https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69435
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 37440
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37440&action=edit
Candidate fix
This patch appears to fix it; tested successfully with "make check-jit" and
"make check-jit -j64"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69435
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
I've reported this here:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/dejagnu/2016-01/msg00013.html
at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Although it's not a duplicate, I believe that the patch I posted for PR 69265
covers this:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg00871.html
I can add the testcases suggested in this bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69006
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
v2 patch posted here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg01915.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69265
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
(see also PR 69453, which is related, but different)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69490
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Thanks for reporting this.
Which exact version are you testing with? This looks a lot like PR 68446,
which was fixed in r232567.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69006
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Jan 26 17:08:12 2016
New Revision: 232837
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232837&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR other/69006: fix extra newlines after diagnostics
gcc/c-family/Chan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69006
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66220
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Jun 2 18:45:50 2015
New Revision: 224041
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224041&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/66220: Fix false positive from -Wmisleading-indentation
gcc/c-fam
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66220
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
See:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/jit/2015-q2/msg00054.html
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Currently libgccjit always issues a hard error about unconditional blocks.
Some interpreters (e.g. Lua) generate bytecode that may have unreachable
instructions, so it should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66546
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #0)
> instructions, so it should make it easier for client code if they can have a
jit client code, that is, i.e. interpreters linking against libgccjit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66546
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #0)
> Currently libgccjit always issues a hard error about unconditional blocks.
"unreachable", that should say
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66539
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Jun 16 18:13:44 2015
New Revision: 224531
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224531&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR jit/66539: Add parentheses as needed to gcc_jit_object_get_debug_str
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66539
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66539
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Jun 16 19:44:05 2015
New Revision: 224535
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224535&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR jit/66539: Properly add testcase
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
P
MED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: driver
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: uros at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-unknown-linux-
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
We should probably default to -mtune=native when building code in-memory (but
probably to -mtune=generic when compiling to disk?). Perhaps an option, or
maybe expose these options
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66593
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #0)
[...]
> That said, the above code runs inside the driver, and libgccjit doesn't yet
> run that part of the driver, so some extra work will be needed by me on top
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66594
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> This should be true on all targets which have -mcpu=native (or
> -march=native). Note x86 options are not always the same on x86 vs arm vs
> aarch64 vs ppc.
Tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66594
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Some notes:
The following archs seem to implement a "host_detect_local_cpu" C++ callback,
implementing the spec-language function "local_cpu_detect":
grep -nH -e host_detect_local_cpu */*/*.h
config/aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66594
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 35815
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35815&action=edit
Hacky work-in-progress fix, using hardcoded calls to host_detect_local_cpu
The attached patch is a hack, in tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66594
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #4)
> (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > > This should be true on all targets which have -mcpu=native (or
> > >
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 35818
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35818&action=edit
Minimal testcase demonstrat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66610
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 35820
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35820&action=edit
A less minimal example
FWIW, here's a less minimal example, better showing what the code was doing
(interpreter
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Depends on: 66539, 66546, 66594, 66610
Target Milestone: ---
Ravi (https://github.com/dibyendumajumdar/ravi) is a JIT-compiler for Lua which
has an experimental libgccjit backend.
This is a tracker
ty: normal
Priority: P3
Component: jit
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 66627
Target Milestone: ---
Experimenting with adding arbitrary command-line options to toplev::main from
libgccji
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66627
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Note to self: not all of the jit fixes on trunk had a bug attached; should
review jit/ChangeLog.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66539
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Mon Jun 29 15:27:39 2015
New Revision: 225125
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225125&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR jit/66539: Add parentheses as needed to gcc_jit_object_get_debug_str
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66627
Bug 66627 depends on bug 66539, which changed state.
