http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48459
--- Comment #18 from Anitha Boyapati
2011-06-14 07:00:45 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> Created attachment 24512 [details]
> loosen constraints on register elimination
>
> This seems to fix the problem. At least for this small test case.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48542
--- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-06-14
07:02:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> on trunk: the
> initial-value machinery should have handled the register with the
> return-address being clobbered. It does partially; note the store of
ome/jarryd/installers/gcc-svn/configure
--prefix=/home/jarryd/local/gcc-4.7 --disable-multilib
--enable-languages=c,c++,go
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20110614 (experimental) (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48542
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #23938|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835
--- Comment #10 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-06-14
08:12:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> > - __gnat_malloc is defined in Ada to return Address (integer, so in d0), but
> > it's called from a couple of places via fake "extern" declarations th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49399
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-14
08:15:14 UTC ---
when you say "works fine" do you mean "doesn't do the access check"?
surely if SFINAE correctly honours access control then the function shouldn't
be callable and the program won't c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49400
Summary: Proc-pointer declaration in BLOCK construct
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49397
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2011-06-14
08:27:44 UTC ---
More information:
* (2): Case "g" works: If the "print *, g()" as the "p => g" is in the same
scoping unit, there is no error or ICE.
* (1) If the "print *, f" is in the host of "p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835
--- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou 2011-06-14
08:44:12 UTC ---
> In that case the Ada side of __gnat_malloc has to be changed to use a pointer
> type rather than Address. Is Interfaces.C.Strings.chars_ptr acceptible, or is
> there a better appro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49401
Summary: Warning regression for 'uninitialized' variable on
non-existant code path (in mep-pragma.c)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build, diagnos
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48459
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.0 |4.6.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49402
Summary: Duplicate use of v850.opt
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedT
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49403
Summary: v850e-elf: incompatible pointer type (near
initialization for ‘targetm.memory_move_cost’)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
d with: ../../gcc.gnu.org/trunk/configure --target=avr
--prefix=/local/gnu/install/gcc-4.7 --disable-nls --disable-shared
--enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: single
gcc version 4.7.0 20110614 (experimental) (GCC)
GNU assembler version 2.21 (avr) using BFD version (GNU Binutils) 2.21
GMP 5.0.1
MPFR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49382
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49365
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835
--- Comment #12 from Thorsten Glaser 2011-06-14 10:59:03
UTC ---
Why not patch the frontend to magically make System.Address a pointer type for
the backend to deal with? That way, no functions have to be changed, and
potential other targets with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou 2011-06-14
11:27:24 UTC ---
> Why not patch the frontend to magically make System.Address a pointer type for
> the backend to deal with? That way, no functions have to be changed, and
> potential other targets w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49392
--- Comment #1 from Ramana Radhakrishnan 2011-06-14
11:31:55 UTC ---
It looks like a linker error but ...
Hmmm with a later version of gcc 4.6 branch that I have lying around the same
example doesn't spew out such error messages. I don't have a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49399
--- Comment #2 from Jarryd Beck 2011-06-14
11:52:58 UTC ---
By works fine I mean that the code compiles, and when it runs, the program
returns the number 4.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding how this is all supposed to work and something has
changed in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49399
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-14
12:11:05 UTC ---
The program should not compile.
In C++03 it should fail to compile because it accesses a private member. SFINAE
does not take access control into account in C++03, so that is an err
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #17 from Daniel Krügler
2011-06-14 12:20:21 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> I had another look at this issue. Something I didn't realize at the time is
> that simply adding begin() and end() overloads taking a const _Expr& is not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49399
--- Comment #4 from Jarryd Beck 2011-06-14
12:21:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> The program should not compile.
>
> In C++03 it should fail to compile because it accesses a private member.
> SFINAE
> does not take access control into acc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49399
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-14
12:27:35 UTC ---
Then they never should have compiled in the first place, and won't compile with
clang or Comeau either.
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#1170 is the
rele
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49390
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49399
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-14
12:30:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Ah, I see. Well the example you gave also doesn't compile. This is exactly
> what
> the boost library does too, I missed that part in their code, meaning
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49278
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus 2011-06-14
12:32:02 UTC ---
I have now filled an interpretation request (J3/11-201) - in time for WG5 and
J3 meeting (m195), which is end of June. Let's see what J3/WG5 will decide. Cf.
http://j3-fortran.org/doc/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49178
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49399
--- Comment #7 from Jarryd Beck 2011-06-14
12:34:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > Ah, I see. Well the example you gave also doesn't compile. This is exactly
> > what
> > the boost library does too, I missed that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49399
--- Comment #8 from Jarryd Beck 2011-06-14
12:35:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > (In reply to comment #4)
> > > Ah, I see. Well the example you gave also doesn't compile. This is
> > > exactly what
> > > the bo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49392
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-06-14
12:40:03 UTC ---
There wasn't any change on the branch that would change this.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49399
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-14
12:40:52 UTC ---
Note that returning 4 was *never* correct for that program. In C++03 it
shouldn't compile and in C++0x it should return 1. There's a bug in the
Boost.MPL docs which should say the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49367
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-06-14
12:44:35 UTC ---
The last example is because with a restrict qualified loaded pointer the
later conversion to a restrict qualified pointer is thrown away.
