--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-27 10:24 ---
Should be fixed now on EABI.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 14:06 ---
Subject: Bug 27643
Author: aph
Date: Tue Dec 18 14:06:15 2007
New Revision: 131036
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131036
Log:
2007-12-18 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #10 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-04 11:07 ---
Subject: Bug 17779
Author: aph
Date: Fri Jan 4 11:06:34 2008
New Revision: 131319
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131319
Log:
2008-01-03 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #12 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-04 15:14 ---
Subject: Bug 17779
Author: aph
Date: Fri Jan 4 15:13:53 2008
New Revision: 131324
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131324
Log:
2008-01-04 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-04 17:19 ---
Another case where Sun's javadoc was rather vague.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-04 17:19 ---
Subject: Bug 3
Author: aph
Date: Fri Jan 4 17:18:56 2008
New Revision: 131326
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131326
Log:
2008-01-04 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-15 15:13 ---
Fixed in trunk.
Tested:
zorro:~ $ ~/gcc/trunk/install/bin/gcj -shared -Wl,-Bsymbolic -fPIC
-findirect-dispatch -fjni -g0 -O0 -mtune=nocona -march=nocona -pipe -w
-save-temps -o libjunit.jar.so junit.jar
gcj: warning
--- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-15 15:32 ---
.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-15 15:32 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 33639 ***
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-15 15:32 ---
*** Bug 32484 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-12 10:27 ---
What on earth is this asm supposed to do?
The compiler is quite entitled to complain about this: the memory
at char x[10] is being used as an ouput operand, but it is not in scope.
The text in the gcc texinfo refers
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-22 16:21 ---
Subject: Bug 35020
Author: aph
Date: Thu May 22 16:20:55 2008
New Revision: 135771
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=135771
Log:
2008-05-22 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-23 13:05 ---
Subject: Bug 35020
Author: aph
Date: Fri May 23 13:04:18 2008
New Revision: 135801
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=135801
Log:
2008-05-22 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-23 13:05 ---
Fixed.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #7 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-11 10:49 ---
This isn't just a mingw bug. It is also manifested in GNU/Linux if gcc itself
is built with -O0, as you need to do when debugging gcc.
There perhaps should be some limit to how far VRP goes before givi
--- Comment #10 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-14 06:27 ---
The only way I can find out which file in libgcj causes the stack overflow is
to try to build it again with an unoptimized gcc. I can do so next week.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36218
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-03 10:14 ---
Subject: Bug 33305
Author: aph
Date: Thu Jul 3 10:13:48 2008
New Revision: 137411
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=137411
Log:
2008-07-03 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-03 10:31 ---
Subject: Bug 33304
Author: aph
Date: Thu Jul 3 10:31:03 2008
New Revision: 137413
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=137413
Log:
2008-07-03 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-03 10:32 ---
Subject: Bug 33305
Author: aph
Date: Thu Jul 3 10:31:50 2008
New Revision: 137414
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=137414
Log:
2008-06-13 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #14 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-30 09:23 ---
This patch limits recursion in tree-vrp.
Index: tree-vrp.c
===
--- tree-vrp.c (revision 136670)
+++ tree-vrp.c (working copy)
@@ -4049,6 +4049,8
--- Comment #9 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-30 15:40 ---
Subject: Bug 21428
Author: aph
Date: Mon Jan 30 15:40:14 2006
New Revision: 110400
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110400
Log:
2006-01-30 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #10 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-30 16:25 ---
Subject: Bug 21428
Author: aph
Date: Mon Jan 30 16:25:40 2006
New Revision: 110402
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110402
Log:
2006-01-30 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-01 16:57 ---
Working around the lack of libffi support on ARM is Just Plain Stupid. We
should either fix it or cease to build on ARM. Without libffi libgcj cannot
work in any reasonable way.
