[Bug target/43725] Poor instructions selection, scheduling and registers allocation for ARM NEON intrinsics

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43725 --- Comment #4 from Ramana Radhakrishnan 2010-10-05 07:16:35 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > So the compiler is correct not to be using vld1 for this code. The memory > > format of int32x4_t is defined to be the f

[Bug bootstrap/45888] tm.texi generation is not portable, rule is broken

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45888 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug tree-optimization/45883] Incorrect store removal when compiling with -fstrict-aliasing

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45883 --- Comment #2 from Vyacheslav Egorov 2010-10-05 08:47:19 UTC --- Richard I can confirm that test case passes when compiled with -O1 -fstrict-aliasing -fno-builtin-memcpy.

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P4 |P3 CC|

[Bug libstdc++/44647] std::nothrow and std::bad_alloc are coupled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44647 --- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-05 09:42:03 UTC --- Author: paolo Date: Tue Oct 5 09:41:57 2010 New Revision: 164973 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164973 Log: 2010-10-05 Sebastian Huber Jo

[Bug libstdc++/44647] std::nothrow and std::bad_alloc are coupled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44647 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 --- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini

[Bug libstdc++/44647] std::nothrow and std::bad_alloc are coupled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44647 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/45889] New: Regression with I/O of element of allocatable array in derived type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45889 Summary: Regression with I/O of element of allocatable array in derived type Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug other/32998] -frecord-gcc-switches issues

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32998 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-10-05 09:48:32 UTC --- I agree, it would be a good idea to append all preprocessing and compilation options, except for -I/-i* paths (and leave out driver/link options like -B, -V, -L, -Wl, too), to DW_AT_p

size_t cast in libssp

After some casual analysis, I noticed that libssp (in gets-chk.c) we were doing: if (slen >= (size_t) INT_MAX) return gets (s); if (slen <= 8192) buf = alloca (slen + 1); else buf = malloc (slen + 1); if (buf == NULL) return gets (s); What's the reason behind casting with size_t

[Bug bootstrap/45816] [4.6 Regression] --enable-checking=release causes a comparison failure on powerpc-darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45816 --- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres 2010-10-05 09:59:01 UTC --- > Does > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-10/msg00059.html > fix it? Yes it does.

Re: size_t cast in libssp

writes: > What's the reason behind casting with size_t for INT_MAX, it seems to > be a design > error, there is no guarantee that INT_MAX is a valid size_t. If we > want to limit it > to size_t, we'd instead want a macro finding the minimum of INT_MAX > and SIZE_MAX, If INT_MAX > SIZE_MAX then (

[Bug middle-end/45877] [4.6 Regression] invalid write in gimplify_and_update_call_from_tree

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45877 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2010-10-05 10:37:15 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Oct 5 10:37:12 2010 New Revision: 164984 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164984 Log: 2010-10-05 Richard Guenther PR middle-

[Bug middle-end/45877] [4.6 Regression] invalid write in gimplify_and_update_call_from_tree

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45877 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug gcov-profile/45890] New: Coverage may be weakened by r164986

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45890 Summary: Coverage may be weakened by r164986 Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: gcov-profile AssignedTo: unassig

[Bug gcov-profile/45891] New: Guessed profile needs updating after profile-read

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45891 Summary: Guessed profile needs updating after profile-read Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: gcov-profile Assig

[Bug gcov-profile/45892] New: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/inliner-1.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45892 Summary: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/inliner-1.c Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: gcov-profile Ass

[Bug gcov-profile/45892] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/inliner-1.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45892 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org Target Mi

[Bug libstdc++/45893] New: Finish updating std::bind to rvalue refs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45893 Summary: Finish updating std::bind to rvalue refs Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ AssignedTo: unass

[Bug libstdc++/45893] [C++0x] Finish updating std::bind to rvalue refs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45893 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Finish updating std::bind |[C++0x] Finish updating

[Bug libstdc++/45893] [C++0x] Finish updating std::bind to rvalue refs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45893 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2010-10-05 11:14:53 UTC --- ah yes that was DR 817 - I don't *think* it's related to the volatile problems, but I would be happy to be wrong!

