Compile the attached test case with options -march=armv7-a -mthumb -Os,
this code snippet
if (native)
dlmalloc_walk_heap(heap_chunk_callback, (void *)&ctx);
else
dvmHeapSourceWalk(heap_chunk_callback, (void *)&ctx);
is compiled to:
cbz r5, .L2
ldr r0, .L4
--- Comment #1 from carrot at google dot com 2010-06-02 08:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=20805)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20805&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44374
--- Comment #9 from hariharans at picochip dot com 2010-06-02 08:41 ---
Thanks Alexandre. I can confirm that this patch works for this testcase.
Cheers
Hari
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44013
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 08:54 ---
HOIST should do this. You will have to check in the RTL dumps that the code is
exposed properly to this optimization.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Ad
--- Comment #32 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-06-02 08:59 ---
> 4.5-branch (as of r160013) has an error in config.gcc (which I just fixed on
> trunk yesterday, with r159979) in which several t-make fragments are included
> twice on x86_64-*-darwin*.
> I wonder if this could b
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 09:02 ---
Alright, this hunk is apparently necessary, although I don't see how. Oh well.
I'll put it back.
Index: gimplify.c
===
--- gimplify.c (revision 160142)
--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 09:13 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-06/msg00056.html
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #33 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 09:24 ---
(In reply to comment #32)
> > 4.5-branch (as of r160013) has an error in config.gcc (which I just fixed on
> > trunk yesterday, with r159979) in which several t-make fragments are
> > included
> > twice on x86_64-*-d
--- Comment #34 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-06-02 09:35 ---
> can you do me a favor?
> (a) copy the config.{log,out} files.
> (b) rm -r and reconfigure/re-bootstrap w/out changing *anything*
> .. I suspect a configure race condition - and would not be surprised if the
> secon
--- Comment #35 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 09:44 ---
(In reply to comment #34)
> > can you do me a favor?
> > (a) copy the config.{log,out} files.
> > (b) rm -r and reconfigure/re-bootstrap w/out changing *anything*
> > .. I suspect a configure race condition - and woul
--- Comment #36 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-06-02 09:53 ---
Since I had a new comparison failure before your answer, I did the following:
(1) delete the various libgomp folders,
(2) resume make.
Indeed the new libgomp were correctly built and I am now building libgfortran.
--- Comment #37 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 10:06 ---
(In reply to comment #36)
> Since I had a new comparison failure before your answer, I did the following:
yes, re-running bootstrap will make no difference if the race is in the
configure...
> (1) delete the variou
--- Comment #38 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-06-02 10:16 ---
> make -jN all
> or make -jn bootstrap?
make -j2 >>& log_file &
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43170
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 10:24 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
As mentioned in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-06/msg00115.html
for -O0 we sometimes, e.g. for return without value or for C++ NRV optimized
return don't emit any insns with the location of the return stmt, which results
in worse debug experience.
--
Summary: goto_locus lost a
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 10:36 ---
Created an attachment (id=20806)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20806&action=view)
gcc46-pr44375.patch
One possible fix. Another is to insert GIMPLE_NOP with the location and handle
it during exp
optimiser generates SSE instructions that add 32 bit quantities when the field
being referenced is actually 21 bits wide. This disables the possibility of
testing the overflow of the additions.
--
Summary: optimiser destroys possibility of detecting overflow
Product: gcc
--- Comment #1 from geoff at dyalog dot com 2010-06-02 11:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=20807)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20807&action=view)
example code to demonstrate bug
extract code using "cpio -i http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44376
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 11:17 ---
Please specify the GCC version you see this bug. I think it has been fixed
with GCC 4.5.0.
