http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56372
Bug #: 56372
Summary: Missing libgcj caused ICE (stack overflow) in jc1
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56366
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56349
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56349
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener 2013-02-18
09:40:39 UTC ---
The issue here is that we have an inner loop that has an exit edge that is
at the same time the latch edge for its outer loop (that is, its latch
does not belong to it - but we
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56350
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56357
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56355
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55030
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou 2013-02-18
10:48:18 UTC ---
> I've lost track. What was "the original patch", what do you mean by "the
> blockage patch" (that has been installed) and I'm pretty sure there were
> several follow-up patche
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56360
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56359
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |4.8.0
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56362
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56363
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56370
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56307
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor 2013-02-18
10:55:32 UTC ---
Probably not because s is a local variable, not a parameter and the
only function parameter in the testcase is an integer. Unfortunately,
I cannot reproduce the failure on hppa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56365
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56347
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56077
--- Comment #9 from Andrey Belevantsev 2013-02-18
11:08:10 UTC ---
I will test the patch removing the JUMP_P part of the conditional on x86-64 and
ia64, but for 4.8 I'd suggest trying some more platforms, like ppc at the
minimum.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56344
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56341
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener 2013-02-18
11:20:43 UTC ---
There is now better ways of implementing -fstrict-volatile-bitfields which
I repeatedly told the arm people. Not for 4.6, but for 4.7 and trunk.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56363
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56373
Bug #: 56373
Summary: -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant: does not catch issues
with smart pointers
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
St
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56366
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener 2013-02-18
11:50:13 UTC ---
The bug must be latent before, added by vectorizing of sign-conversions.
I missed the induction initial value case in case of outer loop vectorization.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56373
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-02-18
12:07:49 UTC ---
The warning isn't issued when 0 converts to std::nullptr_t, only when it
converts to a pointer type.
struct shared_ptr
{
shared_ptr(decltype(nullptr)) { }
~shared
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56321
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener 2013-02-18
12:11:59 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Feb 18 12:11:47 2013
New Revision: 196117
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196117
Log:
2013-02-18 Richard Biener
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56321
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56294
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56301
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose 2013-02-18
12:31:31 UTC ---
Created attachment 29482
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29482
test case
no reduced test case yet, but there is a diff in the tree dump with
-fdump-tree
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56374
Bug #: 56374
Summary: N3276 Incomplete return types Implent in gcc 4.8
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhance
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56301
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #2 from Matthi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56374
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52748
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-02-18
12:47:32 UTC ---
*** Bug 56374 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56301
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener 2013-02-18
12:48:13 UTC ---
I don't see how this is a bug.
job_64 = job_new (class_39, "");
# DEBUG job => job_64
if (job_64 == 0B)
goto ;
else
goto ;
:
# DEBUG __fmt => "BAD:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56301
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56373
--- Comment #2 from Akim Demaille 2013-02-18
12:52:46 UTC ---
Thanks a lot for the detailed answer.
> The warning isn't issued when 0 converts to std::nullptr_t, only when it
> converts to a pointer type.
And shouldn't it?
>> It's
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56350
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener 2013-02-18
13:03:24 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Feb 18 13:03:15 2013
New Revision: 196118
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196118
Log:
2013-02-18 Richard Biener
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56349
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
Summary|I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56349
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56349
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener 2013-02-18
13:09:24 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Feb 18 13:09:17 2013
New Revision: 196119
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196119
Log:
2013-02-18 Richard Biener
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56373
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-02-18
13:20:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> > It's necessary, because otherwise you get bogus warnings from
> > ScopeGuard-style
> > RAII types.
>
> In which case the constructor and destr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56373
--- Comment #4 from Akim Demaille 2013-02-18
13:23:08 UTC ---
> If you're smart enough to know the object isn't used then don't create it :)
:) :) :)
> ~shared_ptr() has non-trivial side-effects, the compiler isn't smart enough to
> d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56301
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56301
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de
2013-02-18 13:34:31 UTC ---
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56301
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56375
Bug #: 56375
Summary: SIGSEGV when assign SIMD variable to member of
allocated structure
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56301
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-02-18
13:42:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Do you think I should revert the patch on the branch nevertheless?
> (it was a fix for a missed-optimization regression only ...)
Yeah, missed-opti
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56375
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53844
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener 2013-02-18
13:46:46 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Feb 18 13:46:37 2013
New Revision: 196120
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196120
Log:
2013-02-18 Richard Biener
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53844
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|4.7.3 |
Target Milestone|4.7.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56366
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener 2013-02-18
13:58:30 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Feb 18 13:58:21 2013
New Revision: 196121
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196121
Log:
2013-02-18 Richard Biener
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56366
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener 2013-02-18
13:58:47 UTC ---
Fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56350
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-02-18
14:19:04 UTC ---
The previous commit was for PR56349.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56376
Bug #: 56376
Summary: gdb needs a way to associate a vtable symbol with a
class type
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56357
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-02-18
14:24:50 UTC ---
Works just fine on x86_64-linux.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56265
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-02-18
14:27:29 UTC ---
Honza, any progress on this?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56359
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56366
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37237
--- Comment #11 from Tom Tromey 2013-02-18 15:20:56
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> I don't think such an attribute belongs in the DWARF standard, since this is
> very much an internal detail of the ABI; another ABI might have just a s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56214
--- Comment #2 from John David Anglin 2013-02-18
15:21:41 UTC ---
Author: danglin
Date: Mon Feb 18 15:21:32 2013
New Revision: 196122
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196122
Log:
PR target/56214
* config/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56214
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56341
Sandra Loosemore changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sandra at codesourcery dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56375
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2013-02-18
16:04:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> User error, malloc doesn't guarantee sufficient alignment of the pointer,
> which
> you are relying on. You need to use posix_memalign or memalign o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56377
Bug #: 56377
Summary: [4.8 Regression] template args in
substitution-failure diagnostics
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRME
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56373
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56373
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56377
--- Comment #1 from Paul Smith 2013-02-18
16:12:00 UTC ---
Looks like this was introduced in rev. 190664, with the merging of
'deduction_tsubst_fntype' into 'fn_type_unification'.
