http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54877
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE: |[4.7 Regression] ICE: tree
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54942
--- Comment #4 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-10-23
08:52:30 UTC ---
Does it still happen? I don't see oom now for my test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54828
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54892
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55030
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55027
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55025
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener 2012-10-23
09:43:43 UTC ---
Please send patches to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54967
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka 2012-10-23
09:57:40 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Tue Oct 23 09:57:36 2012
New Revision: 192709
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192709
Log:
PR middle-end/54967
* cfgloop
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54937
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka 2012-10-23
10:00:24 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Tue Oct 23 10:00:19 2012
New Revision: 192710
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192710
Log:
PR middle-end/54937
* tree-ss
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55019
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55019
--- Comment #6 from Terry Guo 2012-10-23 10:13:08
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > This issue is fixed.
>
> The problem was reported for 4.7 branch, the fix was OK:d for 4.7 and trunk,
> but so far only a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54973
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-10-23
10:28:43 UTC ---
Well the only global maintainer who commented was in favour of it, so let's try
the change.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55032
Bug #: 55032
Summary: [4.7 Regression] Internal compiler error: in
strip_typedefs, at cp/tree.c:1199
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55032
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54921
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55019
--- Comment #7 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-10-23
11:53:07 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > (In reply to comment #4)
> > > This issue is fixed.
> >
> > The problem was reported for 4.7 branch, the fix was
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54988
--- Comment #4 from Olivier Blin 2012-10-23 12:21:52 UTC
---
Thanks Jakub, I can confirm that your patch fixes both the small testcase and
the Qt5 qdrawhelper issues (applied on top of gcc 4.7.2)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52015
Earnie changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||earnie at users dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55033
Bug #: 55033
Summary: [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] PowerPC section type conflict
error
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52015
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52015
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-10-23
13:10:40 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Created attachment 28191 [details]
> Enabling string conversion functions in MinGW
>
> Patch from: http://tehsausage.com/mingw-to-string
That
/sh/install-eabi/lib/gcc/powerpc-unknown-eabi/4.8.0/lto-wrapper
powerpc-unknown-eabi-g++ (GCC) 4.8.0 20121023 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55022
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-10-23
13:35:44 UTC ---
It likely has started after revision 189156.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55034
Bug #: 55034
Summary: avr.c:2877:7: error: variable ‘regno_dest’ set but not
used
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54932
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka 2012-10-23 13:55:24 UTC
---
> Thus, I close the bug as INVALID.
... in wich case could you, please, update the testcase to be valid and remove
the XFAIL I introduced?
Honza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54966
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka 2012-10-23 13:59:38 UTC
---
> I'm not sure how we count the initial unit size, given that when not using
> LTO not merged comdats are probably counted here, so overall they add up
> while the initial LTO uni
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54966
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de
2012-10-23 14:02:05 UTC ---
On Tue, 23 Oct 2012, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54966
>
> --- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka 2012-10-23 13:59:38
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54965
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka 2012-10-23 14:03:06 UTC
---
> you are using indirect function calls here, GCC in 4.6 is not smart enough
> to transform them to direct calls before inlining. Inlining of
> always-inline indirect function ca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54966
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka 2012-10-23 14:12:43 UTC
---
The patch suggesed by Dminique is not going to help here.
> I was just guessing why our overall unit-growth heuristics would
> lead to different overall inlining with LTO vs. si
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55035
Bug #: 55035
Summary: reload1.c:3766:41: error: ‘orig_dup[0]’ may be used
uninitialized in this function (for fr30, microblaze)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55036
Bug #: 55036
Summary: Compiler fails with message "internal compiler error:
in reg_save_code, at caller-save.c:158"
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55005
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka 2012-10-23
14:32:02 UTC ---
This is similar case as do-1.f90. We have:
Statement _6 = m_5 * 2147483647;
is executed at most 2 (bounded by 2) + 1 times in loop 1.
coming from:
while (i--)
{
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54937
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54967
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
error: in gfc_conv_procedure_call, at
fortran/trans-expr.c:4218
call u0%source(tmp)
^
gfortran --version
GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.8.0 20121023 (experimental)
module m1
implicit none
type, abstract :: c_stv
contains
procedure, pass(x) :: source
end type c_stv
contains
pure subroutine
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54980
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka 2012-10-23
14:48:05 UTC ---
This does not seem to reproduce for me. The following patch should however fix
it.
