[Bug tree-optimization/49318] [4.7 Regression] 177.mesa in SPEC CPU 2000 failed to build

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49318 --- Comment #4 from irar at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-10 07:19:31 UTC --- Author: irar Date: Fri Jun 10 07:19:28 2011 New Revision: 174891 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174891 Log: PR tree-optimization/49318

[Bug debug/48459] [4.6/4.7 Regression] avr: Assertion failure with -gdwarf-2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48459 --- Comment #10 from Anitha Boyapati 2011-06-10 07:37:19 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > I agree. But this does not fully solve the problem either. > > INCOMING_RETURN_ADDR_RTX is being defined in dwarf2out.c to >

[Bug bootstrap/49344] ICE in tree-flow-inline.h:745 while bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49344 --- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-06-10 08:32:37 UTC --- With the patch in comment #3 applied on top of revision 174846 I have been able to update powerpc-apple-darwin9 (long update, but not a full bootstrap).

[Bug fortran/49324] Deep copy missing for array constructors of DT w/ allocatable components

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49324 --- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus 2011-06-10 08:35:02 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > The following should partially help It does - but it also leads to two test suite failures: gfortran.dg/alloc_comp_assign_5.f90 - failure around line 53.

[Bug rtl-optimization/42621] [4.4 Regression] Computed gotos on AMD 800% slower

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42621 Jaak Ristioja changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jaak at ristioja dot ee --- Comment #12 f

[Bug rtl-optimization/42621] [4.4 Regression] Computed gotos on AMD 800% slower

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42621 --- Comment #13 from Jaak Ristioja 2011-06-10 08:52:47 UTC --- (In reply to comment #12) > PPS: As noted by other, this bug is likely a duplicate to bug 39284 and bug > 43868. As noted by others, this bug is likely a duplicate to bug 39284 and b

[Bug c/43686] GCC doesn't duplicate computed gotos for functions marked as "hot"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43686 --- Comment #3 from Jaak Ristioja 2011-06-10 09:19:49 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > Duplicate of PR42621? And probably a duplicate of bug 39284 also. (In reply to comment #2) > yes. It's definitely the same issue. > > The only additional

[Bug rtl-optimization/49358] optimization regression in 4.6.1 from 4.5.4

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49358 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization, ra St

[Bug rtl-optimization/49357] [4.7 Regression] register allocation worse

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49357 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0

[Bug c++/49355] new T({""}) crashes G++ when struct T { std::string foobar };

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49355 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/49354] [4.7 Regression] bootstrap failure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49354 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/49352] [4.7 Regression] -fcompare-debug failure with -O2 -ftree-vectorize

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49352 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/49350] [4.7 Regression] Many C++ testsuite failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49350 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug rtl-optimization/49330] Integer arithmetic on addresses optimised with pointer arithmetic rules

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49330 --- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou 2011-06-10 09:50:28 UTC --- The alias.c machinery is clearly based on the fundamental assumption of pointer arithmetics, i.e. that you aren't allowed to compute a difference unless both pointers point to the same

[Bug rtl-optimization/49330] Integer arithmetic on addresses optimised with pointer arithmetic rules

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49330 --- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther 2011-06-10 09:59:06 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) > The alias.c machinery is clearly based on the fundamental assumption of > pointer > arithmetics, i.e. that you aren't allowed to compute a difference unl

[Bug c++/49355] new T({""}) crashes G++ when struct T { std::string foobar };

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49355 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-10 10:00:00 UTC --- it's only valid in C++0x

[Bug c++/49351] Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49351 --- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-06-10 10:00:58 UTC --- Needs quite some more memory for me ... (doesn't fit in my 3GB box).

[Bug c++/48660] ARM ICE in expand_expr_real_1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48660 --- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-06-10 10:04:52 UTC --- Created attachment 24484 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24484 reduced test case With the massively reduced test case and r154736 built as a cross to armv5tel-

[Bug c/47599] -fno-short-wchar does not force long wchar

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47599 --- Comment #8 from Bastien ROUCARIES 2011-06-10 10:14:06 UTC --- Any news of this bug ?

