http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47774
--- Comment #9 from Adam Butcher 2011-03-03
08:40:28 UTC ---
Great. That's got rid of the need for the preprocessor hacks to remove
constexpr usage from libstdc++ in c++0x mode. A full build of our tree from
GCC 4.6 HEAD (including unmodified l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47964
Summary: logical || returns false result, optimization level 02
or 03
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47950
Adam Butcher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47965
Summary: gfortran testsuite failures on mingw32
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
AssignedTo: unassig
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47964
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47963
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47913
--- Comment #20 from Paolo Carlini 2011-03-03
09:51:16 UTC ---
Ah, ok then: when I looked a bit into boost::rational it seemed pretty simple,
didn't notice that additional simplification. Thanks for the additional set of
tests, anyway, as soon as
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47961
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2011-03-03
10:11:21 UTC ---
*** Bug 47962 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47963
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47962
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47964
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47966
Summary: GCC 3.4.6 and 4.4.3 generate wrong stabs debugging
information for global variables explicitly
initialized with 0.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.3
Status: UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47964
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-03-03
10:17:45 UTC ---
bool foo (unsigned int a0)
{
return a0 < 101U || ~a0 < 101U;
}
int
main ()
{
__builtin_printf ("%d\n", (int) foo (1));
}
certainly prints one, not 0.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47966
--- Comment #1 from Dainis Jonitis 2011-03-03
10:21:03 UTC ---
Created attachment 23522
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23522
GCC generated wrong assembler file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47966
--- Comment #2 from Dainis Jonitis 2011-03-03
10:21:44 UTC ---
Created attachment 23523
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23523
nm utility output
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47966
--- Comment #3 from Dainis Jonitis 2011-03-03
10:22:33 UTC ---
Created attachment 23524
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23524
objdump utility output with wrong N_LCSYM debugging information
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47966
--- Comment #4 from Dainis Jonitis 2011-03-03
10:22:57 UTC ---
Created attachment 23525
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23525
makefile
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47966
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-debug
Status|UNCONFI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47920
Ian Bolton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47719
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47899
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47957
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47963
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47799
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47941
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47936
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenthe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47679
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=0
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-03-03
11:29:36 UTC ---
Can it be a side-effect of turning target macros into target hooks?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47283
--- Comment #22 from Richard Guenther 2011-03-03
12:10:44 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Mar 3 12:10:40 2011
New Revision: 170650
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170650
Log:
2011-03-03 Richard Guenther
PR middle
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47837
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20|hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47967
Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE: verify_stmts failed: conversion
of register to a different size with -fipa-cp on
undefined code
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47968
Summary: ICE: in gen_lowpart_general, at rtlhooks.c:51 when
converting vector of double to vector of float
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47968
Zdenek Sojka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #23527|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47967
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47968
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47968
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47968
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2011-03-03
13:34:50 UTC ---
Btw, I wonder since when (and why) we accept
float4 f4 = (float4) d2;
as valid code.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47969
Summary: [C++0x] ICE: SIGSEGV in compute_array_index_type
(cp/decl.c:7522)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47968
--- Comment #5 from Zdenek Sojka 2011-03-03 13:56:06
UTC ---
The testcase is accepted (compiles fine) by 3.3.6, 3.4.6, 4.0.4, 4.1.2, 4.2.4,
4.3.5.
The are files in the testsuite that use that style, at least
gcc.c-torture/compile/vector-[123].c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #30 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-03 13:56:25 UTC ---
On Fri, 25 Feb 2011, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Please shout loudly if there you still encounter a build failure!
>
>
> TO BE DONE: The HP-UX (et al.?) compi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jb at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #15 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47970
Summary: c99_functions.c:611:5: warning: implicit declaration
of function 'round'
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47970
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47971
Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE: in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:11725
on valid code
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47966
--- Comment #6 from Dainis Jonitis 2011-03-03
14:40:18 UTC ---
Problem is actually only with static file scope variables. Only then the
N_LCSYM and N_STSYM stabs are used. With global variables there is no problem
as N_GSYM stab is used instead.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47972
Summary: error.c:158:7: warning: return makes pointer from
integer without a cast
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47973
Summary: error.c:158:7: warning: return makes pointer from
integer without a cast
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47974
Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected tree_vec,
have error_mark in tsubst_template_args, at
cp/pt.c:8969 on invalid code
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #16 from Thomas Henlich
2011-03-03 14:58:35 UTC ---
My _mingw.h has the following:
#if defined(_POSIX) && !defined(__USE_MINGW_ANSI_STDIO)
/* Enable __USE_MINGW_ANSI_STDIO if _POSIX defined
* and If user did _not_ specify it explici
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47968
--- Comment #6 from Zdenek Sojka 2011-03-03 15:19:55
UTC ---
Created attachment 23532
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23532
testcase using long instead of double
This one fails the same way.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47974
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47975
Summary: ICE: in expand_shift, at expmed.c:2299 when using 256b
vectors without -mavx
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47976
Summary: Recent fortran testsuite regressions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassig...@g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47966
--- Comment #7 from Dainis Jonitis 2011-03-03
15:44:04 UTC ---
Everything works fine in Ubuntu GDB, because the Assembler (2.20.1) is smart
enough to ignore wrong debug symbols and still generate correct object file
with correct addresses in stab
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47971
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47972
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2011-03-03
15:59:49 UTC ---
*** Bug 47973 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47973
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47975
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47283
--- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-03-03
16:06:38 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Mar 3 16:06:33 2011
New Revision: 170654
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170654
Log:
PR debug/47283
* cfgexpand.c (expand_debug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47977
Summary: powerpc (-mcpu=8548) Wrong code for double operations
in little endian mode
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47963
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-03-03
16:09:59 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Mar 3 16:09:55 2011
New Revision: 170655
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170655
Log:
PR c/47963
* gimplify.c (omp_add_variable):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47283
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47963
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.0
Summary|[4.5/4.6 Regress
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47975
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-03-03
16:19:23 UTC ---
We lower the vector - vector shift to
:
x.0_1 = x;
x.1_2 = x;
D.2689_4 = BIT_FIELD_REF ;
D.2690_5 = BIT_FIELD_REF ;
D.2691_6 = D.2689_4 << D.2690_5;
D.2692_7 = BIT_FIEL
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47975
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47977
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
--- Comment #1 from Joseph S. My
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47978
Summary: [OOP] Invalid INTENT in overriding TBP not detected
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47978
--- Comment #1 from Salvatore Filippone
2011-03-03 16:47:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 23534
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23534
test-case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47950
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill 2011-03-03
16:51:23 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Mar 3 16:51:20 2011
New Revision: 170656
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170656
Log:
PR c++/47950
* pt.c (tsubst_copy_and_build)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47977
--- Comment #2 from froydnj at codesourcery dot com 2011-03-03 16:51:18 UTC ---
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 04:08:53PM +, m.lazzarotto at robox dot it wrote:
> lwz 9,8(1) # What's the purpose ?