Index: tree-ssa-loop-ivcanon.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17729
--- Comment #27 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-23
14:55:16 UTC ---
I suppose the last tentative patch should be posted to gcc-patches? Even if it
requires changes, I don't think we are going to make progress if it only
remains attached here...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52945
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka 2012-10-23
14:59:10 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Tue Oct 23 14:59:02 2012
New Revision: 192716
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192716
Log:
PR gcc/52945
* testsuite/gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54660
--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton 2012-10-23 15:02:53
UTC ---
Author: nickc
Date: Tue Oct 23 15:02:47 2012
New Revision: 192717
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192717
Log:
PR target/54660
* config/iq2000/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55033
--- Comment #2 from Sebastian Huber
2012-10-23 15:03:37 UTC ---
#0 default_elf_select_section (decl=0x772b92d0, reloc=0, align=32) at
/home/sh/archive/gcc-git/gcc/varasm.c:6251
#1 0x00c57d4e in get_constant_section (align=,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55005
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54663
--- Comment #1 from Michael Eager 2012-10-23
15:09:18 UTC ---
Not able to reproduce. GCC HEAD builds for microblaze without known problem.
Not enough info in report to reproduce or identify problem.
If there was a problem compiling m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54796
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54663
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2012-10-23 15:46:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Not able to reproduce. GCC HEAD builds for microblaze without known problem.
Actually, using a freshly bootstrapped gcc, I run into PR5503
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55037
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55037
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-23 16:00:59 UTC ---
Confirmed. It works with 4.7.
Here is a variant which fails with a different ICE:
implicit none
type :: c_stv
end type
class(c_stv), allocatable :: tmp
c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27619
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54640
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54139
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51744
--- Comment #2 from Mark Pizzolato 2012-10-23
16:42:06 UTC ---
Created attachment 28514
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28514
MUCH simpler test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51744
Mark Pizzolato changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at infocomm dot com
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54988
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-10-23
16:56:01 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Oct 23 16:55:56 2012
New Revision: 192722
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192722
Log:
PR c++/54988
* decl2.c (cplus_d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55038
Bug #: 55038
Summary: c++11: operator +=
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54957
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55038
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54988
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-10-23
17:56:04 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Oct 23 17:55:56 2012
New Revision: 192734
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192734
Log:
PR c++/54988
* decl2.c (cplus_d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54844
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-10-23
18:05:03 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Oct 23 18:04:55 2012
New Revision: 192736
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192736
Log:
PR c++/54844
* pt.c (tsubst_co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55039
Bug #: 55039
Summary: std::addressof vs. constexpr
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54918
--- Comment #5 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-23
18:12:55 UTC ---
Author: ian
Date: Tue Oct 23 18:12:46 2012
New Revision: 192738
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192738
Log:
PR go/54918
Revert previous
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54918
--- Comment #6 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-10-23 18:14:04
UTC ---
Jakub Jelinek asked that I not change the libgo SONAME now that GCC 4.7 has
been released. So libgo in GCC 4.6 and 4.7 use the same SONAME but are
incompatible, and that is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55039
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler
2012-10-23 18:15:38 UTC ---
I agree, an intrinsic is needed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55040
Bug #: 55040
Summary: dereferencing type-punned pointer
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34283
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55040
Pawel Sikora changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pluto at agmk dot net
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48037
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54508
--- Comment #4 from pkoning at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-23 18:44:33 UTC ---
Author: pkoning
Date: Tue Oct 23 18:44:27 2012
New Revision: 192739
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192739
Log:
PR debug/54508
* dwarf2out
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55040
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52609
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dilyan.palauzov at aegee
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54508
Paul Koning changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55041
Bug #: 55041
Summary: prettyprinting/shared_ptr & cxx11 fails on some
platforms
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55042
Bug #: 55042
Summary: sh.c:11586:1: error: ‘bool sh1_builtin_p()’ defined
but not used
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54760
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.or
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985
--- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law 2012-10-23 20:33:52
UTC ---
Author: law
Date: Tue Oct 23 20:33:49 2012
New Revision: 192745
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192745
Log:
PR tree-optimization/54985
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
--- Comment #15 from Eric Botcazou 2012-10-23
20:44:38 UTC ---
> Note that the configure test for whether the gcc driver supports
> -static-libstdc++ is unreliable, because before GCC 4.6 the GCC driver would
> exit with a 0 status even if
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
--- Comment #16 from Andrew Pinski 2012-10-23
20:46:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> > Note that the configure test for whether the gcc driver supports
> > -static-libstdc++ is unreliable, because before GCC 4.6 the GCC driver would
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55039
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-23
20:53:41 UTC ---
Daniel, I'm confused: didn't we agree in that other open PR we have got about
reinterpret_cast vs constexpr that actually the Standard should be amended
exactly to allow this me
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55041
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-10-23
20:54:38 UTC ---
(on my phone so can't check...)