[Bug tree-optimization/45752] [4.5 regression] ICE in ix86_vectorize_builtin_vec_perm_ok

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45752 --- Comment #6 from irar at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-05 12:01:32 UTC --- Author: irar Date: Tue Oct 5 12:01:29 2010 New Revision: 164987 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164987 Log: PR tree-optimization/45752 * tree-v

[Bug tree-optimization/45752] [4.5 regression] ICE in ix86_vectorize_builtin_vec_perm_ok

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45752 --- Comment #7 from irar at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-05 12:25:00 UTC --- Author: irar Date: Tue Oct 5 12:24:43 2010 New Revision: 164989 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164989 Log: PR tree-optimization/45752 * tree-v

[Bug rtl-optimization/45352] ICE: in reset_sched_cycles_in_current_ebb, at sel-sched.c:7058

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352 --- Comment #13 from Andrey Belevantsev 2010-10-05 12:45:21 UTC --- Any updates on this? The last test still does not fail with the patch from comment #11. I am about to submit the patch, so are there any new failing tests or flag combinations?

[Bug c++/45894] New: ICE: segmentation fault with -Wall

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45894 Summary: ICE: segmentation fault with -Wall Product: gcc Version: 4.5.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gn

[Bug objc/45895] New: -Wunused-but-set-variable complains for almost all Objective-C objects

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45895 Summary: -Wunused-but-set-variable complains for almost all Objective-C objects Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug objc++/31126] Infinite loop on missing @end

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31126 Nicola Pero changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/45894] [4.5/4.6 Regression] [C++0x] ICE: segmentation fault with -Wall

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45894 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||error-recovery, |

[Bug libstdc++/45893] [C++0x] [DR 817] Finish updating std::bind to rvalue refs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45893 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[C++0x] Finish updating |[C++0x] [DR 817] Finish

[Bug objc/45895] -Wunused-but-set-variable complains for almost all Objective-C objects

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45895 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 f

[Bug middle-end/45838] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: libgomp.c/pr34513.c execution test

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45838 John David Anglin changed: What|Removed |Added Component|libgomp |middle-end --- Comment #2 from John D

[Bug c++/45894] [4.5/4.6 Regression] [C++0x] ICE: segmentation fault with -Wall

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45894 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot

[Bug fortran/45889] Regression with I/O of element of allocatable array in derived type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45889 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot |

[Bug target/45847] ICE in supportable_widening_operation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45847 belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --

[Bug c++/45894] [4.5/4.6 Regression] [C++0x] ICE: segmentation fault with -Wall

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45894 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|error-recovery, | |ice-on-invalid-code

[Bug fortran/45889] Regression with I/O of element of allocatable array in derived type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45889 --- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-10-05 13:44:02 UTC --- In the test case, does the SAVE automatically allocate? Where does the derived type get allocated ?. If it has not been allocated and set to some value the component must be undefine

[Bug fortran/45889] Regression with I/O of element of allocatable array in derived type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45889 --- Comment #4 from Keith Refson 2010-10-05 13:51:09 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > In the test case, does the SAVE automatically allocate? Where does the > derived > type get allocated ?. If it has not been allocated and set to some value

[Bug fortran/45889] Regression with I/O of element of allocatable array in derived type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45889 --- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-10-05 14:28:55 UTC --- Looks like we are being too conservative on this check. If we can give an error if unallocated but not give an error if allocated, then it would be better.