[Bug fortran/41209] Add full ATTRIBUTE support to gfortran (ALIGN, (WEAK)ALIAS, ...)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41209 Bastien ROUCARIES changed: What|Removed |Added CC||roucaries.bastien+bugs at

[Bug middle-end/35827] -fvisibility only works for C/C++/Objective-C/Objective-C++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35827 Bastien ROUCARIES changed: What|Removed |Added CC||roucaries.bastien+bugs at

[Bug tree-optimization/49352] [4.7 Regression] -fcompare-debug failure with -O2 -ftree-vectorize

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49352 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug c++/49351] Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49351 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-10 10:39:58 UTC --- "you're gonna need a bigger boat" compiles ok on a 64-bit box, physical memory usage nears 4GB

[Bug rtl-optimization/49330] Integer arithmetic on addresses optimised with pointer arithmetic rules

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49330 --- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou 2011-06-10 10:55:53 UTC --- > Creating that pointer is perfectly valid - you are allowed to cast a > pointer to an uintptr_t and back, which is what the code does (in some > obfuscated way of course). No disagre

[Bug tree-optimization/49361] New: [4.7 Regression] Huge 470.lbm regression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49361 Summary: [4.7 Regression] Huge 470.lbm regression Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compon

[Bug tree-optimization/49361] [4.7 Regression] Huge 470.lbm regression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49361 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0

[Bug bootstrap/49344] ICE in tree-flow-inline.h:745 while bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49344 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unassigned

[Bug rtl-optimization/49330] Integer arithmetic on addresses optimised with pointer arithmetic rules

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49330 --- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther 2011-06-10 11:13:53 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) > > Creating that pointer is perfectly valid - you are allowed to cast a > > pointer to an uintptr_t and back, which is what the code does (in some > > obf

[Bug tree-optimization/49361] [4.7 Regression] Huge 470.lbm regression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49361 --- Comment #1 from William J. Schmidt 2011-06-10 11:23:16 UTC --- OK, I'll clean this up.

[Bug tree-optimization/49343] [4.7 regression] ICE on field with variable offset

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49343 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor 2011-06-10 11:23:32 UTC --- Apparently build_ref_for_model has to calculate offsets of COMPONENT_REFs with component_ref_field_offset just like get_ref_base_and_extent does in order to be able to make sense of "p

[Bug tree-optimization/49361] [4.7 Regression] Huge 470.lbm regression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49361 --- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de 2011-06-10 11:31:07 UTC --- On Fri, 10 Jun 2011, wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49361 > > --- Comment #1 from William J. Schmidt > 2011-06-10 11:23

[Bug c/49362] New: Arm Neon intrinsic types not correctly interpreted by compiler.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49362 Summary: Arm Neon intrinsic types not correctly interpreted by compiler. Product: gcc Version: 4.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Com

[Bug c/49362] Arm Neon intrinsic types not correctly interpreted by compiler.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49362 --- Comment #1 from mark.pupilli at dyson dot com 2011-06-10 11:38:40 UTC --- There is a typo - 'treats uint32_t as a single register and not an array of 4 x uint32_t' should read: 'treats uint32x4_t as a single register and not an array of 4 x

[Bug tree-optimization/49361] [4.7 Regression] Huge 470.lbm regression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49361 --- Comment #3 from William J. Schmidt 2011-06-10 11:41:15 UTC --- OK, I won't clean this up. ;)

[Bug tree-optimization/49352] [4.7 Regression] -fcompare-debug failure with -O2 -ftree-vectorize

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49352 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-10 11:44:03 UTC --- Created attachment 24486 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24486 gcc47-pr49352.patch Rough patch I've been playing with. There is no point testing gimple_code of us

[Bug middle-end/49363] New: [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 Summary: [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid) Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement

[Bug target/49349] gfortran.dg/char_result_3.f90 fails with -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49349 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/49361] [4.7 Regression] Huge 470.lbm regression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49361 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2011-06-10 12:19:32 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Jun 10 12:19:30 2011 New Revision: 174903 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174903 Log: 2011-06-10 Richard Guenther PR tree-op

[Bug bootstrap/49344] ICE in tree-flow-inline.h:745 while bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49344 --- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther 2011-06-10 12:18:59 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Jun 10 12:18:55 2011 New Revision: 174902 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174902 Log: 2011-06-10 Richard Guenther PR bootst

[Bug tree-optimization/49352] [4.7 Regression] -fcompare-debug failure with -O2 -ftree-vectorize

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49352 Ira Rosen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||irar at il dot ibm.com --- Comment #4 from Ir

[Bug bootstrap/49344] ICE in tree-flow-inline.h:745 while bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49344 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/49324] Deep copy missing for array constructors of DT w/ allocatable components

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49324 --- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus 2011-06-10 12:45:13 UTC --- Submitted patch, which fixes - except of RESHAPE - the issue of comment 0 and comment 3: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-06/msg00095.html TODO: See comment 6: Namely, for realloc

[Bug c++/49322] [4.7 Regression] Many libstdc++ testsuite failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49322 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/49352] [4.7 Regression] -fcompare-debug failure with -O2 -ftree-vectorize

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49352 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #24486|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug tree-optimization/49352] [4.7 Regression] -fcompare-debug failure with -O2 -ftree-vectorize

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49352 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-10 13:08:13 UTC --- Actually, should vect_is_slp_reduction be called at all if check_reduction is false? I think without check_reduction e.g. nothing ensures that code is commutative and associative...

[Bug tree-optimization/49352] [4.7 Regression] -fcompare-debug failure with -O2 -ftree-vectorize

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49352 --- Comment #7 from Ira Rosen 2011-06-10 13:30:52 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > Actually, should vect_is_slp_reduction be called at all if check_reduction > is false? I think without check_reduction e.g. nothing ensures that code is > commu

[Bug c++/49351] Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49351 --- Comment #4 from Mike Jarvis 2011-06-10 14:02:45 UTC --- That's a bit odd. The final function in the .ii file consists of two function calls. If I delete either one of these, the compile succeeds and only uses about 1100M (RSIZE in top).

[Bug c++/49351] Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49351 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-10 14:06:19 UTC --- a single 32-bit process won't be able to use that much

[Bug debug/49364] New: [4.7 regressions] Empty .debug_abbrev sections confuse SGI nm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49364 Summary: [4.7 regressions] Empty .debug_abbrev sections confuse SGI nm Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compo

[Bug debug/49364] [4.7 regressions] Empty .debug_abbrev sections confuse SGI nm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49364 --- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth 2011-06-10 14:14:40 UTC --- Created attachment 24488 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24488 gcc 4.6.0 assembler output

[Bug debug/49364] [4.7 regressions] Empty .debug_abbrev sections confuse SGI nm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49364 --- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth 2011-06-10 14:15:12 UTC --- Created attachment 24489 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24489 gcc 4.7.0 assembler output

[Bug debug/49364] [4.7 regressions] Empty .debug_abbrev sections confuse SGI nm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49364 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0

[Bug target/48454] gfortran.dg/char_result_13.f90 fails with -O3 -funroll-loops -mvectorize-with-neon-quad

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48454 Ramana Radhakrishnan changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/49365] New: 436.cactusADM performance regression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49365 Summary: 436.cactusADM performance regression Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/49365] 436.cactusADM performance regression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49365 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl at gcc dot gnu.org Known to f

[Bug tree-optimization/49365] 436.cactusADM performance regression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49365 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC|hjl at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at gmail dot com, |

[Bug lto/49302] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/20110201-1 c_lto_20110201-1_0.o-c_lto_20110201-1_0.o

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49302 --- Comment #11 from William J. Schmidt 2011-06-10 15:28:52 UTC --- Author: wschmidt Date: Fri Jun 10 15:28:46 2011 New Revision: 174912 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174912 Log: 2011-06-10 Bill Schmidt PR lto/493

[Bug lto/49302] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/20110201-1 c_lto_20110201-1_0.o-c_lto_20110201-1_0.o

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49302 --- Comment #12 from William J. Schmidt 2011-06-10 15:33:53 UTC --- Fixed.