As for the first example the only case tha
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49394
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49396
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49398
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
Summary|[4.7 ] bootst
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49382
--- Comment #5 from Jan Kratochvil
2011-06-14 12:50:22 UTC ---
../../../gccemptyrange/libgcc/../gcc/config/soft-fp/floattitf.c:34:8: warning:
no previous prototype for ‘__floattitf’ [-Wmissing-prototypes]
../../../gccemptyrange/libgcc/../gcc/conf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-14
12:51:45 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> Then, the snippet:
>
> std::valarray v1{ 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 }, v2{ 5, 6, 7, 8, 9};
>
> for (int i : v1 + v2)
> { std::cout << i << std::endl; }
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49396
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-06-14
12:53:45 UTC ---
Same error on all branches back to 4.4.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49382
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-14
12:54:34 UTC ---
Yeah, sure, I've noticed that an hour ago too. Fixed in my copy, but now libgo
build failed for unrelated reason :(.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49362
Greta Yorsh changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Greta.Yorsh at arm dot com
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-14
13:01:24 UTC ---
Ah, no the problem is std::__addressof(__ex()[0]) which takes the
address of a temporary returned by operator[]
The range-based for seems to do the right thing
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49324
--- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus 2011-06-14
13:07:07 UTC ---
(Comment fixed 8 fixed the missing deep copy.)
Regarding the reallocate (cf. comment 6, but using scalars to reduce the dump
size): For
type t
integer, allocatable :: A
end ty
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #20 from Paolo Carlini 2011-06-14
13:22:13 UTC ---
I'm not sure, really. I'm going to attach a variant which more explicitly only
uses return by const ref and shows the same fundamental problem for me.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #21 from Paolo Carlini 2011-06-14
13:23:29 UTC ---
Created attachment 24519
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24519
patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #22 from Paolo Carlini 2011-06-14
13:27:03 UTC ---
To be clear: I fully agree with the exclusion sentence. But I had to play a bit
with this stuff to realize that really adding overloads to begin() and end()
cannot work.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48459
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #20 from Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49396
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-06-14 13:23:09 UTC ---
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> I think it should be
>
> Index: c-family/c-cppbuiltin.c
> ===
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48459
--- Comment #21 from Richard Henderson 2011-06-14
13:31:47 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Tue Jun 14 13:31:43 2011
New Revision: 175018
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175018
Log:
PR debug/48459
* dwarf2out.c (frame_poin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49404
Summary: ARM _Unwind_Backtrace returns _URC_FAILURE too eagerly
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assign
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49362
mark.pupilli at dyson dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolutio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #23 from Paolo Carlini 2011-06-14
13:50:56 UTC ---
Ok, now I see, it's the operator[] of _BinBase which returns by value, I
overlooked that. Thus, fine it seems confirmed that range-based for-loop itself
is Ok, but making sure we have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36610
--- Comment #21 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-06-14 13:53:56 UTC ---
objc.dg/torture/forward-1.m now seems to XPASS (almost?) everywhere with
-fgnu-runtime:
alpha-dec-osf5.1b
i386-pc-solaris2.1[01] -m64
mips
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #24 from Gabriel Dos Reis 2011-06-14
13:54:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> It should be identical to
>
> auto&& range = v1 + v2;
> for (auto b = std::begin(range), e = std::end(range); b != e; ++b)
> { ... }
> (see 6.5.4 [s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36610
--- Comment #22 from js-gcc at webkeks dot org
2011-06-14 14:02:05 UTC ---
Nope, it's still using __builtin_apply.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #25 from Gabriel Dos Reis 2011-06-14
14:01:30 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #23)
> Ok, now I see, it's the operator[] of _BinBase which returns by value, I
> overlooked that.
