[Bug fortran/57833] Bogus "must not appear in the array specification ... in the same ALLOCATE statement" when used in the specification expression the bounds var

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57833 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Status|UNCONFIR

[Bug fortran/57834] [4.9 Regression] C_F_POINTER (only with -std=): accepts only explicit- and assumed-size arrays for FPTR when SHAPE is present

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57834 --- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus --- Created attachment 30468 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30468&action=edit Draft patch

[Bug c++/16093] Bad error messages for missing declarations.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16093 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P2 |P3 --- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini ---

[Bug c++/28262] Inconsistent "default arguments are only permitted for function parameters".

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28262 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|gcc-bugs at g

[Bug c++/16093] Bad error messages for missing declarations.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16093 --- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #6) > Honestly I didn't pay attention to the second testcase and didn't consider > the first issue serious enough ;) Anyway, let's keep this open for now, > thanks

[Bug debug/57835] variable tracking produces weird const

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57835 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 f

[Bug target/29776] result of ffs/clz/ctz/popcount/parity are already sign-extended

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29776 --- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Sat Jul 6 09:34:17 2013 New Revision: 200731 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=200731&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/29776 * fold-const.c (tree_call_nonnegative_warnv_p): Ret

[Bug target/57836] New: large constants evaluated inline

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57836 Bug ID: 57836 Summary: large constants evaluated inline Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug debug/57835] variable tracking produces weird const

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57835 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/57837] New: ARM function pointer tailcall miscompilation regression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57837 Bug ID: 57837 Summary: ARM function pointer tailcall miscompilation regression Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug c/57838] New: GCC does not obey #pragma long_calls with builtins and -Os on cortexM3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57838 Bug ID: 57838 Summary: GCC does not obey #pragma long_calls with builtins and -Os on cortexM3 Product: gcc Version: 4.7.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/28444] static_cast allowed, even if only the base class is accessible

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28444 Bug 28444 depends on bug 17874, which changed state. Bug 17874 Summary: Reference to member of protected base should be an error http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17874 What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/17874] Reference to member of protected base should be an error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17874 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|gcc-bugs at g

[Bug fortran/57839] New: Reallocate on assignment does not work properly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57839 Bug ID: 57839 Summary: Reallocate on assignment does not work properly Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fo

[Bug rtl-optimization/57763] [4.9 Regression]: comp-goto-1.c: ICE verify_flow_info failed, error: EDGE_CROSSING missing across section boundary

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57763 --- Comment #6 from Steven Bosscher --- Broken by pass_split_after_reload.

[Bug rtl-optimization/57763] [4.9 Regression]: comp-goto-1.c: ICE verify_flow_info failed, error: EDGE_CROSSING missing across section boundary

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57763 --- Comment #7 from Steven Bosscher --- find_many_sub_basic_blocks calls make_edges. Things go bad from there. A block ending in an indirect_jump is marked for find_many_sub_bbs (but actually the basic block boundaries are not changed) and gets pa

[Bug rtl-optimization/57763] [4.9 Regression]: comp-goto-1.c: ICE verify_flow_info failed, error: EDGE_CROSSING missing across section boundary

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57763 --- Comment #8 from Steven Bosscher --- Created attachment 30471 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30471&action=edit Avoid unnecessary CFG mangling Help with testing welcome...

[Bug libstdc++/57840] New: ::std ::result_of is undocumented

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57840 Bug ID: 57840 Summary: ::std ::result_of is undocumented Product: gcc Version: unknown URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/libstdc++-api- 4.5/a00875.html

[Bug c++/51786] [c++0x] Invalid declaration with decltype accepted

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51786 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||0coming.soon at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug c++/57502] Expected error "Declaration doesn't declare anything", but code compiles fine for user-defined class with using decltype, but not with built-in types.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57502 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/55418] Valgrind: Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) in implicitly_declare_fn() method.c:1623

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55418 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com --- Comment #7

[Bug c++/53224] synthesized_method_walk returns uninitialized values

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53224 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/54588] Improved error messages by dropping out types

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54588 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2 fr

[Bug c++/47346] access control for nested type is ignored in class template

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47346 --- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini --- Dodji, any news? ;)

[Bug c++/54588] Improved error messages by dropping out types

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54588 --- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #2) > This is weird ;) Isn't suggesting *exactly* what we don't want to do > anymore? (in particular considering the availability of the caret) > > Manuel? I gue

[Bug rtl-optimization/57763] [4.9 Regression]: comp-goto-1.c: ICE verify_flow_info failed, error: EDGE_CROSSING missing across section boundary

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57763 --- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak --- I have tried to compile gcc.dg/comp-goto-1.c with the patched gcc, but compilation failed with: /home/uros/gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/comp-goto-1.c: In function 'f': /home/uros/gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/testsui

[Bug c++/54588] Improved error messages by dropping out types

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54588 --- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #3) > I guess what information is most useful depends on the exact case. In my > experience, however, knowing the types you are trying to convert from and to > is us