--- Comment #3 from fjoe at samodelkin dot net 2010-03-17 07:09 ---
The source of library "bar" is:
--- cut here ---
#include "foo.h"
#ifdef _MSC_VER
#define BAR_API __declspec(dllexport)
#else
#define BAR_API __attribute__((visibility("default")))
#endif
void BAR_API
bar()
{
--- Comment #4 from pluto at agmk dot net 2010-03-17 07:57 ---
this PR sounds like a PR38610.
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #11 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 08:23 ---
So why not just something like the following:
Note that uses in REG_EQUAL notes are taken into account in
the computation of invariants. Hence it is safe to retain the
note even if the no
--- Comment #12 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 08:30 ---
If it is ok to call check_maybe_invariant in this spot, then I think that's the
right fix.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43360
--- Comment #13 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 08:33 ---
Mine.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned
--- Comment #14 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 08:59
---
I just posted the same fix. :-) Yes, it is OK for all branches.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43360
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 09:20 ---
Actually, this seems to be a C FE bug, corruption of TREE_CHAIN chains.
The reason for dwarf2out hanging is that in foo we have a block:
BLOCK #0 [written]
SUPERCONTEXT: foo
VARS: vector_size foo i h
Note that th
--- Comment #27 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 09:25 ---
Subject: Bug 42216
Author: bernds
Date: Wed Mar 17 09:25:35 2010
New Revision: 157511
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=157511
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/42216
* regrename.c (creat
--- Comment #12 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 09:30 ---
Close as fixed as only PR 42954 remains to be done.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 09:31 ---
Cross reference: The missing define of "_WIN32" causes failures on
MinGW/MinGW64 for gfortran.dg/dev_null.F90 and gfortran.dg/write_to_null.F90.
(cf. PR 42950 which is otherwise fixed.)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugz
I found that when I emerged libcaca 0.99 beta 16, I got 2 ICEs in demo.c
and demo0.c. After some code cutting I got down to [attached demo.i]. Note that
draw_circle isn't defined, it was a "real" function in libcaca's
demo.c. Also, the there's an "-O" flag, removing it causes an error on
draw_ci
--- Comment #1 from scientica at gmail dot com 2010-03-17 09:40 ---
Created an attachment (id=20122)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20122&action=view)
the crash case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43398
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 09:53 ---
Subject: Bug 43331
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Mar 17 09:53:40 2010
New Revision: 157512
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=157512
Log:
2010-03-17 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/43331
*
--- Comment #19 from rguenther at suse dot de 2010-03-17 10:01 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] Empty loop not
removed
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, changpeng dot fang at amd dot com wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #17 from changpeng dot fang at amd dot com 2010-03-17 00:18
> ---
> (In
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 10:03 ---
FIXED on the trunk (4.5).
Richard: Thanks for the clear bug report! And for making the middle-end smarter
with regards to bonds.
Actually, will this middle-end change cause problems for inlining such
old-style Fortr
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de 2010-03-17 10:07 ---
Subject: Re: Cray pointers generate bogus IL for the
middle-end
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 10:03
> ---
> FIXED on
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 10:47 ---
From
[3] ISO/IEC 14882-1998 [conv.prom] An rvalue for an integral bit-field can be
converted to an rvalue of type int if int can represent all the values of the
bit-field; otherwise, it can be converted to unsigned
--- Comment #20 from doko at ubuntu dot com 2010-03-17 10:51 ---
no change in the libjava testsuite when built with these binutils
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40860
--- Comment #5 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 10:54 ---
I think the behaviour is intentional, for the same reasons described at
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Visibility#Problems_with_C.2B-.2B-_exceptions_.28please_read.21.29
Instantiated templates (such as Foo::foo) have vague lin
--- Comment #12 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 10:58 ---
Reduced testcase at -g -O2 on x86_64 grows during var-tracking get_max_uid ()
from ~ 22000 to over a 100. Adding ten X4's instead of 1 of course eats
even more memory.
extern void *f1 (void *, void *, void *);
e
--- Comment #4 from bernds at codesourcery dot com 2010-03-17 11:05 ---
It's not immediately obvious to me why the ARM mulsi3 patterns are written the
way they are - what are the earlyclobber tricks supposed to be good for?
Richard E., any clues?
--
bernds at codesourcery dot com ch
--- Comment #5 from bernds at codesourcery dot com 2010-03-17 11:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=20123)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20123&action=view)
A patch to fix it.