[Bug tree-optimization/49365] 436.cactusADM performance regression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49365 --- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-06-10 15:36:49 UTC --- I'm trying to get my hands on it. Most code differences betweeen good and bad rev. appear in loop array prefetching. Before aprefetch dumps differ only for datestamp.c, PUGH/Setup

[Bug debug/49366] New: pointer-to-member-function not given value in DW_TAG_template_value_param

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49366 Summary: pointer-to-member-function not given value in DW_TAG_template_value_param Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug debug/41736] missing DW_TAG_template_*_ in some cases

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41736 --- Comment #9 from Tom Tromey 2011-06-10 16:09:38 UTC --- See PR 49366 as well.

[Bug libfortran/48906] Wrong rounding results with -m32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48906 --- Comment #33 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-06-10 16:16:19 UTC --- The last test case I am working is fmt_g0_6.f08. The apparent failing case is: print "(rc,g15.2)", 0.995000_8 Which is resulting in 0.99 and we expect it to be 1.0. However

[Bug libfortran/48906] Wrong rounding results with -m32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48906 --- Comment #34 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-06-10 16:22:20 UTC --- Additional note: The standard states: "Let N be the magnitude of the internal value" The internal value is to be used to determine the conversion to F formatting. I think this adds

[Bug debug/48459] [4.6/4.7 Regression] avr: Assertion failure with -gdwarf-2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48459 --- Comment #11 from Jason Merrill 2011-06-10 16:24:12 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) > I don't think initial_return_save() is called now. It passes the compilation > there but gets struck in other places. I think it is because > INCOMING_RET

[Bug libfortran/48906] Wrong rounding results with -m32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48906 --- Comment #35 from Thomas Henlich 2011-06-10 16:56:02 UTC --- (In reply to comment #33) > The last test case I am working is fmt_g0_6.f08. > > The apparent failing case is: > > print "(rc,g15.2)", 0.995000_8 > > Which is resulting in

[Bug libfortran/48906] Wrong rounding results with -m32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48906 --- Comment #36 from Thomas Henlich 2011-06-10 17:01:34 UTC --- (In reply to comment #34) > Additional note: The standard states: > > "Let N be the magnitude of the internal value" > > The internal value is to be used to determine the conversi

[Bug tree-optimization/49367] New: missed optimization with __restrict field

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49367 Summary: missed optimization with __restrict field Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: trivial Priority: P3 Comp

[Bug c++/39415] static_cast used as downcast can silently lose const

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39415 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libfortran/48906] Wrong rounding results with -m32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48906 --- Comment #37 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-06-10 17:29:54 UTC --- Updated patch posted for approval: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-06/msg00097.html Thomas, thanks for working the Standard issues and your testing.

[Bug c++/39684] GCC accepts template keyword where Comeau rejects it.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39684 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c++/41769] Parameter names not restricted to identifiers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41769 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/41138] Inconsistent (incorrect?) "overflow in implicit constant conversion" warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41138 --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor 2011-06-10 17:44:47 UTC --- Here's another test case, one that does involve slicing and where a consistent but differently phrased warning would, IMO, be useful. Perhaps something like: warning: slicing high orde

[Bug c/49368] New: __builtin_constant_p is unable to determine if a union is constant

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49368 Summary: __builtin_constant_p is unable to determine if a union is constant Product: gcc Version: 4.5.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/49347] G++ rejects Solaris spawn.h use of __restrict

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49347 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Summa

[Bug debug/49348] DW_TAG_template_* DIEs missing from template specializations

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49348 --- Comment #3 from Dodji Seketeli 2011-06-10 18:47:46 UTC --- Candidate patch posted to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-06/msg00873.html

[Bug debug/49366] pointer-to-member-function not given value in DW_TAG_template_value_param

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49366 Dodji Seketeli changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/49369] New: typeof() strips const from member when used in const method

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49369 Summary: typeof() strips const from member when used in const method Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug target/49030] ICE in get_arm_condition_code, at config/arm/arm.c:17180

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49030 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se,

[Bug c++/49369] typeof() strips const from member when used in const method

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49369 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-10 19:22:43 UTC --- can you use typeof(this->B::member) instead?