The memory leak thing can be fixed by
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:10 ---
See java/lang/reflect/natMethod.cc:
#if USE_LIBFFI
#include
#else
#include
#endif
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26063
--- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-07 19:02 ---
Subject: Bug 25535
Author: aph
Date: Tue Feb 7 19:02:39 2006
New Revision: 110710
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110710
Log:
2006-02-07 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Component: java
AssignedTo: aph at redhat dot com
ReportedBy: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26192
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-09 12:53 ---
Cross-reference https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180418
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-09 14:03 ---
Subject: Bug 26192
Author: aph
Date: Thu Feb 9 14:03:17 2006
New Revision: 110798
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110798
Log:
2006-02-09 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-09 14:05 ---
Subject: Bug 26192
Author: aph
Date: Thu Feb 9 14:05:31 2006
New Revision: 110799
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110799
Log:
2006-02-09 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 15:45 ---
A bit more explanation.
The problem is caused by the fact that 9007199254740994.0 + 0.847412109375
is carried out in extended precision, and the result is rounded to
9007199254740995. In double precision, the
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26447
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-23 16:34 ---
Created an attachment (id=10903)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10903&action=view)
File to compile
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26447
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-23 17:40 ---
.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-27 17:22 ---
I wouldn't expect to see such errors.
Are you sure you used -findirect-dispatch ?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26447
--- Comment #10 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-02 10:31 ---
No, that patch doesn't help. Still get the same result at -O2:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] eclipse]$ /home/aph/gcc/install/bin/gcj -c -O2 -g -fPIC
-findirect-dispatch -fjni AbstractCommentParser.class
org/eclipse/jdt/int
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-08 14:35 ---
I've started some experimental work on this at
svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcj/gcj-abi-experimental-branch.
Initial improvements in grabage collection time are encouraging, but there are
some problems
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-15 23:15 ---
Oh yes, definitely. It was just waiting for the branch to be unfrozen.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26138
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 14:58 ---
This DECL_ARTIFICIAL for the label -- should it be in the gcj front-end?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21591
--- Comment #28 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-24 17:41 ---
Richard Guenther: should this be posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for discussion?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13212
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-30 14:24 ---
I'm testing a patch for this.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-31 11:43 ---
Subject: Bug 26858
Author: aph
Date: Fri Mar 31 11:43:43 2006
New Revision: 112574
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=112574
Log:
2006-03-30 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #7 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-31 13:05 ---
Subject: Bug 26858
Author: aph
Date: Fri Mar 31 13:05:32 2006
New Revision: 112575
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=112575
Log:
2006-03-30 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #8 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-03 14:31 ---
Subject: Bug 26858
Author: aph
Date: Mon Apr 3 14:31:56 2006
New Revision: 112640
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=112640
Log:
2006-04-03 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #9 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-03 15:22 ---
Subject: Bug 26858
Author: aph
Date: Mon Apr 3 15:22:21 2006
New Revision: 112641
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=112641
Log:
2006-04-03 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-04 15:08 ---
Subject: Bug 25414
Author: aph
Date: Tue Apr 4 15:08:51 2006
New Revision: 112667
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=112667
Log:
2006-04-03 Archit Shah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-04 17:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=11204)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11204&action=view)
PR java/27025: ICE on simple initializer
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27025
--- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-04 18:17 ---
David Daney pointed out the part of the JLS that forbids my solution. I'll
work on another patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27025
--- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-05 09:53 ---
Subject: Bug 25414
Author: aph
Date: Wed Apr 5 09:53:08 2006
New Revision: 112699
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=112699
Log:
2006-04-05 Archit Shah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-05 13:19 ---
I don't think this is a regression.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ ~/gcc/install-4.0/bin/gcj -C z.java
z.java: In class 'z':
z.java: In method 'z.main(java.lang.String[])':
z.java:9: internal compiler
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-05 14:12 ---
As far as I can see this bug is in every version of gcj that has ever existed.
There is special code (in merge_string_cste()) to convert an integer constant
to a constant string for concatenation. However, there isn&#
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-19 12:33
---
Should be fixed by
2005-04-18 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* java-except.h (struct eh_range.handler): Remove unused field.
(handle_nested_ranges): Remove function decla
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-19 13:26
---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-04/msg01068.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21022
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-20 14:38
---
This is indeed a libffi bug.
