https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66497
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #2 from Andreas S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66428
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||singhai at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66242
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66205
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65697
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
--- Comment #26 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 35752
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35752&action=edit
backport to 4.8 branch
Note that neither the unreduced multi-file testcase nor the testcase in the
testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66448
--- Comment #18 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #17)
> Created attachment 35744 [details]
> Call check_die on type DIEs and avoid DW_AT_aritificial attribs
>
> >> I can't reproduce any of these with a cross compile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66205
--- Comment #2 from simon at pushface dot org ---
As a side note, AdaCore’s document on “The GNAT Configurable Run Time
Facility”, section 5.5.2[1], says about Suppress_Standard_Library "All
finalization and initialization (controlled types) is om
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65697
--- Comment #62 from mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #61)
> Well, confirmed at least. And at the minute fixed on trunk - not sure if we
> are asking for backports for this ?
Marcus has asked for this t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66493
--- Comment #7 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
Interestingly, there are some tests in the test suite already,
especially altreturn_3.f90 and altreturn_8.f90.
The latter is using a nopass attribute and compiles.
It still should be tested with some re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66501
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25509
--- Comment #32 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Filipe Brandenburger from comment #31)
> gcc should catch up.
I thought Google employed some capable C/C++ engineers...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66498
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Can't reproduce.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66496
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66495
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66498
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66488
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66493
--- Comment #8 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
Case zarc1_2_pass.f90 should be definitely illegal code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425
--- Comment #11 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
Some remarks before the discussion gets out of hand.
Neither Andrew nor me nor other people that may comment here have the power to
approve or reject this change. The people you need to convince are t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66448
--- Comment #19 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #18)
> > Could you test it properly on darwin?
>
> $ grep -rH "invalid DW" gcc/testsuite |wc -l
> 0
Confirmed on x86_64-apple-darwin14 with
--enable-langu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52144
--- Comment #6 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: chrbr
Date: Thu Jun 11 08:51:17 2015
New Revision: 224365
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224365&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add ARM/thumb pragma target
PR target/52144
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25509
--- Comment #33 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #32)
> (In reply to Filipe Brandenburger from comment #31)
> > gcc should catch up.
>
> I thought Google employed some capable C/C++ engineers...
What I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25509
--- Comment #34 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #33)
> (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #32)
> > (In reply to Filipe Brandenburger from comment #31)
> > > gcc should catch up.
> >
> > I tho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66502
Bug ID: 66502
Summary: SCCVN can't handle PHIs optimistically optimally
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66499
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66502
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66502
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Someone craft a testcase where both cases are interconnected and thus no
optimization is performed currently with either scheme (but would with
merged SCCs).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 35753
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35753&action=edit
Patch to implement ADDSUB patterns using vec_select/vec_concat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> We still need to fixup the sse3_addsubv2df3 pattern or fix combine to try
> multiple "canonical" forms of vec_merge vs. (vec_select (vec_concat ...)).
> Or decide
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66503
Bug ID: 66503
Summary: missing DW_AT_abstract_origin for cross-unit call
sites
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #35753|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66503
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.3
Summary|missing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
No.
Failed to match this instruction:
(set (reg:V2DF 213 [ D.3605 ])
(vec_select:V2DF (vec_concat:V4DF (plus:V2DF (reg:V2DF 161 [ vect__69.31 ])
(reg:V2DF 167 [ vect__68.29 ]))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
So it works with
(define_insn "sse3_addsubv2df3"
[(set (match_operand:V2DF 0 "register_operand" "=x,x")
(vec_select:V2DF
(vec_concat:V4DF
(plus:V2DF
(match_ope
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66205
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm-eabi|
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58972
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|ville.voutilainen at gmail dot com |jason at redhat dot com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
--- Comment #11 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> So it works with
>
> (define_insn "sse3_addsubv2df3"
> [(set (match_operand:V2DF 0 "register_operand" "=x,x")
> (vec_select:V2DF
> (vec_conc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
>
> --- Comment #11 from Uroš Bizjak ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66504
Bug ID: 66504
Summary: ICE using C++ exceptions in Objective-C++
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: objc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66505
Bug ID: 66505
Summary: -Wno-error=pedantic does not reverse -Werror
-Wpedantic
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66506
Bug ID: 66506
Summary: Crash on compiling llvm plugin
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66507
Bug ID: 66507
Summary: Crash on compiling llvm plugin
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivial
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66507
James Michael DuPont changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
--- Comment #13 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #12)
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> As it is just 'naming' it shouldn't matter, no?