[Bug bootstrap/45801] [4.6 regression] powerpc64-linux bootstrap comparison failure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45801 --- Comment #7 from Mikael Pettersson 2010-10-05 14:35:37 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > Thanks for the testcase. > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-10/msg00059.html > seems to help with the testcase. Does it also fix bootstrap? Yes

[Bug middle-end/45838] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: libgomp.c/pr34513.c execution test

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45838 --- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-10-05 15:19:09 UTC --- > Untested patch. Several of the GOMP_* builtins are certainly not leaf. Another issue may be that the sync builtins on hppa-unknown-linux-gnu are implemented in a lib

[Bug libfortran/45165] unix.c:fallback_access() leaks file descriptors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45165 Francois-Xavier Coudert changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|una

[Bug fortran/45889] Regression with I/O of element of allocatable array in derived type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45889 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug c++/45896] New: Facet time_get not reading dates according to the standard.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45896 Summary: Facet time_get not reading dates according to the standard. Product: gcc Version: 4.4.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug fortran/45889] Regression with I/O of element of allocatable array in derived type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45889 --- Comment #7 from Keith Refson 2010-10-05 16:19:50 UTC --- Steve - thanks for the workaround (In fact I had already discovered this). Jerry: As Steve pointed out explicitly, the statement that fails to compile is simply printing a character ex

[Bug c++/45896] [C++0x] Facet time_get not reading dates according to the IEEE 1003 standard.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45896 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Summary|Facet time_get not

[Bug objc++/28050] ICE on invalid initializer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28050 Nicola Pero changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nicola at gcc dot gnu.org AssignedT

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #22 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2010-10-05 17:03:09 UTC --- Just a heads-up regarding issue #3. (In reply to comment #19) > Apparently > reading after a write at EOF is not in the tests. Hm, doesn't 27_io/basic_filebuf/sputbackc/char/94

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #23 from Paolo Carlini 2010-10-05 17:06:27 UTC --- (In reply to comment #22) > Hm, doesn't > 27_io/basic_filebuf/sputbackc/char/9425.cc > test something like that, or at leas EOF after? It doesn't fail for you? Just have a look to t

[Bug objc++/31125] ICE on @interface without identifier

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31125 Nicola Pero changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #24 from David Krauss 2010-10-05 17:24:22 UTC --- (In reply to comment #22) > Just a heads-up regarding issue #3. > > (In reply to comment #19) > > Apparently > > reading after a write at EOF is not in the tests. > > Hm, doesn't > 2

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #25 from David Krauss 2010-10-05 17:26:18 UTC --- > The required sequence is a write up to EOF followed by a read. 9425 is a > putback at the beginning of the file, which is neither. A putback at the beginning will attempt a backward

[Bug c++/45897] New: ZNC. make

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45897 Summary: ZNC. make Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org ReportedB

[Bug c++/45897] ZNC. make

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45897 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2010-10-05 17:30:30 UTC --- > c++: Internal error: Killed: 9 (program cc1plus) This almost always means cc1plus ran out of memory. Can you provide the output of "gcc -v"?

[Bug c++/45896] [C++0x] Facet time_get not reading dates according to the IEEE 1003 standard.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45896 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/45897] ZNC. make

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45897 --- Comment #2 from buddhabrot 2010-10-05 18:01:24 UTC --- buddhabrot# gcc -v Using built-in specs. Target: amd64-undermydesk-freebsd Configured with: FreeBSD/amd64 system compiler Thread model: posix gcc version 4.2.1 20070719 [FreeBSD] buddhab

[Bug middle-end/40893] ARM and PPC truncate intermediate operations unnecessarily

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40893 paul walmsley changed: What|Removed |Added CC||paul at pwsan dot com --- Comment #2 from

[Bug middle-end/45838] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: libgomp.c/pr34513.c execution test

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45838 --- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-10-05 18:14:57 UTC --- > Untested patch. Several of the GOMP_* builtins are certainly not leaf. I did a quick test. Unfortunately, libgomp.c/pr34513.c still fails.