Whether a boolean is promoted to a full word or not is a part of the system ABI.
It's controlled in gcc by TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES, and is part of the gcc
back end.
Wha
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-21 13:38
---
OK, so it isn't a libffi bug.
The odd thing here is that despite the fact that promotion of outgoing args is a
machine dependent issue, each language front end is required to do it.
This patch correspon
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21115
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-28 10:59
---
Added to Tom Tromey's queue for 4.0 branch.
--
What|Removed |Added
Assig
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-28 11:00
---
Added to Tom Tromey's queue for 4.0 branch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21140
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03 13:12
---
This bug is obsoleted by the fix for PR java/19285.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status
--
Bug 17574 depends on bug 18399, which changed state.
Bug 18399 Summary: [4.0/4.1 Regression] Class initialization optimization does
not work with the inliner
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18399
What|Old Value |New Value
---
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03 13:34
---
I'm tempted to change this to WONTFIX.
The patch for PR java/19285 party fixes this for indirect dispatch: in A.foo2(),
the field B.bar is initialized by a call to _Jv_ResolvePoolEntry, and this is
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03 16:10
---
See also PR 21362
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20606
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-05 16:33
---
This may be a dup of 20606
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21362
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21591
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21428
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17 14:49
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21264 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17 14:49
---
*** Bug 20088 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17 14:49
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21624 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17 14:49
---
*** Bug 18945 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17 14:53
---
.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17 14:53
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21624 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17 14:53
---
*** Bug 20088 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-10 17:59 ---
* function.c (expand_function_end): Emit a blockage insn before
the epilogue when -fnon-call-exceptions is used.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-16 14:29
---
comment
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-16 15:00
---
Bumping priority because this is possibly a front end bug that breaks many
programs/
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-10 11:33
---
It's extremely unlikely that anyone will fix bugs in the old verifier.
However, it is still used for the non- indirect dispatch case. I don't know if
it's possible to use the new verifier for
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-18 12:05
---
It looks like my patch of 2004-12-17 fixes the original bug, but there is a
separate bug triggered by a different test case. It shouldn't be attached to
this PR.
Please check that my patch really did fi
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|SUSPENDED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18931
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-18 12:11
---
I believe this is fixed on mainline.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|aph at gcc dot gnu dot org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
||dot org
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-08 19:25
---
I don't think this is a libffi problem. gcj allocates trampolines on the heap,
not the stack.
I think this is a multilib problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19823
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-09 10:47
---
I changed the gc settings to enable USE_MMAP on Linux.
I had to do this because at least one Linux kernel didn't give exec permission
on the heap. That change did work at the time.
2004-01-20 Andrew
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-10 10:58
---
It looks like the patch was applied to the wrong place in the file: it certainly
was my intention to apply it to all Linux. And indeed, my testing was not on
m68k, but on x86-64.
The obvious question is
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-11 12:07
---
This is a workaround for everyone that needs to use debugging on HEAD.
If we can't get this bug fixed soon something like this will need to be
committed.
Index: include/posix-thre
Component: java
AssignedTo: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot gnu
dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19907
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-11 16:37
---
Created an attachment (id=8177)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8177&action=view)
ManifestElement.class
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19907
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-11 16:41
---
The method ArrayList.add() return a boolean, so the bytecode compiler generates
a temp of type promoted_boolean. Unfortunately, the same temp is used later as
an int.
This problem arises because promoted
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-12 13:29
---
The patch I submitted is inadequate. I know how to fix it, and I'll resubmit.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19907
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-14 14:56
---
We need to make this change soon. I'd like to do something that Hans would
approve of, but I don't know exactly what that might be.
Andreas Jaeger says his patch works. Unless someone comes up with
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-14 15:18
---
This seems to me like creeping featurism.
We need to distinguish between fixing this bug in a simple way and adding "nice"
new properties that would require a change to the garbage collector'
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-09-30 12:48 ---
.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot
301 - 400 of 443 matches
Mail list logo
