http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54134
Bug #: 54134
Summary: ICE overriding derived type bound function with
allocatable character as result
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54133
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54135
Bug #: 54135
Summary: Dhrystone 2 test performance has seriously decreased
in recent GCC releases
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54136
Bug #: 54136
Summary: Compiling phoronix/dcraw with gcc 4.8 trunk causes
infinite execution.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: tree-ssa
Status: UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54136
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-07-31
09:01:54 UTC ---
>cam_xyz[0][j] = table[i].trans[j]
How are those two arrays (cam_xyz[0] and trans) defined?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54136
--- Comment #2 from Venkataramanan
2012-07-31 09:02:34 UTC ---
Created attachment 27904
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27904
Simplied test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54136
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53880
--- Comment #32 from Steven Bosscher 2012-07-31
09:21:03 UTC ---
Author: steven
Date: Tue Jul 31 09:20:56 2012
New Revision: 18
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=18
Log:
PR pch/53880
* gengtype.c (struct walk_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54136
--- Comment #4 from Venkataramanan
2012-07-31 09:22:47 UTC ---
Ok thanks will adjust the test case.
So compiler can generate infinite loop incase of array out of bound acess?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53880
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|4.8.0 |
--- Comment #33 from Steven Bosscher
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54136
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2012-07-31
09:24:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Ok thanks will adjust the test case.
>
> So compiler can generate infinite loop incase of array out of bound acess?
Yes, anything can happen when you i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54132
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54130
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2012-07-31
09:32:18 UTC ---
I think your non-matching prototype disables builtin recognition. The C
standard specifies isnan as returning int, so I think GCC is correct here.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54134
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54128
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54135
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54077
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||t.artem at mailcity dot com
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54130
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse 2012-07-31 09:38:38
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I think your non-matching prototype disables builtin recognition.
Yes.
> The C standard specifies isnan as returning int, so I think GCC is correct
> here.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54128
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2012-07-31
09:39:34 UTC ---
>http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=634881,
That was an issue with Ada.
Can you attach the preprocessed source for tree-data-ref.i?
I might debug this later today.
Als
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54088
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski 2012-07-31
09:42:07 UTC ---
Report this bug to opensuse.
This should have been fixed already by revision 187605 on the 4.7.1 branch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53624
--- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-07-31 09:46:59 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Jul 31 09:46:46 2012
New Revision: 190001
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190001
Log:
/cp
2012-07-31 Paolo Carlini
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53624
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54077
--- Comment #6 from wbrana 2012-07-31 10:11:48 UTC ---
clang
FP EMULATION: 405.92 : 194.78 : 44.95
4.4.7
FP EMULATION: 337.44 : 161.92 : 37.36
4.5.4
FP EMULATION: 320.08 :
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54134
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54088
Jan Engelhardt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53880
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54088
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|rguenther at su
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53975
--- Comment #18 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-07-31
10:56:59 UTC ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Jul 31 10:56:52 2012
New Revision: 190005
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190005
Log:
PR target/53975
* sel-sched-i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54088
--- Comment #8 from Jan Engelhardt 2012-07-31 11:04:01
UTC ---
The ICE continues to occur even if I leave out the handful of openSUSE patches.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53975
--- Comment #19 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-07-31
11:11:22 UTC ---
Fixed on trunk. Judging by the time the original wrong patch went in, this
should be a regression and thus I'll commit this to 4.7 too after a week or so.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54137
Bug #: 54137
Summary: expected primary-expression error when accessing
template method
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54137
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54137
--- Comment #2 from vagran 2012-07-31 11:46:02
UTC ---
Thanks!