Okay, so the pattern is written strangely because it's a two-operand mul where
the input and
--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 11:59 ---
Perhaps add a comment why the peephole is needed? That information tend to get
lost rather quickly.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42258
--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 12:02 ---
Subject: Bug 43347
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Mar 17 12:02:35 2010
New Revision: 157515
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=157515
Log:
2010-03-17 Martin Jambor
PR tree-optimization/433
--- Comment #7 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 12:04 ---
Fixed with http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-03/msg00694.html
--
jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
current trunk is failing bootstrap in stage 1 on Cortex-A8 (armv7l target)
First caught it svn 157489. Started bisection yesterday between 157445 &
157489. First bad commit is: 157476.
System is running Debian Testing(Squeeze)
Error:
/opt/trunk/objdir/./gcc/xgcc -B/opt/trunk/objdir/./gcc/
-B/opt
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 12:56 ---
Please provide preprocessed source.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-03-17 12:57 ---
New test fails with:
Executing on host: /space/uros/gcc-build/gcc/xgcc -B/space/uros/gcc-build/gcc/
/home/uros/gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr43379.c -O2 -ftracer -S -o
pr43379.s(timeout = 300)
/home/uros/gcc
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 13:44 ---
I fixed htat.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RE
While crosscompiling gcc 4.5.0 svn rev. 157515, it barfs while compiling
itself:
/usr/src/CVS/toolchains/gcc-4.5.0/build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/usr/src/CVS/toolchains/gcc-4.5.0/build/./gcc/
-B/usr/armv6j-blankpage-linux-gnueabi/bin/
-B/usr/armv6j-blankpage-linux-gnueabi/lib/ -isystem
/usr/armv6j-blankpage-
On the assigned file you can reproduce the bug.
If you compile this file with -O2 the error occures, only way is use -O0 or use
volatile statement for the double arrays.
I think this should be checkt during optimization.
Greets,
Matthias
--
Summary: Register not cleand correctly by
--- Comment #1 from matthias at goldhoorn dot eu 2010-03-17 13:48 ---
Created an attachment (id=20124)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20124&action=view)
source file where the bugg occures
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43401
--
matthias at goldhoorn dot eu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43401
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 13:51 ---
*** Bug 43400 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 13:51 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 43399 ***
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from matthias at goldhoorn dot eu 2010-03-17 13:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=20125)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20125&action=view)
Object dump without optization
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43401
--- Comment #3 from matthias at goldhoorn dot eu 2010-03-17 13:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=20126)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20126&action=view)
Object Dumpo with optimization (broken result)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43401
--- Comment #4 from matthias at goldhoorn dot eu 2010-03-17 13:57 ---
Forgotten output with optimization:
(10.00,20.00)
(0.00,0.00)
(0.00,0.00)
(0.00,0.00)
sould be:
(10.00,20.00)
(10.00,20.00)
(10.00,20.00)
(10.00,20.00)
This actually happens in libicu, preventing genbrk (and hence openoffice and
texlive) to work.
# gcc -O1 icubug.c && ./a.out
Aborted
With -O0 it works. The wrong transformation is done by dom1, it transforms
the loop into a linear sequence without backedges.
:
goto ;
:
# start_16 = PHI
--- Comment #1 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 14:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=20127)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20127&action=view)
testcase
Testcase reduced from ucnv_bld.c of libicu
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43402
--- Comment #3 from robertcnelson at gmail dot com 2010-03-17 14:04 ---
Rebuilding 157476, will take a couple hours to hit that error..
System: gcc -v
voo...@beagle-256mb-1:~$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: arm-linux-gnueabi
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion=
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|dom1 miscompiles binary |[4.5 Regression] dom1
|search
/home2/dave/gcc-4.5/objdir/./gcc/xgcc -B/home2/dave/gcc-4.5/objdir/./gcc/
-B/hom
e2/dave/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.5.0/hppa-linux/bin/
-B/home2/dave/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.5.
0/hppa-linux/lib/ -isystem /home2/dave/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.5.0/hppa-linux/include
-isystem /home2/dave/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.5.0/hppa-linux/sys
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.5.0 20100317 (experimental) [trunk revision 157506] (GCC)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43403
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 14:41 ---
Can you attach preprocessed source?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 14:42 ---
Mine. Looking into it now.
We might even want to simply relax the checking if it triggers on lately build
stuff like tinfos. Let me see if I can avoid tinfos producing "mallformed"
decls.
--
hubicka at gcc dot gn
--- Comment #3 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 14:55 ---
A patch was proposed at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-03/msg00662.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43327
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 14:57 ---
This is points-to information being computed wrongly. A lot was fixed for
GCC 4.4.x in this area.