Yes, "val" in "valarray" stands for "value", e.g. a valarr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #26 from Paolo Carlini 2011-06-14
14:02:15 UTC ---
... among other things, std::valarray, at variance with the containers, does
*not* have member begin and end, thus I don't even think novice programmers may
have expectations about th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48365
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48365
Gabriel Dos Reis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gdr at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49362
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45098
--- Comment #14 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-14 14:30:01 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Jun 14 14:29:58 2011
New Revision: 175022
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175022
Log:
2011-06-14 Zdenek Dvorak
Tom d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49390
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-14
14:59:55 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jun 14 14:59:52 2011
New Revision: 175023
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175023
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/49390
Revert:
2010-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49390
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-14
15:01:15 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jun 14 15:01:10 2011
New Revision: 175024
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175024
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/49390
Revert:
2010-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45098
--- Comment #15 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-14 15:05:29 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Jun 14 15:05:26 2011
New Revision: 175025
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175025
Log:
2011-06-14 Tom de Vries
PR target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49103
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-14
15:27:28 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jun 14 15:27:24 2011
New Revision: 175028
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175028
Log:
PR fortran/49103
* tree.h (DECL_NONSHAREAB
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49103
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-14
15:28:27 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jun 14 15:28:21 2011
New Revision: 175029
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175029
Log:
PR fortran/49103
* tree.h (DECL_NONSHAREAB
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49402
--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton 2011-06-14 15:30:15
UTC ---
Author: nickc
Date: Tue Jun 14 15:30:05 2011
New Revision: 175030
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175030
Log:
PR target/49403
* config/v850/v850.c (v850_m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49403
--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton 2011-06-14 15:30:15
UTC ---
Author: nickc
Date: Tue Jun 14 15:30:05 2011
New Revision: 175030
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175030
Log:
PR target/49403
* config/v850/v850.c (v850_m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49403
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton 2011-06-14 15:32:13
UTC ---
Fixed in mainline.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49402
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton 2011-06-14 15:32:49
UTC ---
Fixed in mainline.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49375
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-06-14 15:41:50 UTC ---
IMO this is a clear example why LD_LIBRARY_PATH is evil: the execution
tests in the testsuite should be linked with -R/-rpath/whatever is
required so the correct ta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47333
--- Comment #15 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-06-14 15:47:16 UTC ---
> --- Comment #14 from Richard Guenther 2011-06-12
> 12:48:32 UTC ---
> A target issue as it only depends on the assembler used. Rainer, as people
> don't have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49214
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47364
--- Comment #7 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-14
16:32:01 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Jun 14 16:31:57 2011
New Revision: 175034
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175034
Log:
Properly expand strlen to Pmode.
2011-06-14
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48459
--- Comment #22 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-06-14
16:32:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> (In reply to comment #19)
> > > A full build for AVR fails, but that seems to be related to other
> > > open bugs.
> >
> > What bugs?
>
> Perhaps I s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47364
--- Comment #8 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-14
16:36:16 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Jun 14 16:36:12 2011
New Revision: 175035
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175035
Log:
Pass POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED to convert_to_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47364
--- Comment #9 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-14
16:36:50 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Jun 14 16:36:45 2011
New Revision: 175036
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175036
Log:
Expand strlen to Pmode.
2011-06-14 H.J. Lu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49402
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49405
Summary: Inlining in inheritance seems broken
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49405
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49290
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2011-06-14
18:15:46 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Jun 14 18:15:43 2011
New Revision: 175041
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175041
Log:
PR c++/49290
* semantics.c (cxx_fold_indire
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49389
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill 2011-06-14
18:16:00 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Jun 14 18:15:58 2011
New Revision: 175043
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175043
Log:
PR c++/49389
* typeck2.c (build_m_component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49369
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill 2011-06-14
18:15:53 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Jun 14 18:15:51 2011
New Revision: 175042
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175042
Log:
PR c++/49369
* class.c (build_base_path): F
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49117
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill 2011-06-14
18:16:08 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Jun 14 18:16:06 2011
New Revision: 175044
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175044
Log:
PR c++/49117
* call.c (perform_implicit_con
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49406
Summary: Inlining in inheritance seems broken
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36610
Nicola Pero changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicola at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #23 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49406
--- Comment #1 from neotheone222 at gmail dot com 2011-06-14 18:33:25 UTC ---
Created attachment 24520
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24520
Base header file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49406
--- Comment #2 from neotheone222 at gmail dot com 2011-06-14 18:33:52 UTC ---
Created attachment 24521
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24521
Base implementation file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49406
--- Comment #3 from neotheone222 at gmail dot com 2011-06-14 18:34:18 UTC ---
Created attachment 24522
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24522
Base preprocessed file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49406
--- Comment #4 from neotheone222 at gmail dot com 2011-06-14 18:34:43 UTC ---
Created attachment 24523
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24523
Derived header file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49406
--- Comment #5 from neotheone222 at gmail dot com 2011-06-14 18:35:04 UTC ---
Created attachment 24524
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24524
Derived implementation file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49406
--- Comment #6 from neotheone222 at gmail dot com 2011-06-14 18:35:22 UTC ---
Created attachment 24525
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24525
Derived preprocessed file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49406
--- Comment #7 from neotheone222 at gmail dot com 2011-06-14 18:36:01 UTC ---
Created attachment 24526
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24526
InlineText main file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49406
--- Comment #8 from neotheone222 at gmail dot com 2011-06-14 18:36:35 UTC ---
Created attachment 24527
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24527
InlineText preprocessed file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49406
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-14
18:37:28 UTC ---
your program is invalid
if a function is declared inline in one translation unit (such as Base.c++)
then it must be declared inline in all translation units that refer to it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49406
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49407
--- Comment #1 from Pawel Sikora 2011-06-14 19:04:34
UTC ---
Created attachment 24528
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24528
testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49407
Summary: unusable debuginfo for dll-imported functions.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: una
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: jan.kratoch...@redhat.com
CC: do...@gcc.gnu.org
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
FAIL gcc (GCC) 4.4.7 20110614 (prerelease)
FAIL gcc (GCC) 4.7.0 20110614 (experimental)
struct S {
void m (int x) {}
};
template
struct K
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