gcc-4.4 -o t main.c slave.c -O3
> ./t
overflow assigning 12524191771
total returned = 27
gcc-4.5 -o t main.c slave.c -O3
>
Command line:
$ gcc -O1 -fipa-pta testcase.c
- testcase.c -
int foo ()
{
__builtin_return (foo);
}
--
Tested revisions:
r160122 - crash
r159696 - OK
Compiler output:
$ gcc -O1 -fipa-pta testcase.c
testcase.c: In function 'foo':
testcase.c:4:1: internal compiler erro
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 11:33 ---
Created an attachment (id=20808)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20808&action=view)
gcc46-pr44375.patch
Alternative patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44375
--- Comment #3 from geoff at dyalog dot com 2010-06-02 11:36 ---
Subject: Re: optimiser destroys possibility
of detecting overflow
On 02/06/10 12:17, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 11:17
> ---
> Please sp
--- Comment #1 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-06-02 12:18 ---
The testcase was reduced from gcc.dg/torture/stackalign/builtin-return-1.c,
which is valid. It can be further reduced to:
void foo () { __builtin_return (0); }
In general, it seems any use of __builtin_return() with -fipa
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 12:20 ---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 12:27 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 12:27 ---
Subject: Bug 44377
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Jun 2 12:27:24 2010
New Revision: 160152
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=160152
Log:
2010-06-02 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/
Trying to crosscompile Qt to arm with LTO results in a linker error while
linking QtCore:
armv6j-blankpage-linux-gnueabi-g++ -O2 -mcpu=arm1136jf-s -fomit-frame-pointer
-fweb -frename-registers
-Wl,-O2,-z,combreloc,-z,relro,--enable-new-dtags,--hash-style=gnu -g -fwhopr
-Wl,-rpath-link,/usr/src/ar
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 12:59 ---
Do not use -fwhopr with gcc 4.5, it's broken. Please try recent trunk or
-flto.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44378
I think this is a dup of a much older bug.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 2, 2010, at 3:30 AM, "jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org" > wrote:
As mentioned in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-06/msg00115.html
for -O0 we sometimes, e.g. for return without value or for C++ NRV
optimized
return don'
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2010-06-02 13:33 ---
Subject: Re: New: goto_locus lost at -O0 during cfg cleanup
I think this is a dup of a much older bug.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 2, 2010, at 3:30 AM, "jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org"
wrote:
> As mentioned in
> http:/
On Linux/ia64, revision 160132 gave
/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/bld/gcc/../../src-trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c:2033:
undefined reference to `MOVE_RATIO'
libbackend.a(tree-inline.o): In function `estimate_move_cost':
/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/bld/gcc/../../src-trunk/gcc/tree-inline.c:3168:
undefi
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-02 14:36 ---
It is caused by revision 160125:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-06/msg00037.html
expr.h:/* If a memory-to-memory move would take MOVE_RATIO or more simple
expr.h:#ifndef MOVE_RATIO
expr.h:#define MOVE_RATIO(spe
The FCD (n3092) states in 20.7.6.6 (Table # 53), that result_of should work
with references to functors as well. Current implementation of result_of will
only work with functor types, not with references to functor types.
The following will produce incorrect results:
#include
struct F
{
typed
The FCD (n3092) states in 20.7.6.6 (Table # 53), that result_of should work
with references to functors as well. Current implementation of result_of will
only work with functor types, not with references to functor types.
The following will produce incorrect results:
#include
struct F
{
typed
For
---
extern int a, b, c, d, e, f;
void
foo ()
{
a = f * b * c * d;
}
---
on Linux/x86-64, gcc generates:
movlb(%rip), %eax
imull f(%rip), %eax
imull c(%rip), %eax
imull d(%rip), %eax
movl%eax, a(%rip)
ret
Icc generates:
The FCD (n3092) states in 20.7.6.6 (Table # 53), that result_of should work
with references to functors as well. Current implementation of result_of will
only work with functor types, not with references to functor types.
The following will produce incorrect results:
#include
struct F
{
typed
Instead of treating each dimension of the array as a separate subobject, BOSC
treats them all as a single subobject which results in unexpected size
calculations. For example, the below code compiled with '-O2' in gcc 4.5.0
gives the following results with expect results listed after.
cha
Trying to build Qt with -flto and -fuse-linker-plugin, using -fwhole-program
for the helper apps results in
g++ -Wl,-rpath-link,/usr/src/ark/BUILD/qt/lib -m64 -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer
-fweb -frename-registers
-Wl,-O2,-z,combreloc,-z,relro,--enable-new-dtags,--hash-style=gnu -g -flto
-fuse-linker-p
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 15:15 ---
Because our tree reassoc doesn't re-associate them.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
When the last element of a structure is an array, builtin_object_size__ always
assumes it is a flexible array no matter the length. For example, the below
code compiled with '-O2' in 4.5.0 gives an unexpected length in 'a', 'b', 'd',
and 'f'. At a minimum, it is expected that 'a' and 'd' should r
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-02 15:17
---
Works fine with 4_5-branch and mainline.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 15:18 ---
Obviously mine.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|un
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 15:18 ---
*** Bug 44383 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44380
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 15:18 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 44380 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 15:19 ---
*** Bug 44381 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44380
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 15:19 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 44380 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
The FCD (n3092) states in 20.7.6.6 (Table # 53), that result_of should work
with references to functors as well. Current implementation of result_of will
only work with functor types, not with references to functor types.