Would be fine if the error message could contain the probable cause hint for
this kind of error (if technically possible).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53773
--- Comment #7 from William J. Schmidt 2012-07-31
12:25:10 UTC ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Tue Jul 31 12:25:04 2012
New Revision: 190007
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190007
Log:
gcc:
2012-07-31 Bill Schmidt
PR tr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53773
William J. Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54138
Bug #: 54138
Summary: configuring --without-cloog but executable links
against system cloog
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54109
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2012-07-31
12:34:42 UTC ---
Inlining ends up generating
MEM[(long unsigned int *)&b + 8B].bits[2305843009213693951]{lb: 0 sz: 8} = 0
which is of course bogus, but it's what the code does - referencing
b.me
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54125
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|sparc64-linux |sparc64-linux,
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54134
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-31 13:04:00 UTC ---
Author: janus
Date: Tue Jul 31 13:03:53 2012
New Revision: 190010
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190010
Log:
2012-07-31 Janus Weil
PR fortran/5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54134
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54138
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|other |bootstrap
Version|unknown
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54134
--- Comment #5 from koen.poppe at cs dot kuleuven.be 2012-07-31 13:10:46 UTC ---
Thank you for the quick response and solution!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54139
Bug #: 54139
Summary: [4.8 regression] some ARM Thumb-2 tests appear to be
run on ARMv5TE hardware causing unhandled exceptions
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52412
amker.cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker.cheng at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54140
Bug #: 54140
Summary: -Wswitch shouldn't complain about out-of-range values
that are cast to the correct type
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54130
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2012-07-31 14:43:18 UTC ---
In C it's a macro not a function and there is no guarantee that there
exists a function with that name, or what the semantics of such a function
would be. In C++, un
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54120
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
Compon
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54128
--- Comment #3 from Steve Ellcey 2012-07-31 15:17:15
UTC ---
Created attachment 27906
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27906
Compressed preprocessed test case
Sorry about not including the attachment earlier, I thought I had d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54140
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-07-31
15:27:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> This would have been appropriate if I wrote "case 72:", but I didn't -- I
> wrote
> "case (Enum)72:". This is an explicit indication that I want gcc to t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54128
--- Comment #4 from Steve Ellcey 2012-07-31 15:26:56
UTC ---
I configured with:
--disable-libssp --disable-libgomp --disable-libmudflap --disable-fixed-point
--disable-decimal-float --with-arch=mips32r2 --with-synci --with-llsc
--with-mips-plt -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54140
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-07-31
15:34:19 UTC ---
However changing the range of the enum doesn't make any difference, so please
ignore my comment!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54141
Bug #: 54141
Summary: The optimizer -O produces a bug.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54142
Bug #: 54142
Summary: ppc64 build failure - Unrecognized opcode: `sldi' (and
`srdi`)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
The subscrubers who took care to read to the Friday news, earned as much as
+70% (seventy percent, I repeat) on V N DB today.
V N DB was priced 0.08 on this day, those who bought $2,000 on July 27th got
$3,200 today and the people who invested ten grands now have $16,000.
Where else can you g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53664
--- Comment #8 from Janis Johnson 2012-07-31
15:56:12 UTC ---
For some reason I couldn't apply the patch, but manually changed the tests to
use { scan-assembler-times regexp 2 } instead of { scan assembler regexp }.
Ramana, have you tried runnin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54142
--- Comment #1 from Gary Funck 2012-07-31 16:12:18
UTC ---
We have determined that we can bypass the failure with the following configure
switches:
--with-long-double-128 --with-cpu-32=power4 --with-tune-32=power6
--with-cpu-64=power4 --with-tu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53664
--- Comment #9 from Ramana Radhakrishnan 2012-07-31
16:16:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> For some reason I couldn't apply the patch, but manually changed the tests to
> use { scan-assembler-times regexp 2 } instead of { scan assembler rege
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54140
--- Comment #3 from Aryeh Gregor 2012-07-31 16:18:14
UTC ---
Yeah, sorry, it was a bad example. Assigning 72 to this enum is undefined, so
maybe this behavior is justifiable. The real-world example I was looking at
didn't have that issue, thoug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38644
Hagay changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hagayg at broadcom dot com
--- Comment #65 from H
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54142
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2012-07-31
16:35:02 UTC ---
sldi and srdi are both standard PowerPC64 instructions.
How did you configure GCC?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54141
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53664
--- Comment #10 from Janis Johnson 2012-07-31
16:49:23 UTC ---
The problem is the regular expression, which matches far too much text and ends
up with a length of 5 instead of 2.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38644
--- Comment #66 from Andrew Pinski 2012-07-31
16:49:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #65)
> Also saw the same problem on MIPS
> Compiling using 'gcc version 4.5.2 (Sourcery CodeBench Lite 2011.09-86)'
You should report that issue to Mentor becau
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54142
--- Comment #3 from Gary Funck 2012-07-31 16:53:52
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> sldi and srdi are both standard PowerPC64 instructions.
>
> How did you configure GCC?
No special switches. For example,
$src/configure \
CFLAGS='-O0 -g3'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54142
--- Comment #4 from Gary Funck 2012-07-31 16:57:55
UTC ---
One of target platforms is running RHEL 6.2 on a POWER7 series processor.
The binutils RPM is:
binutils-2.20.51.0.2-5.28.el6.ppc64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54141
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alain.hebert at polymtl dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54142
--- Comment #5 from Gary Funck 2012-07-31 17:14:24
UTC ---
Here is the complete output at the point of a make failure.