Bug 66539 Summary: Missing parentheses in jit dumps
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66539
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66539
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Priority: P3
Component: jit
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 66627
Target Milestone: ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/jit/2015-q2/msg00131.html noted a problem where a ptr to
a local was being passed as an argument in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66700
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 35875
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35875&action=edit
Minimal reproducer
This gimplifies to:
test_caller_of_write_back_through_ptr ()
{
d.0;
D.59;
d;
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66700
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 35876
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35876&action=edit
Dump of initial GENERIC form of function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66700
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Looks like we're not setting
TREE_ADDRESSABLE (x) = 1
when taking the address of something.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66700
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 35877
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35877&action=edit
Crude patch that fixes the testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66628
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Jun 30 19:27:19 2015
New Revision: 225205
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225205&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR jit/66628: add gcc_jit_context_add_command_line_option
gcc/jit/Chan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66546
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Jun 30 19:38:12 2015
New Revision: 225206
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225206&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR jit/66546: Add gcc_jit_context_set_bool_allow_unreachable_blocks
gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66700
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Jul 1 12:50:50 2015
New Revision: 225248
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225248&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR jit/66700: set TREE_ADDRESSABLE when building an ADDR_EXPR
gcc/jit/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66628
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Jul 1 14:31:48 2015
New Revision: 225253
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225253&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR jit/66628: add gcc_jit_context_add_command_line_option
Backport of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66546
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Jul 1 14:35:53 2015
New Revision: 225254
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225254&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR jit/66546: Add gcc_jit_context_set_bool_allow_unreachable_blocks
Ba
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66700
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Jul 1 14:48:55 2015
New Revision: 225258
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225258&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR jit/66700: set TREE_ADDRESSABLE when building an ADDR_EXPR
Backport
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66546
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66628
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66627
Bug 66627 depends on bug 66546, which changed state.
Bug 66546 Summary: No way to disable check for unreachable blocks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66546
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66627
Bug 66627 depends on bug 66700, which changed state.
Bug 66700 Summary: Bogus gimplification of jit code using ptrs to functions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66700
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66700
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66627
Bug 66627 depends on bug 66628, which changed state.
Bug 66628 Summary: jit: Provide a way to add arbitrary options to the toplev
"command line"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66628
What|Removed |
gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 66627
Target Milestone: ---
This bug is to track the segfault during jit-compilation reported here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/jit/2015-q3/msg00018.html
I'm able to reproduce it locally on x86_64 with trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66779
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
Priority: P3
Component: jit
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 66627
Target Milestone: ---
Problem reported on mailing list here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/jit/2015-q3/msg00022.html
We need to reject this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66779
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Jul 7 19:22:01 2015
New Revision: 225522
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225522&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR jit/66779: fix segfault
gcc/jit/ChangeLog:
PR jit/66779
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66783
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Jul 7 19:29:58 2015
New Revision: 225523
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225523&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR jit/66783: prevent use of opaque structs
gcc/jit/ChangeLog:
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 66627
Target Milestone: ---
Whilst trying to track down a code generation issue with the jit, a user noted
that gcc_jit_context_dump_to_file resembles C, but isn't C, and th
Priority: P3
Component: jit
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 66627
Target Milestone: ---
A user reported a problem on the jit mailing list where incorrect code was
generated by libgccjit at the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66783
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Jul 8 14:41:59 2015
New Revision: 225557
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225557&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR jit/66783: improve error messages
gcc/jit/ChangeLog:
PR jit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66812
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 35945
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35945&action=edit
Minimal reproducer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66812
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Output from fre1 dump (at e.g. optlevel 3) (with TDF_DETAILS enabled) is:
;; Function test_pr66812 (test_pr66812, funcdef_no=0, decl_uid=56,
cgraph_uid=0, symbol_order=0)
Setting value number of .MEM_4(D) t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66812
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #2)
> Output from fre1 dump (at e.g. optlevel 3) (with TDF_DETAILS enabled) is:
(snip)
> Removing dead stmt MEM[(struct value *)arr_2(D) + 16B].union_field.i_field =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66812
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 35946
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35946&action=edit
Equivalent C code
(generated using gcc_jit_context_dump_to_file and lightly editing until valid
C)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66812
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #4)
> Created attachment 35946 [details]
> Equivalent C code
>
> (generated using gcc_jit_context_dump_to_file and lightly editing until
> valid C)
Compiling this wit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66783
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Root cause found: it's because of the langhook:
LANG_HOOKS_GET_ALIAS_SET
which it looks like I need to implement for libgccjit.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66812
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66783
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3)
> Root cause found: it's because of the langhook:
> LANG_HOOKS_GET_ALIAS_SET
> which it looks like I need to implement for libgccjit.
