[Bug c++/55402] New: Compiling large initializer lists never finishes

2012-11-19 Thread kevin at topsy dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55402 Bug #: 55402 Summary: Compiling large initializer lists never finishes Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major

[Bug c++/55402] Compiling large initializer lists never finishes

2012-11-19 Thread kevin at topsy dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55402 --- Comment #1 from Kevin Hsu 2012-11-19 22:27:00 UTC --- In the example, the initializer list has maybe around 60,000 elements. This is pretty large, but by no means a corner case.

[Bug c++/55402] Compiling large initializer lists never finishes

2012-11-19 Thread kevin at topsy dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55402 --- Comment #2 from Kevin Hsu 2012-11-19 22:28:53 UTC --- Created attachment 28737 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28737 The .cc file, gzip'd In case it helps (gzipped)

[Bug c++/55402] Compiling large initializer lists never finishes

2012-11-19 Thread kevin at topsy dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55402 --- Comment #3 from Kevin Hsu 2012-11-19 22:30:48 UTC --- Created attachment 28738 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28738 intermediate file, gzipped

[Bug c++/55402] Compiling large initializer lists never finishes

2012-11-19 Thread kevin at topsy dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55402 --- Comment #4 from Kevin Hsu 2012-11-19 22:32:35 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) > An initializer list of tens of thousands of simple std::pair<...> causes GCC > 4.7.2 to busily never return. > > Command line: > > kevin@ps027:~$ ca

[Bug c++/55402] Compiling large initializer lists never finishes

2012-11-19 Thread kevin at topsy dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55402 --- Comment #6 from Kevin Hsu 2012-11-20 00:24:11 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > I don't think it's correct to say that it *never* finishes - the memory usage > also doesn't diverge - it's just extremely slow. We have of course to anal