The instantiation context is constructed with 'targs' as
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56377
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47333
--- Comment #30 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2013-02-18 16:16:18 UTC ---
I've run another reghunt, which revealed that the 4.8 regression was
caused by this patch:
2012-05-23 Jan Hubicka
* tree.h (alias_diag_flags)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56375
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-02-18
16:17:35 UTC ---
If you mean Joseph's http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6527
comment, then that is about _Decimal128, thus something not part of ISO C89 nor
ISO C99.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56378
Bug #: 56378
Summary: gfortran internal compiler error
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56347
--- Comment #6 from John David Anglin 2013-02-18
16:29:56 UTC ---
Author: danglin
Date: Mon Feb 18 16:29:49 2013
New Revision: 196123
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196123
Log:
PR target/56347
* config/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56378
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=56378
--- Comment #2 from David Sagan 2013-02-18
16:34:30 UTC ---
Created attachment 29483
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29483
3 *.f90 files and script to run them
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56378
--- Comment #3 from David Sagan 2013-02-18
16:36:14 UTC ---
Somehow the attachment did not get sent with the initial writeup Now it is
downloaded.
(In reply to comment #1)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > 1) Unpack and cd to the attached
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56379
Bug #: 56379
Summary: libquadmath: Wrong result for strtoflt128.c if
compiled with -O0
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56380
Bug #: 56380
Summary: Const/reference mutable members are not always
rejected in class templates
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56381
Bug #: 56381
Summary: ICE: cc1plus: internal compiler error: in
gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:7842
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56381
--- Comment #1 from vincenzo Innocente
2013-02-18 17:10:03 UTC ---
Created attachment 29484
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29484
preprocessed file of user code (sorry for not reducing)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56370
Dave Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at redhat dot com
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56379
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56381
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56380
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
St
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56348
Vladimir Makarov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56347
--- Comment #7 from John David Anglin 2013-02-18
18:04:23 UTC ---
Patch to remove old work around is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-02/msg00854.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56378
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2013-02-18
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56382
Bug #: 56382
Summary: FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr55921.c (internal
compiler error)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56382
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin 2013-02-18
18:34:54 UTC ---
Created attachment 29485
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29485
Patch
I tried the above changes to expmed.c but this
approach eventually reaches a gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56341
--- Comment #6 from Bernd Edlinger
2013-02-18 18:41:55 UTC ---
hhmm...
could some one give an example where packedp would be false but the value
is packed or unaligned?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30162
--- Comment #44 from Thomas Koenig 2013-02-18
18:44:02 UTC ---
If unformatted sequential ever worked, it was by chance.
Look at this piece of code:
/* Seek to the head and overwrite the bogus length with the real
length. */
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56378
--- Comment #5 from Joost VandeVondele
2013-02-18 18:48:28 UTC ---
simplified testcase:
module t
use, intrinsic :: iso_c_binding
interface fvec2vec
module procedure int_fvec2vec
end interface
contains
function int_fvec2vec
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56383
Bug #: 56383
Summary: error with multiple enable_shared_from_this base
classes
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30162
--- Comment #45 from Dominique d'Humieres
2013-02-18 19:15:43 UTC ---
> ...
> I would therefore suggest to resolve this PR by issuing a well-defined
> error if we encounter a pipe on opening.
Are you suggesting to "fix" the non working
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56378
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56381
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-02-18
19:24:28 UTC ---
Created attachment 29486
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29486
pr56381.ii
Somewhat reduced, just -std=c++11 -O2 is enough to reproduce.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56381
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55939
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56381
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.3
Summary|ICE: cc
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: antoine.balest...@gmail.com
With GCC 4.8.0 as of 20130218 :
$ cat fold.c
int a, c;
void f(void)
{
unsigned char b;
if(a)
{
for(; b < 1; b++);
lbl1:
c =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54117
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-02-18
19:43:06 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Feb 18 19:42:56 2013
New Revision: 196124
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196124
Log:
PR pch/54117
* c-opts.c (c_com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54117
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56378
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56365
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo 2013-02-18 20:04:40
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I see, at -O2, on x86_64 in 070t.phiopt:
>
> test_04 (int a, int b)
> {
> int D.1744;
> int D.1741;
> int _3;
> int _4;
>
> :
> _3
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