The following will produce incorrect results:
#include
struct F
{
typed
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 15:23 ---
Subject: Bug 44385
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Jun 2 15:23:34 2010
New Revision: 160157
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=160157
Log:
2010-06-02 Richard Guenther
PR lto/44385
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 15:23 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-02 15:25
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 44380 ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-02 15:25
---
*** Bug 44387 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44380
The FCD (n3092) states in 20.7.6.6 (Table # 53), that result_of should work
with references to functors as well. Current implementation of result_of will
only work with functor types, not with references to functor types.
The following will produce incorrect results:
#include
struct F
{
typed
The FCD (n3092) states in 20.7.6.6 (Table # 53), that result_of should work
with references to functors as well. Current implementation of result_of will
only work with functor types, not with references to functor types.
The following will produce incorrect results:
#include
struct F
{
typed
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-02 15:29
---
*** Bug 44388 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44380
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-02 15:29
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 44380 ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 15:29 ---
I think this is related to PR 12076.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44375
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-02 15:30
---
*** Bug 44389 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44380
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-02 15:30
---
Hey! Stop it
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 44380 ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-06-02 15:33 ---
I see this error too, it's causing gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/memops-asm.c
and gcc.dg/pr39443.c to regress on arm-linux-gnueabi due to ICEs. I didn't see
the problem in 4.6-20100515 (r159445), but do see it in 4.6-20
--- Comment #7 from avenikov at gmail dot com 2010-06-02 15:36 ---
Sorry, I've just noticed that I messed up.
I was clicking the "refresh" button to see the status of the bug and apparently
that was creating new bug report every time.
Sorry for that.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
--- Comment #4 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 15:40 ---
Subject: Bug 44295
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Jun 2 15:39:43 2010
New Revision: 160159
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=160159
Log:
PR middle-end/44295
* cgraphunit.c (cgraph_re
--- Comment #26 from bergner at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 15:40
---
Subject: Bug 44199
Author: bergner
Date: Wed Jun 2 15:40:09 2010
New Revision: 160160
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=160160
Log:
Backport from GCC 4.4:
2010-05-26 Jakub J
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-02 16:00 ---
The updated patch is at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-05/msg02161.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from doc0 dot delphin at voila dot fr 2010-06-02 16:07
---
Created an attachment (id=20809)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20809&action=view)
Shell (bash) script to build gcc
Files related to this bug : shell (bash) script, log files.
--
http://
While building Qt with -flto, helper apps with an additional -fwhole-program:
g++ -Wl,-rpath-link,/usr/src/ark/BUILD/qt/lib -m64 -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer
-fweb -frename-registers
-Wl,-O2,-z,combreloc,-z,relro,--enable-new-dtags,--hash-style=gnu -g -flto
-Wl,-rpath,/usr/lib64/qt4-embedded/lib -Wl,
--- Comment #6 from doc0 dot delphin at voila dot fr 2010-06-02 16:08
---
Created an attachment (id=20810)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20810&action=view)
config.log
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44304
--- Comment #7 from doc0 dot delphin at voila dot fr 2010-06-02 16:09
---
Created an attachment (id=20811)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20811&action=view)
configure.log
File generated by ./configure ... 2>&1 | tee configure.log
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #8 from doc0 dot delphin at voila dot fr 2010-06-02 16:12
---
Created an attachment (id=20812)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20812&action=view)
All the files
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44304
--- Comment #9 from doc0 dot delphin at voila dot fr 2010-06-02 16:15
---
(In reply to comment #1)
OK Thank you very much.
I have verified the prerequisites before.
Please note I just send a zip files with all log files.
Thanks.
===
--- Comment #1 from bero at arklinux dot org 2010-06-02 16:20 ---
uic3.tar.gz, containing the object files that should be linked and the source
they're generated from, is too large to attach, so I've uploaded it to
http://arklinux.org/~bero/uic3.tar.gz
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #10 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 16:25 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> OK Thank you very much.
>
> I have verified the prerequisites before.
