http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55693
--- Comment #35 from Jack Howarth 2013-01-23
21:13:16 UTC ---
What's up with the comment
/* Provide dummy functions to satisfy linkage for versions of the Darwin
tool-chain that that can't handle undefined weak refs at the link s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56087
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56089
nicolas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc
Host|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56089
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55693
--- Comment #36 from Jack Howarth 2013-01-23
21:27:41 UTC ---
The darwin linker developers comments on the testcase I uploaded were...
The term "weak" is way overloaded. The original bug was about "weak
definitions" which
is how C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56090
Bug #: 56090
Summary: Injected-class-name treated as constructor name
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56081
--- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-23 21:38:44 UTC ---
Author: janus
Date: Wed Jan 23 21:38:40 2013
New Revision: 195412
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195412
Log:
2013-01-23 Janus Weil
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56090
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2013-01-23
21:41:16 UTC ---
This is related to bug 11764 and C++ defect report #147.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56090
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2013-01-23
21:44:07 UTC ---
My reading of DR 147, makes this invalid code as foo::foo names the
constructor.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56087
--- Comment #3 from Thorsten Glaser 2013-01-23 22:15:36
UTC ---
tags 698380 + patch fixed-upstream
thanks
mikpe at it dot uu.se dixit:
>http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56087
>Mikael Pettersson changed:
>--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55693
--- Comment #37 from Iain Sandoe 2013-01-23 22:16:10
UTC ---
Created attachment 29262
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29262
test, supply the dummy functions from a static archive.
in the current code, the following
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56088
--- Comment #5 from Václav Zeman 2013-01-23
22:20:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Can you provide the preprocessed source that was used to generate
> timehelper.o?
Done.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56088
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever Confirmed|1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56090
--- Comment #3 from Klemens 2013-01-23 22:32:47
UTC ---
I would argue that in 3.4.3.1.2 the constructor is not an acceptable lookup
result, since it would result in the code being invalid.
Additionally, the following use of a type alia
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56077
--- Comment #6 from Brad Huntting 2013-01-23
23:59:39 UTC ---
Er... The asm()s are beside the point. There is no reording bug. The
problem is that the 3 volatile assignments are being squished into 1. BTW:
I first noticed this with th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56091
Bug #: 56091
Summary: gcc.target/arm/pr43137.c fails for THUMB-1
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56092
Bug #: 56092
Summary: gcc.target/arm/volatile-bitfields-1.c fails for THUMB
and armv[78]
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56093
Bug #: 56093
Summary: gcc.target/arm/wmul-11.c fails for armv5te and iwmmxt
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55516
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janis at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56092
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55889
--- Comment #22 from David Edelsohn 2013-01-24
02:35:33 UTC ---
I don't understand your analysis. Prior to sched1, the pr50907.c.205r.asmcons
RTL dump looks like:
(insn 15 14 16 2 (set (reg:SI 3 3)
(mem/u/c:SI (unspec:SI [
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55308
--- Comment #4 from N8GCBP7SHNBTI79GINADGKJPRTLOCO2A at cmx dot ietfng.org
2013-01-24 02:56:14 UTC ---
I'm not proposing changing all of them. The one (two) that are significant to
my case are these:
--- gcc/configure.ac.orig 2013-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56094
Bug #: 56094
Summary: Invalid line number info generated with tree-level
ivopts
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56094
--- Comment #1 from Joshua Conner 2013-01-24
04:03:44 UTC ---
Created attachment 29263
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29263
Reduced test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56094
--- Comment #2 from Joshua Conner 2013-01-24
04:05:09 UTC ---
Sorry, I should have been more specific -- the function I'm describing in the
previous comments is "test_main".
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56095
Bug #: 56095
Summary: Crash casting function pointer as non-type template
argument
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55693
--- Comment #38 from Jack Howarth 2013-01-24
05:54:24 UTC ---
Tested proposed patch from Comment 37 on x86_64-apple-darwin11 and
x86_64-apple-darwin12 with Xcode 4.5.2 on both systems. No regressions are
found with either
make -k ch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56095
--- Comment #1 from Rendaw 2013-01-24 06:39:12 UTC
---
I tried one more case, casting before using the template:
Code (c.cxx):
int *a(void) { return 0; }
typedef void (*IntermediarySignature)(void);
template void z(void) {}
int main(int argc,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56096
Bug #: 56096
Summary: Bad code generated for conditional shift
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55975
--- Comment #36 from Kostya Serebryany 2013-01-24
07:19:00 UTC ---
> Well, although the ppc64 LNT bot is not quite functional yet, there are many
> of
> us who run the LLVM unit test suite several times a day. So as long as the
> changes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47764
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm-linux-androideabi |
CC|
101 - 131 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
