https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66867
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc64*-*-*, x86_64-*-*
Stat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66609
--- Comment #7 from Rich Felker ---
Created attachment 36359
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36359&action=edit
preprocessed source still affected by the bug
Oddly I'm still experiencing this bug for some functions but not ot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67639
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66609
--- Comment #8 from Rich Felker ---
Perhaps hold off on worrying about this; it's only happening with -mfdpic (with
my forward-port of the fdpic patch applied) so it's possible that the bug is on
my end in code that's not in upstream gcc. I'll fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67636
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |6.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67647
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Component|bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67649
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
You are using -O3 -march=native it seems. Note that the error doesn't make
much sense to me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67650
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67474
--- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson ---
Still occurs with gcc-6-20150920.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67662
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67651
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29842
Bug 29842 depends on bug 28791, which changed state.
Bug 28791 Summary: sh64-elf -mdiv= options bitrot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28791
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24714
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28791
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58866
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20211
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||sh*-*-*
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67663
Bug ID: 67663
Summary: ambiguous namespace/class name not reported as error
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37633
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67660
--- Comment #1 from Oleg Endo ---
Just a note ...
It might also make sense to tell the compiler (via function attribute) whether
the ISR is re-entrant or not. On a single-core system, atomic ops in an ISR
can be converted into normal load-modify
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67663
--- Comment #1 from Andrei M. ---
in line:
a::i=1;
i is resolved to x::a::i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67649
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> You are using -O3 -march=native it seems.
I checked, and the problem also occurs in the simpler case
when -O3 -march=native is replaced by -O2.
> Note that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67657
--- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo ---
BTW, I'd recommend not specifying -ffloat-store on SH. It doesn't affect FP
precision (unlike on x86) and just creates slower code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39057
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|paolo.carlini at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67664
Bug ID: 67664
Summary: [6 Regression] Duplicate AT_const_value attributes in
some c++ cases.
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67665
Bug ID: 67665
Summary: ICE when passing two empty files directly to cc1 with
-g
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67664
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67649
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67647
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67653
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67653
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.4
Summary|ICE on valid co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67664
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Reduced testcase:
struct T
{
static const int a = 0;
};
int main()
{
T t;
return t.a;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67649
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
==122519== Invalid write of size 4
==122519==at 0x107D4EF0: vn_nary_op_insert_into(vn_nary_op_s*,
hash_table*, bool) (tree-ssa-sccvn.c:2634)
==122519==by 0x107D528B: sccvn_dom_walker::record_con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67649
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-pc-linux-gnu |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67141
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|tschwinge
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67664
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
First time via
#0 add_AT_unsigned (
die=>, attr_kind=DW_AT_const_value, unsigned_val=0)
at /space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/dwarf2out.c:3879
#1 0x00bc777f in add_const_value_attribute (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67470
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66793
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 21 09:55:57 2015
New Revision: 227961
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227961&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-09-21 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67121
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 21 09:55:57 2015
New Revision: 227961
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227961&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-09-21 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66952
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 21 09:55:57 2015
New Revision: 227961
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227961&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-09-21 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67470
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 21 09:55:57 2015
New Revision: 227961
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227961&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-09-21 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66793
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66952
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.0
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67055
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 21 09:55:57 2015
New Revision: 227961
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227961&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-09-21 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67271
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 21 09:55:57 2015
New Revision: 227961
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227961&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-09-21 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67055
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67121
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67271
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67639
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #112 from Oleg Endo ---
I had a quick look at the gcc.target/sh/hiconst.c test case:
int rab (char *pt, int *pti)
{
pt[2] = 0;
pti[3] = 0;
return 0;
}
without LRA:
mov #0,r0
mov.b r0,@(2,r4)
rts
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67666
Bug ID: 67666
Summary: single restrict pointer in struct looses restrict
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60832
--- Comment #2 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
Author: manu
Date: Mon Sep 21 10:11:24 2015
New Revision: 227964
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227964&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR middle-end/60832] Do not convert widest_int to tree just for prin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67666
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 36360
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36360&action=edit
Tentative patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67649
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
I guess valgrind just needs to be silenced in this case.
See valgrind related macros in gcc/system.h.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67666
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Looks good to me. The other possibility is to init ->only_restrict_pointers
from
the single entry.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60832
--- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
Created attachment 36361
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36361&action=edit
add %Wi %Wu %Wd for pretty-printing wides_int
This fails bootstrap at:
libcommon.a(pretty-print.o): In f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67649
--- Comment #7 from Mikhail Maltsev ---
Probably. Will look at this today (valgrind has some sort of memory pool API, I
think it can be used here).