Well, the operand is used in the assembly, and now "t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63870
--- Comment #8 from cbaylis at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patch posted to the mailing list
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg00799.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56764
alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 56764, which changed state.
Bug 56764 Summary: vect_prune_runtime_alias_test_list not smart enough
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56764
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66448
--- Comment #20 from Iain Sandoe ---
FWIW,
I boostrapped r224366 with the dwarf2out.c changes + this:
diff --git a/gcc/passes.c b/gcc/passes.c
index d3ffe33..1bc8a36 100644
--- a/gcc/passes.c
+++ b/gcc/passes.c
@@ -332,7 +332,7 @@ rest_of_decl_c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
--- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
>
> --- Comment #13 from Uroš Bizjak ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66501
--- Comment #1 from John Lindgren ---
For what it's worth, the default move *constructor* works correctly; it is only
the assignment operator that is the problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66503
--- Comment #2 from pmderodat at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: pmderodat
Date: Thu Jun 11 12:40:10 2015
New Revision: 224371
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224371&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Restore DW_AT_abstract_origin for cross-unit call sites
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66503
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jun 11 12:44:56 2015
New Revision: 224372
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224372&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-06-11 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/66503
* dwa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66136
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #13 from Richard Earn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66508
Bug ID: 66508
Summary: Attempt to Compile gcc-6.0 on OSX 10.9.4 cause
segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66503
--- Comment #4 from pmderodat at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: pmderodat
Date: Thu Jun 11 12:51:04 2015
New Revision: 224373
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224373&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Restore DW_AT_abstract_origin for cross-unit call sites
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
--- Comment #15 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 35758
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35758&action=edit
Patch that adds additional ADDSUB patterns using vec_select/vec_concat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
--- Comment #16 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> No.
[...]
> That was why I was suggesting to add additional patterns rather than
> replacing the existing ones...
So, there is no other way than using "the ugl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66509
Bug ID: 66509
Summary: the new clang-based assembler in Xcode 7 on 10.11
fails on the libjava/java/lang/reflect/natArray.cc
file from FSF gcc 5.1 at -m32
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66509
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is due to HAVE_AS_IX86_FILDS not being defined. So basically they made
the clang assembly not backwards compatible with the GNU one.
You can add a check to configure.ac if you want which does the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66509
--- Comment #2 from Jack Howarth ---
Created attachment 35760
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35760&action=edit
gcc/config.log generated against Xcode7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66509
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jack Howarth from comment #2)
> Created attachment 35760 [details]
> gcc/config.log generated against Xcode7
Wrong one. This is the one for libevent.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66509
--- Comment #4 from Iain Sandoe ---
could you please also list
as -v
and
as --version
it's possible that it no longer contains the string "GNU" which would actually
help us distinguish moving forward (i have some patches in my Q to handle
Darw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66509
Jack Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #35760|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25509
--- Comment #35 from Filipe Brandenburger ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comments)
Don't worry, I got what you mean...
