http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51316
--- Comment #2 from Nikolka 2011-11-27 08:37:37 UTC ---
> Note that this usage is not valid in C1X.
Could you explain?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51278
--- Comment #1 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-27 10:18:28 UTC ---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Sun Nov 27 10:18:25 2011
New Revision: 181763
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181763
Log:
gcc/
PR target/51278
* con
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51278
rsand...@gcc.gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
David Kastrup writes:
P.S.:
> A workaround has been compiling with the options
>
> -fkeep-inline-functions -fno-crossjumping
>
> I don't know which of the two options is responsible for avoiding the
> problem but can test if it makes a difference to you.
It is -fkeep-inline-functions that does
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51301
Ira Rosen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50682
--- Comment #4 from Zdenek Sojka 2011-11-27 13:13:45
UTC ---
Created attachment 25919
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25919
another testcase
This testcase doesn't need any -fno-* flags. It might be the same problem (the
backt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51298
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51316
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-11-27 15:58:15 UTC ---
On Sun, 27 Nov 2011, tsoae at mail dot ru wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51316
>
> --- Comment #2 from Nikolka 2011-11-27 08:37:37 UTC ---
> >
David Kastrup writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
> P.S.:
>
>> A workaround has been compiling with the options
>>
>> -fkeep-inline-functions -fno-crossjumping
>>
>> I don't know which of the two options is responsible for avoiding the
>> problem but can test if it makes a difference to you.
>
> I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51322
Bug #: 51322
Summary: [C++11] wrong mangling with argument packs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51311
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-11-27
18:01:22 UTC ---
I don't think this is a bug as in_data can be changed by a different function
other than bar().
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50283
--- Comment #6 from John David Anglin 2011-11-27
18:35:52 UTC ---
Fails have changed somewhat but are still present:
WARNING: program timed out.FAIL: g++.dg/eh/simd-1.C -std=gnu++98 execution test
WARNING: program timed out.FAIL: g++.dg/eh/simd-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50283
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #25187|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50283
--- Comment #8 from John David Anglin 2011-11-27
18:54:10 UTC ---
This is hack, but test doesn't fail if I interchange ldo and
.cfi_def_cfa_offset
lines:
ldo 64(%r30),%r30
.cfi_def_cfa_offset -64
How should a stack adjust in the final i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50283
--- Comment #9 from Richard Henderson 2011-11-27
18:59:40 UTC ---
You don't. We're supposed to prevent frame-related insns
from appearing in branch delay slots.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51323
Bug #: 51323
Summary: g++ confuses this with function argument in optimized
call
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50283
--- Comment #10 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-11-27 19:07:46 UTC ---
On 27-Nov-11, at 1:59 PM, rth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> You don't. We're supposed to prevent frame-related insns
> from appearing in branch delay slots.
Is this a reo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51252
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin 2011-11-27
19:24:34 UTC ---
Similar fails:
FAIL: c-c++-common/tm/inline-asm-2.c (internal compiler error)
FAIL: c-c++-common/tm/inline-asm-2.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: c-c++-common/tm/memcpy-1.c (inter
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51324
Bug #: 51324
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/atomic-compare-exchange-3.c (test for
excess errors)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47868
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2011-11-27
--- Comment #2 from John D
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49084
--- Comment #11 from Cesar Strauss 2011-11-27
20:55:15 UTC ---
Created attachment 25922
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25922
Debug log of PR49084
The cause of the access violation is due to an attempt to pass a null string
p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
fabien at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51307
--- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-11-27 21:18:46 UTC ---
On 26-Nov-11, at 6:40 PM, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Probably a missing CLOCK_REALTIME on the system (11.31 apparently
> has it). You
> need to add something
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51307
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-11-27 21:30:07 UTC ---
On 27-Nov-11, at 4:18 PM, John David Anglin wrote:
> typedef enum __clockid_t {
>CLOCK_INVALID = 0,
>CLOCK_REALTIME = 1, /* the system-wide "wall clock
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51325
Bug #: 51325
Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE with -flto and union in template
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51325
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51326
Bug #: 51326
Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE with invalid override
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51326
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Target Milestone|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51327
Bug #: 51327
Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE with invalid constexpr parameter
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51308
--- Comment #2 from Steve Kargl
2011-11-27 21:56:30 UTC ---
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 07:21:29PM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> The problem comes about because of gen_special_c_interop_ptr() in
> symbol.c has the following lines:
>
> /
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51327
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery,
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49084
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou 2011-11-27
22:06:23 UTC ---
> The cause of the access violation is due to an attempt to pass a null string
> pointer to asprintf in internal_error_function
> (gcc/ada/gcc-interface/misc.c:290):
Thanks for the i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51328
Bug #: 51328
Summary: [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE on invalid template
parameter
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51328
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery,
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50814
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo 2011-11-27 22:38:34 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Will be slightly different because sh2a's shad&shld are 4-byte
> insns. Perhaps something like below will work, though I don't
> test it at all.