The constraints are already wrong:
arr = &a
arr.32 = &b
arr.64 = &c
arr.96 = &d
D.2332_12 = arr
With 4.4 and 4.5 w
Tested with GCC 4.4.1 and 4.4.3 (custom built) on Arch Linux
host arch is x86_64 and target is arm-elf
This is the full source code needed to reproduce the bug:
void __data_abort(void) __attribute__ ((naked));
void __data_abort(void)
{
long foo;
long* bar = &foo;
}
test.c: In function __dat
--- Comment #1 from marti at juffo dot org 2010-03-17 15:03 ---
Created an attachment (id=20128)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20128&action=view)
test.i
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43404
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2010-03-17
15:03 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] ICE in stage1 compiling
__bswapdi2
> Can you attach preprocessed source?
Attached.
Dave
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2010-03-17
--- Comment #13 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 15:05 ---
Created an attachment (id=20130)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20130&action=view)
gcc45-pr43058.patch
So far untested fix. This just optimizes handling of optimized out variables
which are know
--- Comment #2 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 15:13 ---
This looks like a duplicate of PR42860.
This works on gcc4.5.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 42860 ***
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 15:13 ---
*** Bug 43398 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 15:14 ---
See PR43398 for a nicely reduced testcase.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42860
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43381
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43384
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 15:19 ---
Waiting for testcase.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
S
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 15:21 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 15:24 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
sinl (and probably others) are not computed correctly. At least for large
inputs.
Please consider the following simple testcase:
$ cat sintest.c
#include
#include
int
main (void) {
double arg = 1e22;
long double larg = 1e22L;
printf("double precision: sin(1e22) = %.16lf\n", sin(arg));
--- Comment #1 from eli dot osherovich at gmail dot com 2010-03-17 15:29
---
Created an attachment (id=20131)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20131&action=view)
testcase as a standalone file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43405
--- Comment #3 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 15:31 ---
It seems the jump threading somehow confuses cfgcleanup. Right after the
jumps are threaded (in tree_ssa_dominator_optimize after the call to
thread_through_all_blocks) the function looks like so:
:
goto ;
:
# start_
--- Comment #4 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 15:36 ---
Um, we cleanup the CFG before updating SSA form, hence no wonder that
the missing PHI nodes confuse it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43402
--- Comment #4 from robertcnelson at gmail dot com 2010-03-17 15:42 ---
Here here is the preprocessed source.
http://rcn-ee.homeip.net:81/dl/gcc/SVN-157476-trunk-c-armv7l-256-bug43399/save-temps.log
http://rcn-ee.homeip.net:81/dl/gcc/SVN-157476-trunk-c-armv7l-256-bug43399/libgcc2.i
Re
--- Comment #5 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 15:49 ---
Hmm, create_edge_and_update_destination_phis is supposed to add new PHI
arguments for the ultimate threading destination. But it only does so if
there are already PHI nodes in that BB. We need to create new ones, whic
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-17 15:51 ---
It is caused by revision 157093:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-02/msg00676.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
Sample code:
#include
int main (void)
{
long long a = 0xLL; // 48 bits set
int popcount;
#if 1
popcount = __builtin_popcountll (a);
#else
popcount = __popcountdi2 (a);
#endif
printf ("%llx popcount = %d\n", a, popcount);
return 0;
}
If -mpopcnt is enabled,
--- Comment #7 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 16:05 ---
Hmm, I wonder how that could cause the bug. Probably because we can't rely
on SSA form being uptodate during cfgcleanup, and hence looking up PHI
arguments is wrong, at least for those SSA names that are registered for
--- Comment #1 from rbarreira at gmail dot com 2010-03-17 16:35 ---
Note that if you use scanf ("%llx", &a) and input "" instead of
having a hardcoded value for a, the bug happens both with -O3 and -O0.
To sum up it seems that when the popcnt instruction is actually issued,
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 16:36 ---
var-tracking expects that if frame_pointer_rtx (resp. arg_pointer_rtx,
depending on whether FRAME_POINTER_CFA_OFFSET or ARG_POINTER_CFA_OFFSET is
defined)
is said to be eliminated (to stack_pointer_rtx in case of
!fram
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 16:42 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Hmm, I wonder how that could cause the bug. Probably because we can't rely
> on SSA form being uptodate during cfgcleanup, and hence looking up PHI
> arguments is wrong, at least for those
If one specifies any visibility attribute on an enum class emits the "type
attributes ignored after type is already defined" warning.
Easy to reproduce! Just add the following lines anywhere and compile them
(without -Wno-attributes):
enum class __attribute__((visibility("default"))) Number
{
--- Comment #9 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 17:03 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-03/msg00774.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43402
If one specifies any visibility attribute on an enum class emits the "type
attributes ignored after type is already defined" warning.