/home/garyf/gcc-4.8/wrk/./gcc/xgcc -B/home/garyf/gcc-4.8/wrk/./gcc/ -B/home/gar
yf/gcc-4.8/rls/powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54143
Bug #: 54143
Summary: [4.8 Regression] Bytemark ASSIGNMENT 8% slower
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53664
--- Comment #11 from Janis Johnson 2012-07-31
17:30:15 UTC ---
Sorry, I had been assuming that the tests in our tree match what's upstream but
the expressions to match are slightly different. I'll keep investigating.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38644
--- Comment #67 from Hagay 2012-07-31 17:34:02 UTC
---
Just reported to Mentor. Thanks
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53233
Sean McGovern changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53923
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||richard.sandiford at linaro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54143
--- Comment #1 from wbrana 2012-07-31 17:48:57 UTC ---
Created attachment 27908
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27908
20120422
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54143
--- Comment #2 from wbrana 2012-07-31 17:50:20 UTC ---
Created attachment 27909
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27909
20120429
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54144
Bug #: 54144
Summary: With -sdt=c++0x certain incorrect arguments to
map.insert cause gcc crash
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53615
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53664
--- Comment #12 from Ramana Radhakrishnan
2012-07-31 17:56:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> For some reason I couldn't apply the patch, but manually changed the tests to
> use { scan-assembler-times regexp 2 } instead of { scan assembler re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54142
--- Comment #6 from Paul H. Hargrove 2012-07-31
17:59:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> sldi and srdi are both standard PowerPC64 instructions.
IBM's "Programming Environments Manual for 64-Bit Microprocessors" lists sldi
and srdi as "Simpl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54144
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery,
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53664
--- Comment #13 from Janis Johnson 2012-07-31
18:01:55 UTC ---
The scan-assembler finds the expression at least once and passes. The
scan-assembler-times directive expects to find the expression twice, but the
returned match is 5 lines, not 2.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54145
Bug #: 54145
Summary: [4.6/4.7 Regression] no symbol generated for `void
QMailThreadSortKey::deserialize(QDataStre
am&)'
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42418
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-31 18:32:46 UTC ---
Author: janus
Date: Tue Jul 31 18:32:41 2012
New Revision: 190017
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190017
Log:
2012-07-31 Janus Weil
PR fortran/4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146
Bug #: 54146
Summary: Very slow compile at -O1 (expand vars)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-07-31
18:38:20 UTC ---
Are you compiling GCC with --enable-checking=release to do the timings?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42418
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54125
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|sparc64-linux, |sparc64-linux,
|arm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse 2012-07-31 18:47:48
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Are you compiling GCC with --enable-checking=release to do the timings?
I first noticed the issue with the compiler provided by debian (4.7.1), which
has --en
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53823
--- Comment #9 from John David Anglin 2012-07-31
18:51:26 UTC ---
Regarding the remaining acats fails, the following line in a-calend.adb
appears to be miscompiled:
Date_Dur := Date_Dur - Time_Dur (Four_Year_Segs) *
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54060
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54147
Bug #: 54147
Summary: [F03] Interface checks for PPCs & TBPs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54130
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse 2012-07-31 19:20:09
UTC ---
Joseph,
I understand your comments, but I don't know what conclusion to take from them
about whether gcc should recognize int/bool isnan(double) as a builtin...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53823
--- Comment #10 from John David Anglin 2012-07-31
19:41:20 UTC ---
Created attachment 27913
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27913
Testcase
Testcase produces wrong output when compiled at -O0 and -O1.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53823
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigne
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54130
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2012-07-31 19:59:50 UTC ---
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012, glisse at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> I understand your comments, but I don't know what conclusion to take from them
> about whether gcc should recog
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53823
--- Comment #12 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-07-31 20:10:55 UTC ---
> Mine.
Expected result for testcase is 112975202 (0x6bbdd62). Miscompiled
result is
116077092194 (0x1b06bbdd62).
--
John David Anglindave.ang...@bell.net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54130
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse 2012-07-31 20:13:38
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> If your system headers declare isnan with bool return type I advise making
> fixincludes fix them.
But the C++ standard requires a bool return type, using fi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54060
--- Comment #2 from Nathan Ridge 2012-07-31
20:21:51 UTC ---
What is the purpose of warning about the use of an anonymous type in this
context?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146
--- Comment #3 from Steven Bosscher 2012-07-31
20:33:56 UTC ---
Time is spent in add_scope_conflicts() in this loop:
FOR_EACH_BB (bb)
add_scope_conflicts_1 (bb, work, true);
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo