[Bug fortran/57628] spurious error: division by zero in if statement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug fortran/57628] spurious error: division by zero in if statement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 --- Comment #2 from Ryo Furue --- Thank you for the prompt response! > But, it is evaluated at compile time, and so, you'll > get the error. I understand that. > You are getting the correct diagnosis! Of course. I agree with all your statemen

[Bug fortran/57628] spurious error: division by zero in if statement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 --- Comment #3 from Ryo Furue --- (In reply to kargl from comment #1) Thank you for the prompt response! [This is a re-post. I missed the "reply" feature and made a typo. I would delete the other post, if possible.] > But, it is evaluated at co

[Bug fortran/57628] spurious error: division by zero in if statement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- >Since my code includes an expression that can be evaluated at compile time and >it's a division by zero, parameter are special in fortran. The expression is evaluated at compile time because of the paramet

[Bug fortran/57628] spurious error: division by zero in if statement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 --- Comment #5 from Ryo Furue --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > parameter are special in fortran. The expression is evaluated at compile > time because of the parameter. a has to be replaced with 0 according to the > fortran stan

[Bug fortran/57628] spurious error: division by zero in if statement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 --- Comment #6 from Ryo Furue --- (In reply to Ryo Furue from comment #5) I'm correcting two typos. Sorry. > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > > parameter are special in fortran. The expression is evaluated at compile > > time beca

[Bug c++/22149] func pointer non-type template parm invalid access control

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22149 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mouchtaris at gmail dot com --- Comment #

[Bug c++/50586] Template argument of type "pointer to function" of a template class causes usage error if template is instantiated with pointer-to-private-static-member-function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50586 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57172 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57172 --- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse --- Not soon, sorry (I am in Brazil). Feel free to take it up (or use a different approach).

[Bug c++/56493] Performance regression in google dense hashmap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56493 --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 30312 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30312&action=edit gcc49-pr56493.patch Untested patch that in the FE restores the performance on the simplified testcase. Haven't

[Bug fortran/52473] CSHIFT slow - inline it?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52473 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/45689] [F2003] Missing transformational intrinsic in the trans_func_f2003 list

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45689 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/57629] New: -Wmaybe-uninitialized does not catch some conditional initialization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57629 Bug ID: 57629 Summary: -Wmaybe-uninitialized does not catch some conditional initialization Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57172 --- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini --- Oh well, it can certainly wait a bit, just let's not forget about it (patches only attached to bug reports make me slightly nervous) ... or you can and it over to Alex (Oliva) ;)

[Bug fortran/48776] ICE(segfault) after -std=f95 diagnostic error involving PROCEDURE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48776 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/57569] [4.8/4.9 Regression] wrong code for struct copy at -O3 on x86_64-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57569 Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/55907] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE with -fno-automatic -finit-local-zero

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55907 --- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > The patch in comment 5 regtests cleanly! Confirmed. Any reason why it has not been committed?

[Bug fortran/50221] Allocatable string length fails with array assignment

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50221 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Status|UNCO

[Bug fortran/57628] spurious error: division by zero in if statement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 --- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres --- AFAICT the option -fno-range-check is what you are looking for.

[Bug fortran/48298] [F03] User-Defined Derived-Type IO (DTIO)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48298 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/41370] Function return-type declaration with specification expression rejected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41370 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/19541] need another option to support what -I- did just besides -iquote

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541 --- Comment #23 from Rodolfo Schulz de Lima --- How difficult is it to add a parameter to add paths to precompiled header search list *only*? We have a big code base with #include "pch.h" in some source files. If source file directory is always

[Bug fortran/57628] spurious error: division by zero in if statement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 --- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl --- On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 07:57:23AM +, furue at hawaii dot edu wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 > > --- Comment #2 from Ryo Furue --- > > Of course. I agree with all your stateme

[Bug tree-optimization/18501] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Missing 'used uninitialized' warning (CCP)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nszabolcs at gmail dot com --- Comm

[Bug c/57629] -Wmaybe-uninitialized does not catch some conditional initialization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57629 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/13452] No error on invalid (I think) C++ code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13452 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org| Severity|minor

[Bug c++/26143] accepts invalid function pointer type return

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26143 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|gcc-bugs at g

[Bug c++/13452] No error on invalid (I think) C++ code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13452 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mark at halcy0n dot com --- Comment #6 fr

[Bug c++/57614] Friend declaration and qualified class member access

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57614 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.

[Bug c++/57626] [C++11] ICE with template alias and member function pointer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57626 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.

[Bug libfortran/48787] Invalid UP/DOWN rounding with F editing

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48787 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libfortran/48906] Wrong rounding results with -m32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48906 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/57263] std::set with user-defined allocator - compile error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57263 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/42934] Bogus variable_check

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42934 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/42934] Bogus variable_check

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42934 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/55117] Programs fails to read namelist (contains derived types objects)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55117 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/41827] [Cleanup] Remove SET_EXPR_LOCATION in gfc_trans_code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41827 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/45288] Double initialization: Warn if the value is different

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45288 --- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres --- *** Bug 49586 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** --- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres --- *** Bug 49586 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug fortran/45288] Double initialization: Warn if the value is different

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45288 --- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres --- *** Bug 49586 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** --- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres --- *** Bug 49586 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug fortran/49586] Multiple initialization with DATA: Warning and initialization order

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49586 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/49586] Multiple initialization with DATA: Warning and initialization order

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49586 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/45288] Double initialization: Warn if the value is different

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45288 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/57614] Friend declaration and qualified class member access

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57614 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/57630] New: Error should include -std=c11 and friends

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57630 Bug ID: 57630 Summary: Error should include -std=c11 and friends Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug fortran/47674] gfortran.dg/realloc_on_assign_5.f03: Segfault at run time for deferred (allocatable) string length

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47674 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/40756] Cleanup TREE_BLOCK

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40756 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/41724] PUREness/ELEMENTAL check missing for ACTUAL/DUMMY conformance

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41724 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/57621] attribute error is interpreted even if it is switched with __builtin_constant_p on -Og

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57621 Hans-Peter Nilsson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug middle-end/56977] gcc -Og incorrectly warns about 'constant zero length parameter'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56977 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||naruse at airemix dot jp --- Comment #3 f

[Bug c/57621] attribute error is interpreted even if it is switched with __builtin_constant_p on -Og

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57621 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pins

[Bug fortran/41599] [OOP] SELECT TYPE with associate-name => exp: Use (sometimes) a restricted pointer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41599 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/52333] Explicit etime interface should work

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52333 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/52651] Fortran testsuite ICEs with -flto

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52651 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/57631] New: spurious warning for avr interrupts with asm labels

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57631 Bug ID: 57631 Summary: spurious warning for avr interrupts with asm labels Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component

[Bug fortran/53296] Segfault on non-constant character array constructor containing kind spec

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53296 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/42067] Misleading error message for misusing a type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42067 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|gcc-bugs at g

[Bug target/57631] spurious warning for avr interrupts with asm labels

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57631 --- Comment #1 from pebbles at riseup dot net --- Here is a more complete test: // test.c ... __attribute__((signal,used)) void __vector_1() { asm(""); } // should not trigger warning, should be placed in __vectors __attribute__((signal,used)) vo

[Bug fortran/57628] spurious error: division by zero in if statement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 --- Comment #9 from Ryo Furue --- (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #8) > So, the compiler should just arbitrarily chose to evaluate > some expression and ignore others? No, I don't mean that. I'm not saying which expression the compiler sh

[Bug fortran/57628] spurious error: division by zero in if statement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 --- Comment #10 from Ryo Furue --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #7) > AFAICT the option -fno-range-check is what you are looking for. Thanks! That's exactly it. But, I'm curious. The following code still fails to compile even

[Bug target/57631] spurious warning for avr interrupts with asm labels

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57631 --- Comment #2 from pebbles at riseup dot net --- Created attachment 30314 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30314&action=edit avr.c: avr_set_current_function: 'name' uses assembler name if set

[Bug rtl-optimization/55190] [SH] ivopts causes loop setup bloat

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55190 Oleg Endo changed: What|Removed |Added Component|target |rtl-optimization --- Comment #2 from Oleg End

[Bug fortran/44672] [F2008] ALLOCATE with SOURCE and no array-spec

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44672 Sean Santos changed: What|Removed |Added CC||quantheory at gmail dot com --- Comment #2

[Bug fortran/45440] [F03] ALLOCATE with SOURCE gives an ICE (segfault)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45440 Sean Santos changed: What|Removed |Added CC||quantheory at gmail dot com --- Comment #10

[Bug fortran/57628] spurious error: division by zero in if statement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 --- Comment #11 from Steve Kargl --- On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 11:28:36PM +, furue at hawaii dot edu wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 > > --- Comment #9 from Ryo Furue --- > (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #8) >

[Bug fortran/57628] spurious error: division by zero in if statement

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 --- Comment #12 from Steve Kargl --- On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 11:33:49PM +, furue at hawaii dot edu wrote: > > Is this an inconsistency in the implementation of -no-range-check ? No. > > I would be nice if there were an option to demote thi

[Bug c++/57632] New: Operator new overloads with stdc++11 enabled looses exception specifier (MacOsX)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57632 Bug ID: 57632 Summary: Operator new overloads with stdc++11 enabled looses exception specifier (MacOsX) Product: gcc Version: 4.8.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug target/53425] No warnings are given for -mno-sse

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53425 jbeulich at novell dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jbeulich at novell dot com --