Easy to reproduce! Just add the following lines anywhere and compile them
(without -Wno-attributes):
enum class __attribute__((visibility("default"))) Number
{
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-03-17 17:21
---
*** Bug 43408 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43407
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-03-17 17:21
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 43407 ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from pluto at agmk dot net 2010-03-17 17:28 ---
this is a bug in glibc-2.11.1/sysdeps/x86_64/fpu/s_sinl.S
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43405
Found at
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/110fb27c70e1a193
Reported by: Philippe Bourdin
The following program always prints "-42" independent whether the file exists
or not. It at least should initialize the variable by "-1".
!---
integer :: i
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 17:34
---
Glibc is a separate project, see http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 17:34 ---
If one checks libgfortran/io/*, one sees that (dtp->common.flags &
IOPARM_DT_HAS_SIZE) is only used for read.c and transfer.c and is not touched
at all for inquire.c.
Work-around: gfortran offers the STAT, FSTAT, and
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 17:43 ---
I was wondering about connected files. (I think it only applies to
inquire_via_unit.) What does one return here if the file has not been flushed?
The *STAT result or does one calls flush on the unit and uses then *STA
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 17:47 ---
Fixed in 4.2.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UN
--- Comment #4 from pluto at agmk dot net 2010-03-17 17:51 ---
more details...
intel (24319101.pdf) manual describe requirements for fsin opcode:
"Calculates the sine of the source operand in register ST(0) and stores
the result in ST(0). The source operand must be given in radians an
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 17:58 ---
Patch by Changpeng, which has been approved for 4.6 Stage 1 and moves the
"pass_lim" up;
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-03/msg00775.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32824
--- Comment #5 from eli dot osherovich at gmail dot com 2010-03-17 18:05
---
The very same code compiled by the Intel C compiler runs as expected.
Moreover, the prototype of sinl is as follows
long double sinl(long double x);
and 1e22 definitely withing the bounds of long double.
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2010-03-17
18:19 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] ICE in stage1 compiling __bswapdi2
> var-tracking expects that if frame_pointer_rtx (resp. arg_pointer_rtx,
> depending on whether FRAME_POINTER_CFA_OFFSET or ARG_POINTER_CFA_
--- Comment #3 from vsoni at tilera dot com 2010-03-17 19:33 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
>
> I read that t.f promotes to int. And that is exactly what the C++ frontend
> does:
That's plausible, but the standard, especially it's intent, is unclear I think.
I see three plausible inter
On Linux/x86-64, gcc 3.4 failed to bootstrap gcc 4.5.0 at
revision 157518. I got:
gcc -c -g -fkeep-inline-functions -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings
-Wcast-qual -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-format-attribute
-Wold-style-definition -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.
-I/net/gnu-13/ex
--- Comment #8 from vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org 2010-03-17 20:05 ---
Sorry for a late follow up but I've just discovered that this change broke
compilation of code using wxWidgets library with "-pedantic-errors -std=c++98"
switches because wxWidgets uses constructions such as (simplified)
--- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 20:16 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > Maybe we just need to document that -pedantic changes the range of integers
> > to
> > be what the Fortran standard requires (a symmetric range).
>
> The Fort
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-17 20:27 ---
False alarm. I did run out of memory.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 21:01 ---
Created an attachment (id=20132)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20132&action=view)
gcc45-pr43403.patch
Let's go with this patch then. Can you please regtest it?
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot or
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 21:07 ---
As Daniel has indicated, this has nothing to do with gfortran.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2010-03-17
21:09 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] ICE in stage1 compiling __bswapdi2
> Let's go with this patch then. Can you please regtest it?
Yes. I'll try it when I get home this evening.
Dave
--
http://gcc.gnu.o
--- Comment #21 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-03-17 21:13 ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> no change in the libjava testsuite when built with these binutils
But that's still thumb not arm like in comment #16? All my results are from
plain arm (armv5tel) builds.
--
http://gcc.g
--- Comment #9 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 21:15 ---
The situation has change quite a lot since gcc 4.3.0.
Now a DW_TAG_member is emitted for the static member variable, and only one
DW_TAG_variable is emitted to represent the variable definition.
So I guess the bug can
--- Comment #8 from changpeng dot fang at amd dot com 2010-03-17 21:22
---
Created an attachment (id=20133)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20133&action=view)
patch with the testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32824
--- Comment #22 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-03-17 21:23 ---
I did another binutils experiment. I reverted my patch to disable general
merging of table entries, and instead disabled generating new and merging
cantunwind entries. With that binutils libjava regressed just like with
--- Comment #11 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-03-17 21:31 ---
> Well, the number model is symmetric. See Fortran 2003 ...
I agree, but it is a very pedantic view that should at least be mentioned in
the manual.
Now I think the implementation is not consistent:
[macbook] f90/
1 - 100 of 136 matches
Mail list logo