Ooops, wrong bug; ignore th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66812
--- Comment #8 from David Malcolm ---
Root cause found: it's because of the langhook:
LANG_HOOKS_GET_ALIAS_SET
which it looks like I need to implement for libgccjit.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66812
--- Comment #9 from David Malcolm ---
Notes to self:
For the given stmt, fre1's call to:
val = vn_reference_lookup (gimple_assign_lhs (stmt),
gimple_vuse (stmt), VN_WALK, NULL);
is returning NULL for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66812
--- Comment #10 from David Malcolm ---
Candidate patch posted as:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/jit/2015-q3/msg00060.html
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: jit
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
As noted here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-07/msg01520.html
> This is probably out
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66783
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 36176
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36176&action=edit
Reproducer
The attached generates a false
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 36203
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36203&action=edit
Patch
The issue seems to be in here in c_parser_for_statement:
warn_for_misleading_indentation (for_loc, bod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Problem also affects while statements; reproduced using example from comment #0
w with "for (;;)" replaced with "while (1)"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3)
> Created attachment 36203 [details]
> Patch
>
> The issue seems to be in here in c_parser_for_statement:
>
> warn_for_misleading_indentation (for_loc, body_loc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #36203|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70339
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Jun 22 15:20:41 2016
New Revision: 237714
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237714&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C FE: suggest corrections for misspelled identifiers and type names
gc
at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
I'm working on this
at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
I'm working on a fix for the specific issue in comment #0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71613
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Candidate patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-06/msg01658.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71610
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Candidate patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-06/msg01658.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52952
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
||2016-06-24
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Confirmed. I'm working on a fix for this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71651
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Also affects gcc-6-branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71651
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Candidate patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-06/msg01766.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71651
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Thu Jun 30 14:28:50 2016
New Revision: 237880
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237880&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix bogus option suggestions for RejectNegative options (PR driver/7165
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71651
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Thu Jun 30 14:39:10 2016
New Revision: 237881
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237881&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix bogus option suggestions for RejectNegative options (PR driver/7165
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71651
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62314
--- Comment #8 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Jul 5 15:50:54 2016
New Revision: 238008
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238008&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/62314: add fixit hint for "expected ';' after class definition"
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
(from email)
$ cat /tmp/a.c
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
return bar();
}
$ ./xgcc -B. /tmp/a.c
/tmp/a.c: In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71858
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Jul 20 18:42:11 2016
New Revision: 238538
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238538&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C++ FE: handle misspelled identifiers and typenames
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70339
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Jul 20 18:42:11 2016
New Revision: 238538
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238538&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C++ FE: handle misspelled identifiers and typenames
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #44 from David Malcolm ---
Candidate patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-07/msg01733.html
at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Candidate patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-07/msg01735.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71858
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72786
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Thanks for filing this.
A two-liner fix for this would be to detect in
best_match::get_best_meaningful_candidate
if m_best_distance is 0, and if so return NULL, i.e. to not give a suggestion
if somehow we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72823
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Sorry about this.
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Created attachment 39062 [details]
> gcc7-pr72823.patch
>
> Untested fix.
Thanks. ppalka on IRC said that this fixed it for him.
> IMHO eit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72823
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3)
> Not sure why I'm not seeing it fail; am investigating further.
Looks like gcc_assert in libcpp was doing nothing on my box. The code i
libcpp/system.h has:
/*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72823
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72823
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Sat Aug 6 18:06:30 2016
New Revision: 239211
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239211&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix crash in selftest::test_lexer_string_locations_ucn4 (PR bootstrap/7
1801 - 1900 of 3389 matches
Mail list logo