> Please note I just send a zip files with all log files.
thanks for posting the files -
s
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 16:27 ---
Can you try without -fwhole-program, with the tip of the 4.5 branch and with
trunk? If it works on the trunk, can you identify the patch that made it work?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 16:27 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #1 from meklund at cisco dot com 2010-06-02 16:33 ---
I've re-run the code varying the flag from 0 to 3 (instead of hard coding to 3)
with the below results. The unexpected results are still happening for 'a',
'b', 'd', and 'f'.
a b c d e f
0: -1 200 -1 -1 200 1
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-06-02 16:35 ---
This looks like a duplicate of pr40873.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44390
--- Comment #6 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 16:35 ---
Subject: Bug 42900
Author: ro
Date: Wed Jun 2 16:35:15 2010
New Revision: 160161
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=160161
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2010-03-01 Rainer Orth
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 16:36 ---
No, this is not fortran.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44390
--- Comment #11 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 16:39 ---
Subject: Bug 44363
Author: spop
Date: Wed Jun 2 16:39:26 2010
New Revision: 160163
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=160163
Log:
Fix PR44363: don't abort when the ifcvt analysis fails to recogniz
--- Comment #12 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 16:42 ---
Fixed.
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #10 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 16:50 ---
Subject: Bug 41169
Author: ro
Date: Wed Jun 2 16:49:39 2010
New Revision: 160166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=160166
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2009-09-02 Rainer Orth
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-06-02 16:51 ---
> No, this is not fortran.
I am not sure that fortran matter here.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44390
--- Comment #6 from bero at arklinux dot org 2010-06-02 16:53 ---
Omitting -fwhole-program doesn't change anything. Compiling 4.5 branch and
trunk now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44390
--- Comment #10 from tfautre at pandora dot be 2010-06-02 16:54 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > I'm under the impression we should simply not provide operator __safe_bool()
>
> Agreed, there is no requirement for conversion to bool, explicit or implicit.
> E
--- Comment #14 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 16:57 ---
Subject: Bug 38251
Author: ro
Date: Wed Jun 2 16:57:10 2010
New Revision: 160168
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=160168
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2010-03-01 Rainer Orth
--- Comment #11 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-02 17:03
---
For sure something may have changed in the working paper, we are talking about
1 year since these changes. Jon can you have a look to this?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40296
--- Comment #3 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 17:04 ---
Subject: Bug 44372
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Jun 2 17:04:13 2010
New Revision: 160169
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=160169
Log:
Add a testcase for PR middle-end/44372.
2010-06-02 H.J. Lu
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-02 17:04 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 44295 ***
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-02 17:04 ---
*** Bug 44372 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #39 from rwild at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 17:04 ---
Can you (someone with darwin) just take the configure test from comment #13,
build it, and run it under various load on your system, to see whether it
produces unstable results with a compiler from the previous stage?
--- Comment #8 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-06-02 17:09
---
gcc 4.3 was released 18 months before the FCD, at that time the specification
of result_of was quite different. Also, until the gcc 4.5.0 release
std::result_of was based on the tr1::result_of code.
--
http:
--- Comment #40 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-06-02 17:09 ---
> Can you (someone with darwin) ...
I have tried:
[macbook] f90/bug% gcc46 pthread_create.c
[macbook] f90/bug% a.out ; echo $?
0
Is it the correct way to do the test? (so far I only got zeros).
--
http://gcc
--- Comment #17 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 17:17 ---
Subject: Bug 36610
Author: ro
Date: Wed Jun 2 17:16:55 2010
New Revision: 160172
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=160172
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2010-02-24 Rainer Orth
--- Comment #12 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-06-02 17:17
---
The NullablePointer concept is new, so yes, it's changed.
I'll deal with this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40296
--- Comment #13 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-02 17:18
---
Thanks a lot.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40296
--- Comment #14 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-06-02 17:26
---
(In reply to comment #10)
> AFAIK, the following code should work but does not anymore cause of this bug
> fix:
>
> std::exception_ptr e;
>
> if (e)
> {
> /* ... */
> }
I'm fairly sure that's not valid.
Th
--- Comment #39 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 17:28 ---
Subject: Bug 14940
Author: ro
Date: Wed Jun 2 17:28:24 2010
New Revision: 160176
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=160176
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2010-03-01 Rainer Orth
--- Comment #15 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-06-02 17:30
---
(In reply to comment #14)
> I'm fairly sure that's not valid.
> That relies on an implicit conversion to bool
actually that's nonsense ... that is a contextual conversion!
anyway, I'll look into it properly and
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-02 17:37
---
So it's already known...
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 23594 ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-02 17:37
---
*** Bug 44333 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
1 - 100 of 169 matches
Mail list logo