> lwz 10,12(1)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42240
--- Comment #21 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-03 16:58:34 UTC ---
Author: denisc
Date: Thu Mar 3 16:58:26 2011
New Revision: 170657
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170657
Log:
Backport from mainline
2011-02-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47974
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-03-03 17:07:32 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Mar 3 17:07:28 2011
New Revision: 170658
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170658
Log:
/cp
2011-03-03 Paolo Carlini
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47974
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47837
--- Comment #2 from davidxl 2011-03-03 17:32:06
UTC ---
Please attach two dump files:
-fdump-tree-cddce2-blocks
-fdump-tree-uninit-details
David
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47837
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Krebbel 2011-03-03
17:38:48 UTC ---
Created attachment 23535
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23535
uninit-pred-7_a.c.126t.cddce2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47837
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Krebbel 2011-03-03
17:39:12 UTC ---
Created attachment 23536
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23536
uninit-pred-7_a.c.128t.uninit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47966
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski 2011-03-03
17:42:53 UTC ---
IIRC a.out format support for freebsd has just been depercated. Why use stabs
at all? Elf and dwarf2 have been around for at least 10 years now and actually
make sense for 90% of the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47968
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski 2011-03-03
17:47:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Patch:
>
> Index: gcc/expmed.c
IIRC this is the patch which I had applied to the PS3 toolchain while at Sony.
I don't have access to the sources any more
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47968
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski 2011-03-03
17:50:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Btw, I wonder since when (and why) we accept
>
> float4 f4 = (float4) d2;
>
> as valid code.
Because it is documented as being valid code that is you ca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47972
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47971
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47837
--- Comment #5 from davidxl 2011-03-03 18:06:33
UTC ---
While this exposes a limitation in uninit analysis, the cause of the warning is
that C FE behaves differently. On x86, the expression "n || l" is converted to
bitwise | expression, but on s3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47972
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47964
--- Comment #4 from rob.bob.301 at hotmail dot com 2011-03-03 18:26:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> You need to provide self-contained testcase, this is not self-contained.
Thank you for running your simple experiment. Unfortunately, all my
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47837
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski 2011-03-03
18:36:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> While this exposes a limitation in uninit analysis, the cause of the warning
> is
> that C FE behaves differently. On x86, the expression "n || l" is conver
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47964
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47979
Summary: Problem in comparing integers
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassig..
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47979
--- Comment #1 from Xiaofeng Guo 2011-03-03
20:36:32 UTC ---
Because I can't find the attachment in the thread, add the text below for
debugging easily.
==
#include
#include
int main() {
const
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47979
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46220
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merril
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47980
Summary: Inefficient code for local const char arrays
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassig
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47980
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47980
--- Comment #2 from Rafael Avila de Espindola 2011-03-03 21:50:07 UTC ---
I agree that the code is correct. The bug is because of a missing optimization,
not about wrong behavior.
The only use of foo is passing it function expecting a const point
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47980
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47980
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-03-03
21:59:50 UTC ---
I believe f could do:
assert (arg != "aoeuaoeuaeouaeouaoeuaoeaoxbxod");
which would then fail with the proposed optimization. It is unspecified if
two string literals with the same
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47980
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Component|c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47947
--- Comment #10 from Pat Haugen 2011-03-03
22:12:12 UTC ---
This is looking like a dup of PR47862, note the following snippet of assembler.
stfd 0,360(1) #,
stfd 12,344(1) #,
stfd 13,352(1) #,
stfd 11,336(1) #,
..
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47958
--- Comment #1 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-03
22:15:29 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Mar 3 22:15:26 2011
New Revision: 170664
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170664
Log:
Put symbol reference in memory in ptr_mode.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44499
Ryan Hill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dirtyepic at gentoo dot org
--- Comment #10 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47980
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pins
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
