
---
I can confirm the ICE from comment #8 still is present on i?86-linux.
#1 0x0820c740 in expand_mult (mode=XCmode, op0=0x0, op1=0xb77d3ba0,
target=0xb77d3b7c, unsignedp=0)
at /home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/ex
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 16:42 ---
Works for me with a cross.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 16:44 ---
The Darwin issue is being tracked in PR42333. Since the LTO issue is fixed, to
avoid confusion I'll close this one as a dup.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 42333 ***
--
ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #31 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 16:44 ---
*** Bug 42074 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 16:47 ---
Fixed thus.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAIT
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 16:50 ---
It works when you use the linker plugin
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 16:54 ---
Fixed. -Wabi and -Wpsabi is a non-LTO specific issue.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 16:56 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 16:56 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #19 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-11 17:02
---
This is now [Ready]:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#539
and we are already *almost* doing the right thing, besides a std::move call in
std::adjacent_difference, which I'm going
--- Comment #8 from jacob dot benoit dot 1 at gmail dot com 2009-12-11
17:07 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Fixed in trunk (4.5)
>
Thanks for fixing this bug!
Maybe I'm just ignorant, but I can't get the fix to work for me. I have SVN
r155167. I am still getting a ICE, albeit at a sl
--- Comment #9 from jacob dot benoit dot 1 at gmail dot com 2009-12-11
17:10 ---
I also confirm that I still have the ICE with the .ii file attached to this bug
report.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42225
--- Comment #10 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-12-11 17:24
---
Confirmed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RES
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE 2009-12-11
17:25 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 regression] ICE in function_and_variable_visibility breaks
Tru64 UNIX Ada bootstrap
> --- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-27 11:20
> ---
> Is this still a
--- Comment #2 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 17:37 ---
Subject: Bug 42263
Author: ramana
Date: Fri Dec 11 17:37:34 2009
New Revision: 155171
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155171
Log:
2009-12-11 Ramana Radhakrishnan
PR target/42263
--- Comment #3 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 17:45 ---
Subject: Bug 42263
Author: ramana
Date: Fri Dec 11 17:45:32 2009
New Revision: 155172
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155172
Log:
2009-12-11 Ramana Radhakrishnan
PR target/42263
--- Comment #4 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 17:46 ---
Fixed.
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #12 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 17:46 ---
Fixed .
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #20 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 17:55 ---
Subject: Bug 22634
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Dec 11 17:54:37 2009
New Revision: 155173
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155173
Log:
2009-12-11 Paolo Carlini
PR libstdc++/22634, DR 539
--- Comment #13 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 17:55 ---
Mine, fix in progress.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|un
--- Comment #21 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-11 17:56
---
Done.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Statu
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 18:00 ---
Subject: Bug 41657
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Dec 11 18:00:24 2009
New Revision: 155174
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155174
Log:
2009-12-11 Richard Guenther
PR lto/41658
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 18:00 ---
Subject: Bug 41658
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Dec 11 18:00:24 2009
New Revision: 155174
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155174
Log:
2009-12-11 Richard Guenther
PR lto/41658
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 18:00 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 18:01 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
Platform:
Fedora release 12 (Constantine)
Linux cage.lbl.gov 2.6.31.5-127.fc12.x86_64 #1 SMP Sat Nov 7 21:11:14 EST
2009 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
URL: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
Revision: 150327 or higher
gcc version 4.5.0 20090801 (experimental) (GCC)
I'll attach a reproducer.
g
--- Comment #1 from rwgk at yahoo dot com 2009-12-11 18:05 ---
Created an attachment (id=19277)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19277&action=view)
reproducer
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42352
--- Comment #5 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 18:10 ---
Needed an update to a newer version of binutils. Invalid.
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 18:11 ---
arm-elf is in maintenance only mode. Marking it as P4 -
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 18:15 ---
No feedback in more than 6 months .
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 18:16 ---
Fixed with 4.3.2 apparently.
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-11 18:17
---
The std::, c++0x, version, is in flux. If you want the old behavior, just use
std::tr1::bind for now, and do not expect and C++0x-conforming behavior.
Really, no point in keeping open issues vs ongoing C++0x wo
--- Comment #3 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 18:19 ---
No feedback in over a year and don't have more information . Hence Suspended.
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #10 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 18:21 ---
No feedback in over 6 months and appears to work fine in later versions of the
tools.
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-11 18:22
---
:) Sorry, this issue has nothing to do with std::bind (ansd std::tr1::bind) of
course. This is actually about list::splcie and list::merge, which indeed are
still in flux in the WP, see DR 1133, or:
http://g
--- Comment #5 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 18:23 ---
No feedback in over 6 months.
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 18:27 ---
As it could not be reproduced and a later comment indicates it works for 4.4.0.
Resolved as INVALID.
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #14 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE 2009-12-11
18:37 ---
Subject: Re: Bootstrap with Sun Studio 12.1 fails
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-12/msg00625.html.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41771
--- Comment #7 from rmansfield at qnx dot com 2009-12-11 18:38 ---
The PR valid and it is still reproducible on the 4.3 branch and AFAIK the 4.3
branch is still open. A resolution of WONTFIX makes sense, but INVALID doesnt..
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35623
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-11 18:43
---
Bah, we can use some std::move(s) in the splice and merge calls used by sort,
and solve this. We'll be reverted as unnecessary when DR 1133 will be resolved,
but maybe can make people more happy for the time be
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 18:56 ---
Using "-O3 -fno-signed-zeros" (the latter being set by -ffast-math) gets rid of
all the additional computations and results in
:
D.1504_2 = *a_1(D);
D.1514_10 = REALPART_EXPR <*b_4(D)>;
D.1515_11 = IMAGPART_EX
--- Comment #5 from rwgk at yahoo dot com 2009-12-11 19:27 ---
Thanks for the fast response!
Everything else we have works with -std=c++0x.
If this issue is fixed I could keep testing with -std=c++0x,
which I imagine could be of great value long term.
(We have several 100k of sources + b
--- Comment #4 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 21:04 ---
Subject: Bug 42219
Author: jason
Date: Fri Dec 11 21:03:55 2009
New Revision: 155177
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155177
Log:
PR c++/42219
* typeck.c (error_type_p): New.
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-11 21:04
---
Thanks. This specific issue I will fix in one day or so. But be warned that
until DR 1133 is resolved by the ISO C++ Committee likely you will encounter
problems with list::splice and list::merge.
--
http:
--- Comment #3 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 21:08 ---
Subject: Bug 40290
Author: dfranke
Date: Fri Dec 11 21:08:39 2009
New Revision: 155179
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155179
Log:
2009-12-11 Daniel Franke
PR fortran/40290
--- Comment #4 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 21:10 ---
Fixed in trunk. Closing.
Thanks for the report!
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #21 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 21:39
---
All is well again.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
St
--- Comment #3 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 21:44 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I wonder why this is not caught in parse.c's verify_st_order; the error
> message there is much nicer
Because it seems that verify_st_order is not called for every accepted
statement. In
--- Comment #7 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 22:05 ---
Subject: Bug 42352
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Dec 11 22:04:56 2009
New Revision: 155180
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155180
Log:
2009-12-11 Paolo Carlini
PR libstdc++/42352
*
--- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-11 22:10
---
list::sort (both overloads) should be fine now, if you notice something
strange, please let me know...
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
1 - 100 of 167 matches
Mail list logo
