http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52132
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-11
08:27:41 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Feb 11 08:27:30 2012
New Revision: 184126
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184126
Log:
PR debug/52132
* reg-stack.c (subst_stack_r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52132
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51910
--- Comment #18 from Jason Merrill 2012-02-11
08:50:27 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Sat Feb 11 08:50:23 2012
New Revision: 184127
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184127
Log:
PR c++/51910
* tlink.c (demangled_hash_ent
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39055
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |NEW
Summary|questionable defau
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52175
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-11 09:00:47 UTC ---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Sat Feb 11 09:00:42 2012
New Revision: 184128
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184128
Log:
gcc/
PR rtl-optimization/52175
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52175
rsand...@gcc.gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51910
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52209
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38114
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou 2012-02-11
10:50:53 UTC ---
> Did the revert fix any regression that was reported as a bug and has gotten
> a testcase? If not, then the proper way to address this new regression is
> to revert the revert espec
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46779
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dhowells at redhat dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51445
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolut
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52117
--- Comment #11 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-11
11:40:36 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> We have a problem in v4.6.2 with the following (using the std=f95 flag):
> There seems to have been a limitation in past versions of gfortran with
> allocat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52117
--- Comment #12 from steven hirshman 2012-02-11
12:08:02 UTC ---
Thank you for your reply. I'll check with my coworker about that.
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
To: sphirsh...@yahoo.com
Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 6:40 AM
Subject: [Bu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52207
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gerald at pfeifer dot com
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52203
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassign
on latest trunk dated 20120211 on an AMD x86_64 box.
Valgrind said
==6796== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
==6796==at 0xAECAC5: vect_model_simple_cost(_stmt_vec_info*, int,
vect_def_type*, _slp_tree*) (tree-vect-stmts.c:800)
==6796==by 0xB17
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52211
Bug #: 52211
Summary: Typo in translatable string: "-fdisble" ("-fdisable")
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52172
--- Comment #8 from Anton Shterenlikht 2012-02-11
22:01:52 UTC ---
bear with me..
# pwd
/usr/ports/lang/gcc47/work/build/stage2-gcc
# cat stage2-command
/usr/ports/lang/gcc47/work/build/./stage2-gcc/g++ -fcompare-debug -save-temps
-B/usr/ports
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15459
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31531
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski 2012-02-12
04:35:53 UTC ---
The shortest testcase for the problem function:
int isnegative_optimized_4(unsigned int X) {
int result; // Y is the conditional expression of if-else.
if ((~X) >> 31) result = 0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31531
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31531
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski 2012-02-12
04:39:01 UTC ---
forwprop already handles:
int f(int a)
{
int b = ~a;
return b<0;
}
It just needs to handle:
int f(unsigned a)
{
int b = ~a;
return b<0;
}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15017
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47656
--- Comment #4 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-02-12 05:59:42
UTC ---
Yes, __builtin_init_heap_trampoline is new for 4.7. Sorry for not answering
earlier, I missed the e-mail message somehow.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51874
--- Comment #6 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12
06:00:42 UTC ---
Author: ian
Date: Sun Feb 12 06:00:34 2012
New Revision: 184137
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184137
Log:
PR go/51874
* go.test/go-test.exp (g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51874
--- Comment #7 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-02-12 06:04:42
UTC ---
In current mainline I'm not aware of any test failures on Solaris. The SPARC
Solaris system I am using is very slow and I do see some timeouts. However, I
do not see any more actu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51874
--- Comment #8 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-02-12 06:05:36
UTC ---
Sorry, I should clarify that I don't see any failures on Solaris if I patch the
compiler to avoid PR 51921.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52084
--- Comment #1 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12
06:23:13 UTC ---
Author: ian
Date: Sun Feb 12 06:23:08 2012
New Revision: 184138
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184138
Log:
PR go/52084
libgo: Provide more __sync f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52084
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51874
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski 2012-02-12
06:55:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> I have not tested on Irix. To be honest I am far less interested in Irix than
> I am in Solaris. Can you still buy a new Irix system?
Not know I know of.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52212
Bug #: 52212
Summary: friend declaration doesn't see previous friend of same
function
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52212
--- Comment #1 from Ivan Godard 2012-02-12
07:46:10 UTC ---
p.s. FWIW, clang accepts this and Comeau does not.
36 matches
Mail list logo