[Bug bootstrap/45888] tm.texi generation is not portable, rule is broken

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45888 Francois-Xavier Coudert changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/45896] [C++0x] Facet time_get not reading dates according to the IEEE 1003 standard.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45896 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW CC|

[Bug c/30580] GCC doesn't set floating-point exceptions when performing fp<->int conversions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30580 Fred J. Tydeman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tydeman at tybor dot com --- Comment #6

[Bug c/30580] GCC doesn't set floating-point exceptions when performing fp<->int conversions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30580 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/27682] float to int conversion doesn't raise invalid exception

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27682 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||geoffk at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #11

[Bug middle-end/45899] testing

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45899 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #26 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2010-10-05 18:45:52 UTC --- (In reply to comment #24) > Did I follow the wrong process for deleting the file? No, the commit was fine, it's the "svn diff" that fails. (In reply to comment #25) > A putback

[Bug middle-end/45899] New: testing

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45899 Summary: testing Product: gcc Version: 4.5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org Report

[Bug middle-end/323] optimized code gives strange floating point results

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #140

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #27 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2010-10-05 18:59:00 UTC --- (In reply to comment #26) > looks like I have to amend > the check_v3_target_fileio some more and fix another simulator bug. Film at > 11. JFTR, the simulator part (the wrap fu

[Bug objc++/31125] ICE on @interface without identifier

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31125 --- Comment #2 from Nicola Pero 2010-10-05 19:23:38 UTC --- Author: nicola Date: Tue Oct 5 19:23:33 2010 New Revision: 164997 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164997 Log: In gcc/: 2010-10-05 Nicola Pero * c-pars

[Bug objc++/28050] ICE on invalid initializer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28050 --- Comment #15 from Nicola Pero 2010-10-05 19:23:40 UTC --- Author: nicola Date: Tue Oct 5 19:23:33 2010 New Revision: 164997 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164997 Log: In gcc/: 2010-10-05 Nicola Pero * c-par

[Bug other/32998] -frecord-gcc-switches issues

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32998 --- Comment #12 from Roland McGrath 2010-10-05 19:24:56 UTC --- Preprocessing stuff is probably best left to the -g3 info instead. cc1* options make sense for DW_AT_producer.

[Bug objc++/28050] ICE on invalid initializer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28050 Nicola Pero changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug objc++/31125] ICE on @interface without identifier

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31125 Nicola Pero changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug objc++/23707] ICE on invalid code after error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23707 --- Comment #2 from Nicola Pero 2010-10-05 19:23:39 UTC --- Author: nicola Date: Tue Oct 5 19:23:33 2010 New Revision: 164997 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164997 Log: In gcc/: 2010-10-05 Nicola Pero * c-pars

[Bug objc++/31126] Infinite loop on missing @end

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31126 --- Comment #1 from Nicola Pero 2010-10-05 19:23:39 UTC --- Author: nicola Date: Tue Oct 5 19:23:33 2010 New Revision: 164997 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164997 Log: In gcc/: 2010-10-05 Nicola Pero * c-pars

[Bug objc++/23707] ICE on invalid code after error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23707 Nicola Pero changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug objc++/31126] Infinite loop on missing @end

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31126 Nicola Pero changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #28 from David Krauss 2010-10-05 19:35:17 UTC --- (In reply to comment #26) > lseek(4, -1, SEEK_CUR) = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument) > read(4, "// 990117 bkoz\n// test functiona"..., 1023) = 1023 > > So, it's (error/

[Bug fortran/45451] [OOP] Inconsistent status of ALLOCATABLE components inside CLASS variables.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45451 --- Comment #11 from Salvatore Filippone 2010-10-05 19:39:44 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > Ok, I could reduce this quite a bit: > > >1 3 4 5 >1 3 4 5 >

[Bug fortran/45900] New: [OOP] Polymorphic method not called

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45900 Summary: [OOP] Polymorphic method not called Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassig...@g

[Bug target/45901] New: alpha-gnu target-specific CPP macros are broken

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45901 Summary: alpha-gnu target-specific CPP macros are broken Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target AssignedTo: u

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #29 from Paolo Carlini 2010-10-05 20:39:11 UTC --- Can I ask a simple question? At this point in the analysis, do we have a testcase failing on Linux or Darwin, thus showing a clear regression in the generic code? If the answer is yes

[Bug fortran/45900] [OOP] Static TBP resolved incorrectly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45900 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Status|U

[Bug tree-optimization/45902] New: CPU2006 benchmark sphinx3 fails with vectorization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45902 Summary: CPU2006 benchmark sphinx3 fails with vectorization Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #30 from David Krauss 2010-10-05 21:16:01 UTC --- Also, I think we need to clarify whether 9425.cc is a regression. That was an expected failure before my revision, right?