[Bug c++/41769] Parameter names not restricted to identifiers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41769 --- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-10 19:31:03 UTC --- Author: paolo Date: Fri Jun 10 19:31:00 2011 New Revision: 174927 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174927 Log: /cp 2011-06-10 Paolo Carlini PR

[Bug c++/41769] Parameter names not restricted to identifiers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41769 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug target/43088] [avr] Suspect optimizer missed code in gcc 4.4.3..

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43088 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization CC

[Bug c++/49369] typeof() strips const from member when used in const method

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49369 --- Comment #2 from shawn.bohrer at gmail dot com 2011-06-10 20:20:11 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > can you use typeof(this->B::member) instead? Yes this works for my application, thanks for the suggestion. Surely this is still a bug though

[Bug target/26882] [AVR][C++] ICE when using template function with memory attributes

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26882 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gjl at gcc dot gnu.org Known to f

[Bug other/49370] New: flags implemented in the specs file but undocumented

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49370 Summary: flags implemented in the specs file but undocumented Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: other Assigne

[Bug c++/49107] [C++0x][4.7 Regression] incomplete type regression with std::pair

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49107 --- Comment #20 from Marc Glisse 2011-06-10 20:39:59 UTC --- The patch fixes the example (thanks), but I still have trouble with the following (and I also get a different type of failure elsewhere that I'll investigate later): #include templat

[Bug ada/48835] Porting GNAT to GNU/Linux/m68k

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835 --- Comment #7 from Thorsten Glaser 2011-06-10 20:54:58 UTC --- OK, so the fix is that the System.Address type must be changed in GNAT to be handled as pointer in the GCC middle-/back-end. Is any GCC/GNAT developer please working on this?

[Bug c++/49351] Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49351 --- Comment #6 from Mike Jarvis 2011-06-10 21:04:59 UTC --- I figured out how to install a 64 bit version of g++ on my machine, and I also booted up the machine with 6 and 4 held down to get the 64 bit kernel. And this didn't help. I'm still

[Bug c++/49351] Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49351 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-10 21:10:16 UTC --- does 'ulimit -a' show any limit on memory size? obviously it would be good if gcc didn't use so much memory, but I did verify that given a sufficiently beefy machine (64-bit, 24GB R

[Bug c++/49369] typeof() strips const from member when used in const method

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49369 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug c++/49351] Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49351 --- Comment #8 from Mike Jarvis 2011-06-10 21:26:59 UTC --- $ ulimit -a core file size (blocks, -c) 0 data seg size (kbytes, -d) unlimited file size (blocks, -f) unlimited max locked memory (kbytes, -l) unli

[Bug c++/49351] Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49351 --- Comment #9 from Mike Jarvis 2011-06-10 21:47:37 UTC --- That worked. So I guess g++ is exceeding the stack limit and crashing, not the heap memory. $ ulimit -aH core file size (blocks, -c) 0 data seg size (kbytes, -d) unl

[Bug c++/49369] typeof() strips const from member when used in const method

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49369 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente 2011-06-11 05:58:46 UTC --- These new developments sound interesting. Hope somebody is working on it and will publish a testable version soon. On the other hand I was thinking more of exploiting auto-vectori

[Bug c++/49351] Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49351 Mike Jarvis changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |minor --- Comment #10 from Mike Jarvis 201

[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 davidxl changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tmsriram at google dot com --- Comment #3 from