Though I don't think coming up with code to fix it is the issue here, in
comment #10 a patch was provided (which a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66509
--- Comment #6 from Jack Howarth ---
A check of a recent build gcc trunk against the GNU assembler from Xcode 6.2
shows the same...
gcc_cv_as_ix86_fildq=no
gcc_cv_as_ix86_filds=no
as the build against Xcode 7's clang-based assembler.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66505
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic, easyhack
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66509
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
The assembly test in configure failed:
configure:24880: checking assembler for filds and fists mnemonics
configure:24889: /usr/bin/as-o conftest.o conftest.s >&5
clang -cc1as: fatal error: error in backe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
--- Comment #27 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jun 11 13:39:56 2015
New Revision: 224375
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224375&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-06-11 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline, guarded
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65549
--- Comment #37 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jun 11 13:39:56 2015
New Revision: 224375
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224375&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-06-11 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline, guarded
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65549
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
--- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
>
> --- Comment #16 from Uroš Bizjak ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Back trace:
#0 0x in ()
#1 0x74a5c337 in
nsComponentManagerImpl::CreateInstanceByContractID(char const*, nsISupports*,
nsID const&, void**) [clone .part.32] [clone .constprop.53402]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #1)
> Compiling with -fno-lifetime-dse should make it work again.
> -fsanitize=undefined doesn't currently catch this issue (relying on the
> value of storage persistin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425
--- Comment #12 from Filipe Brandenburger ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #11)
> Neither Andrew nor me nor other people that may comment here have the power
> to approve or reject this change.
Great, so please don't preemptivel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66509
--- Comment #8 from Jack Howarth ---
Note that configure test does succeed if the '-arch i386' option is also passed
to the assembler. Perhaps the tests aren't fine-grained enough as they are only
done for x86_64 in config.log.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425
--- Comment #13 from Andreas Schwab ---
> I don't really see why the trouble making the mental connection from the
> void cast with the coder's intent do discard that result. Could it mean
> anything else really?
The C language doesn't define an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66509
--- Comment #9 from Jack Howarth ---
Also, testing with in-line assembly using clang 3.7svn, I get the same behavior
for...
% cat conftest.c
asm("filds mem; fists mem");
% clang-3.7 -c conftest.c
fatal error: error in backend: 32-bit absolute ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
CC|man
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66510
Bug ID: 66510
Summary: gcc.target/arm/pr53636.c FAILs after r224221
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66510
James Greenhalgh changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66510
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66511
Bug ID: 66511
Summary: [avr] whole-byte shifts not optimized away for
uint64_t
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66445
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jun 11 15:04:54 2015
New Revision: 224379
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224379&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/66445
* constexpr.c (potential_constant_expression_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
--- Comment #18 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(in reply to c#9)
Yes, this is a generic problem. recog will not recognise patterns
where regs are swapped in some places but not others. This can of
course be worked around in combine, but that will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66512
Bug ID: 66512
Summary: PRE fails to optimize calls to pure functions in C++,
ok in C
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425
--- Comment #15 from Lucas De Marchi ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #14)
> (In reply to Filipe Brandenburger from comment #12)
> > Can I have this issue reopened please?
>
> If that makes you happy...
>
> > Ok, how can we ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66500
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52998
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66513
Bug ID: 66513
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault with `-x
c-header` while reading from stdin
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66513
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
vel/GNU/mpc
--with-isl=/usr/local/travel/GNU/isl
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20150611 (experimental) (GCC)
[sfilippo@epsilon NewPSBLAS]$ gfortran -O3 -c mv.f90
mv.f90:1:0:
subroutine mv(m,n,nc,alpha,irp,ja,val,&
^
internal compiler error: in vect_get_vec_def_for_operand, at
tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66280
--- Comment #12 from Salvatore Filippone ---
Created attachment 35763
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35763&action=edit
test case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56541
alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66450
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jun 11 15:45:01 2015
New Revision: 224381
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224381&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/66450
* constexpr.c (cxx_eval_store_expression): Av
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66445
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jun 11 15:45:08 2015
New Revision: 224382
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224382&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/66445
* constexpr.c (potential_constant_expression_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425
--- Comment #16 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
I'd say that for any function for which use of this attribute is
appropriate, suppression of the warning should involve a detailed comment
explaining why the particular use of the function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66079
--- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Thu Jun 11 15:49:32 2015
New Revision: 224383
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224383&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-06-11 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/66079
* trans-expr.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Thu Jun 11 15:56:30 2015
New Revision: 224384
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224384&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/66252
* config/sparc/sparc.c (hard_regno_
1 - 100 of 149 matches
Mail list logo