[Bug tree-optimization/45902] CPU2006 benchmark sphinx3 fails with vectorization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45902 Pat Haugen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #31 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2010-10-05 21:26:23 UTC --- (In reply to comment #28) > I'm a little confused. Is that supposed to be a sticky state? Nope. Don't worry. The patch I quoted just fixes a bug on the return path from the ho

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #32 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2010-10-05 21:40:39 UTC --- (In reply to comment #29) > Otherwise, if the situation is too confused maybe we have to humbly take out > the improvements to filebuf, allow HP to fix the other issues on the ta

[Bug fortran/45900] [OOP] Static TBP resolved incorrectly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45900 --- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-05 21:42:15 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > Confirmed. This is basically a duplicate of PR45836. Both are also related to PR42769. I'm currently not sure how to fix this. The obvious workarou

[Bug fortran/45900] [OOP] Static TBP resolved incorrectly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45900 --- Comment #3 from ortp21 at gmail dot com 2010-10-05 22:01:08 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > Confirmed. This is basically a duplicate of PR45836. > > Both are also related to PR42769. The reason I posted this bu

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #33 from Paolo Carlini 2010-10-05 21:57:26 UTC --- (In reply to comment #32) > Thanks for caring but FWIW, my work would not be helped by backing out any > changes; I do all the work at a fix set of revisions, followed up if needed >

[Bug fortran/45889] Regression with I/O of element of allocatable array in derived type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45889 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #34 from David Krauss 2010-10-05 22:47:14 UTC --- Posted a patch to fix my end of this, and a regression to verify that fix on working systems. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2010-10/msg00015.html

[Bug tree-optimization/45903] New: unnecessary load of 32/64bit variable when only 8 bits are needed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45903 Summary: unnecessary load of 32/64bit variable when only 8 bits are needed Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #35 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2010-10-05 23:16:37 UTC --- (In reply to comment #30) > Also, I think we need to clarify whether 9425.cc is a regression. That was an > expected failure before my revision, right? Yes and no. By fixing on

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #36 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2010-10-05 23:29:32 UTC --- (In reply to comment #33) > (In reply to comment #32) > > Thanks for caring but FWIW, my work would not be helped by backing out any > > changes; I do all the work at a fix set o

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #37 from David Krauss 2010-10-05 23:31:34 UTC --- (In reply to comment #35) > Yes and no. By fixing one of the two (known :) simulator bugs and running the > test-suite for r164529, the result of that test regressed from PASS to FAIL

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #38 from Paolo Carlini 2010-10-05 23:34:37 UTC --- > To summarize the comments above, the real issues I know of at r164529 are: > 1) an extra lseek (compared to r164529) for > 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc > 2) erroneous be

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #39 from David Krauss 2010-10-05 23:37:55 UTC --- > Good, I'm going to apply it here, give it a spin and commit it if everything > looks fine. Please hold off for a minute. I screwed that patch up about as much as it's possible for s

[Bug bootstrap/45888] tm.texi generation is not portable, rule is broken

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45888 --- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke 2010-10-05 23:39:37 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) > The thread starting at: > > lists a number of issues around tm.texi: > > The output produced by g

[Bug libstdc++/45841] [4.6 Regression]: r164529 cris-elf libstdc++ 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/char/2-io.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45841 --- Comment #40 from Paolo Carlini 2010-10-05 23:40:56 UTC --- Ok, no problem. While we are at it, I would recommend not including large formatting / indentation fixes, are hising too much the substance of the work. For a later patch...

  1   2   >