I need to configure GCC with --enable-checking=yes,valgrind to reproduce this,
right?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67649
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
--enable-checking=valgrind is enough
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67622
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
The reghunt revealed (not completely unexpected) the following patch as
the culprit:
The first bad revision is:
changeset: 25098:fa3edfa6a9a7
user:davem@138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67607
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
Created attachment 36362
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36362&action=edit
shortening
The shortening case seems much easier and does not require VRP information.
Calling get_range_info fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67657
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #7)
> Created attachment 36357 [details]
> Proposed patch
>
> Although a "mov @r2+,r2" is actually possible and valid (r2 will contain the
> value loaded from memory, AFAIR),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67657
--- Comment #10 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #1)
> Thanks for reporting. I was a bit confused ... the attached source is not
> cselib.c (which is a GCC file) but rather the problematic jidctflt.c
Oops,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67647
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Sep 21 11:44:08 2015
New Revision: 227966
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227966&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix bootstrap error introduced in r227870
PR libstdc++/67647
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67647
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67657
--- Comment #11 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #10)
> (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #1)
> > Thanks for reporting. I was a bit confused ... the attached source is not
> > cselib.c (which is a GCC file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #113 from Oleg Endo ---
Created attachment 36363
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36363&action=edit
CSiBE I08 const cost = 0 vs. cost = 1, no LRA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #114 from Oleg Endo ---
Created attachment 36364
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36364&action=edit
CSiBE I08 const cost = 0 vs. cost = 1, LRA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67667
Bug ID: 67667
Summary: erroneous type argument for unary operator one's
complement
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #115 from Oleg Endo ---
It seems that it's already enough to set the cost for I08 from 0 to 1:
Index: gcc/config/sh/sh.c
===
--- gcc/config/sh/sh.c (revision 227958)
++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67668
Bug ID: 67668
Summary: erroneous type argument for unary operator one's
complement
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67667
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67668
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
*** Bug 67667 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67651
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 21 12:33:23 2015
New Revision: 227968
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227968&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-09-21 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/67651
* rtl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67651
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67668
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-5.2.0/gcc/Complex.html
-Wpedantic
What is your question exactly?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67657
--- Comment #12 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Mon Sep 21 12:57:31 2015
New Revision: 227969
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227969&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/67657
* config/sh/sh.c (sh_remove_overlappi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67300
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openmp
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67652
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67657
--- Comment #13 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Mon Sep 21 13:14:45 2015
New Revision: 227970
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227970&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Backport from mainline
2015-09-21 Oleg Endo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67652
iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67669
Bug ID: 67669
Summary: Wrong works fwrite or fread or both
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67669
--- Comment #1 from Bernard ---
Created attachment 36366
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36366&action=edit
Source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67669
--- Comment #2 from Bernard ---
The same source compiled for UBUNTU works well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57625
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64345
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Mon Sep 21 13:49:07 2015
New Revision: 227971
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227971&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
testsuite/
PR target/64345
* gcc.target/sh/pr64345-1.c: Adj
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64906
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67664
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 21 14:02:27 2015
New Revision: 227972
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227972&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-09-21 Richard Biener
PR debug/67664
* dwarf2ou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67664
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67628
--- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> (In reply to ktkachov from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > > This is due to the fold-const.c optimization which shoul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67670
Bug ID: 67670
Summary: [c++11] Misleading / outdated error message "invalid
pure specifier"
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivial
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67668
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67670
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66415
--- Comment #10 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
Author: manu
Date: Mon Sep 21 14:52:09 2015
New Revision: 227975
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227975&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Handle lines encoded into several maps in linemap_position_for_loc_a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67671
Bug ID: 67671
Summary: restrict pointer reference looses restrict
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67619
--- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Sep 21 15:23:52 2015
New Revision: 227976
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227976&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/67619
* except.c (expand_builtin_eh_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67672
Bug ID: 67672
Summary: [6 regression] Ada "Storage_Error stack overflow or
erroneous memory access" error breaks sparc-linux
bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62171
--- Comment #6 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> And maybe set DECL_BY_REFERENCE, a mere REFERENCE_TYPE doesn't prevent
> you from doing (¶m)[2] which we'd miscompile. Not sure who added
> that REFER
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66790
--- Comment #27 from Pierre-Marie de Rodat ---
Firstly, thanks everyone for your help! I'll try to address points that
still are unresolved.
(In reply to Bernd Schmidt from comment #14)
> As you say, the df-live problem claims to compute a mus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66790
--- Comment #28 from Bernd Schmidt ---
(In reply to Pierre-Marie de Rodat from comment #27)
> (In reply to Bernd Schmidt from comment #14)
> > It looks like your "visited" bit tries to avoid that, but I don't
> > think this works.
> (In reply to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67673
Bug ID: 67673
Summary: support restrict pointer to restrict pointer
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67615
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Mon Sep 21 18:09:13 2015
New Revision: 227981
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227981&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-09-21 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/67615
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