>
According
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51329
Bug #: 51329
Summary: O3 optimizes away a loop
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50814
--- Comment #3 from Kazumoto Kojima 2011-11-28
00:09:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> According to the SW manual document rej09b0051_sh2a.pdf the SHAD and SHLD
> insns
> have the same 2-byte format as on SH3:
>
> SHAD Rm, Rn: 01001
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51329
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49084
--- Comment #13 from Cesar Strauss 2011-11-28
00:46:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Zero is UNKNOWN_LOCATION. The problem is probably that the location mapping
> isn't initialized yet. What happens if you move the block in gigi:
>
> g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51273
--- Comment #1 from Patrick Marlier
2011-11-28 01:06:09 UTC ---
Proposed patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg02460.html
Thanks for reporting.
Patrick Marlier.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51320
--- Comment #8 from Jim Michaels 2011-11-28
01:12:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 25924
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25924
phone.cpp version without initializer list or map. still crashes.
compiler has no STL. tried to sear
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51320
--- Comment #9 from Jim Michaels 2011-11-28
01:23:08 UTC ---
Sun 11/27/2011 17:19:49.04|C:\djc462beta\bin|>gcc -print-prog-name=cc1plus
Exiting due to signal SIGSEGV
General Protection Fault at eip=1bb2
eax=0c72 ebx=0299 ecx=0c5898cf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51320
--- Comment #10 from Jim Michaels 2011-11-28
02:07:37 UTC ---
I am going to try a test program which does not #include anything and see if it
compiles.
Sun 11/27/2011 18:04:02.90|C:\prj\test\djgpp|>c:\djc462~1\bin\gxx -Wall -W
-Wextra -s -oa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51320
--- Comment #11 from Jim Michaels 2011-11-28
02:19:25 UTC ---
Created attachment 25925
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25925
cpp462b.cpp smaller test case causes compiler internal error
Sun 11/27/2011 18:06:49.10|C:\prj\test\
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51320
Jim Michaels changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #25917|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51320
Jim Michaels changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #25916|phone.cpp original program |phone.cpp original program
descript
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51311
--- Comment #2 from Michael Bruck
2011-11-28 02:34:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I don't think this is a bug as in_data can be changed by a different function
> other than bar().
Before I stripped this down to a test case in_data was act
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51311
--- Comment #3 from Michael Bruck
2011-11-28 02:44:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > I don't think this is a bug as in_data can be changed by a different
> > function
> > other than bar().
>
> Before I stripped
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51050
--- Comment #1 from Wim Lewis 2011-11-28 04:26:14 UTC ---
Still broken in rev 181770. Configuring without LTO does not change things.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50814
--- Comment #4 from Kazumoto Kojima 2011-11-28
04:31:51 UTC ---
Created attachment 25927
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25927
A patch
I'm testing the attached patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51320
--- Comment #14 from Andris Pavenis 2011-11-28
04:43:41 UTC ---
Verify that You have
c:/djc462~1/libexec/gcc/djgpp/4.62/cc1plus.exe at all
(I suspect that it is not there due missing installation of gpp462b.zip
package and use of obsolete GCC w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51320
--- Comment #15 from Andris Pavenis 2011-11-28
05:18:21 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> Verify that You have
>
> c:/djc462~1/libexec/gcc/djgpp/4.62/cc1plus.exe at all
>
> (I suspect that it is not there due missing installation of gpp462b.z
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51329
--- Comment #2 from Andrew 2011-11-28
06:45:29 UTC ---
Thanks, will report to apple.
(In reply to comment #1)
> First try to using a newer version of GCC, since 4.2.x is no longer
> supported.
> Also this is heavily modified version of 4.2.x fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51271
--- Comment #8 from Denis Excoffier 2011-11-28
07:41:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 25928
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25928
preprocessed exclude.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51271
Denis Excoffier changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||g...@denis-excoffier.org
--- Comment #9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51308
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2011-11-28
07:51:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> - conf2 (is_bind_c);
> + if (!(name && (strcmp(name, "c_null_ptr") == 0 || strcmp(name,
> "c_null_funptr") == 0)))
> +conf2 (is_bind_c);
I thi
56 matches
Mail list logo