If the failures are in unordered_set it's almost certainly
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2012-10/msg00147.html and the printers need to
go
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55039
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler
2012-10-23 20:56:36 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
During the Portland meeting the issue
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#1384
was discussed and core had consensus *not* to suppor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
--- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou 2012-10-23
20:57:29 UTC ---
> Can't we also try running the resulting program, or at least looking at the
> output of ldd as this only matters for bootstrapping?
We can discuss refinements afterward but
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55039
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-23
21:06:09 UTC ---
Ok, thanks, I wasn't there. Then please somebody add a note to that other PR.
In any case, the other PR being about us actually accepting reint casts for the
time being, I think
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
--- Comment #18 from Peter Bergner 2012-10-23
21:08:45 UTC ---
Actually, g++ -static-libstdc++ foo.cpp produces a working executable, so that
wouldn't work.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55041
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-23
21:11:11 UTC ---
Nope it must be something else, I saw the failures on some machines already
many days ago (sorry for not having filed a PR, I thought it was my fault, some
sort of config glitch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
--- Comment #19 from Andrew Pinski 2012-10-23
21:14:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> Actually, g++ -static-libstdc++ foo.cpp produces a working executable, so that
> wouldn't work.
But looking at the output of ldd will work or rea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54957
--- Comment #15 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2012-10-23 21:16:37 UTC ---
Mingw32 target, GCC 4.8.0 20121021 (experimental).
$ cat > bug.cc
struct S {
~S();
};
int main()
{
S s1, s2, s3, s4, s5, s6, s7;
return 0;
}
^D
$ g++ bug.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55043
Bug #: 55043
Summary: issue with nesting unordered_map containing unique_ptr
into vector
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-10-23
21:23:10 UTC ---
After revision 192745 bootstrap fails with
...
../../work/gcc/tree-ssa-threadedge.c:583:1: error: unused parameter 'n'
[-Werror=unused-parameter]
cond_arg_set_in_bb
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law 2012-10-23 21:25:43
UTC ---
debugging cruft. I'll deal with it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54967
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres
2012-10-23 21:26:13 UTC ---
The test gfortran.dg/pr54967.f90 fails because SUBROUTINE calc_S_derivs() is
duplicated.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55043
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres
2012-10-23 21:35:09 UTC ---
Jeffrey are you sure that r192746 is enough? cond_arg_set_in_bb is used with 3
arguments elsewhere in the file.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55044
Bug #: 55044
Summary: Compile error in tree-ssa
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: tree-ssa
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55045
Bug #: 55045
Summary: ira.c:879:32: error: array subscript is above array
bounds (for vax)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55045
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55043
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-10-23
22:28:52 UTC ---
This is due to the fact that _Hashtable::_Hashtable(_Hashtable&&) is not
declared noexcept.
I think we can just add 'noexcept' to the move ctor and move assignment op, at
l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53198
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.8.0
--- Comment #4 from Manuel L
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55043
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|issue with nesting |[4.7/4.8 Regression] issue
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55045
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2012-10-23 22:40:59 UTC ---
Created attachment 28515
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28515
Preprocessed ira source file
cc1plus invocation was:
/home/joern/fsf/inst/libex
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55043
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-23
22:53:06 UTC ---
Unfortunately, I don't think we can simply add noexcept to the move ctor,
because it does allocate memory. Something similar happens for std::deque. In
terms of QoI I think we c
1 - 100 of 114 matches
Mail list logo
