Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27292
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-25 11:46 ---
the original testcase still ICEs. however now in gimplify.c:5492
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #24 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-03 13:02
---
closing as fixed then. Thanks !
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27471
--- Comment #7 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-08 08:40 ---
Ah, just missed it by a few minutes :)
I've been using this patch:
=== CUT ===
--- c-common.c (revision 113532)
+++ c-common.c (working copy)
@@ -1077,7 +1077,7 @@ convert_and_check (tree type, tree
--- Comment #5 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-08 10:06 ---
I'll try taking care.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22303
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27505
dTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27506
--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-08 19:54 ---
raising severity because it triggers frequently
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-08 19:55 ---
triggering quite often, raising severity
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-08 20:31 ---
error message is:
bitfield-error-1.cc:14: error: invalid conversion from 'int' to 'EBorderStyle'
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27506
--- Comment #10 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-16 08:37
---
ok, rerunning regtest
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-26 18:39
---
It also causes bootstrap failures (see PR18058)
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-29 16:26 ---
it might not be invalid, but its certainly worth a diagnostic IMHO
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13717
--- Comment #12 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-30 13:44
---
Subject: Bug 27273
Author: mueller
Date: Tue May 30 13:43:55 2006
New Revision: 114238
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=114238
Log:
PR c/27273
* c-common.c (convert_a
--- Comment #13 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-30 13:44
---
Fixed.
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #40 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-08 15:50
---
I've a patch, which is currently blocked by -fivopts bug
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-13 12:48 ---
I'm currently testing this patch:
--- cp/decl2.c (revision 116108)
+++ cp/decl2.c (working copy)
@@ -1541,7 +1541,7 @@ static tree
min_vis_r (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees, void *data)
{
int *vis_p =
--- Comment #7 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-18 17:55 ---
struct oD.1993:
type_0 type_5 type_6 BLK
size
constant invariant 0>
unit size constant invariant 0>
align 8 symtab 0 alias set -1
attributes
local bindings <(nil)>>
--- Comment #9 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-22 09:19 ---
Thanks Jason! I'll regtest immediately.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28659
--- Comment #11 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-18 12:11
---
yes please. Actually I created my own patch for bringing the C++ frontend on
ear with the C frontend, but I didn't submit it because it produced bazillions
of (legal) warnings in the code I usually compile
--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-16 15:22 ---
ehm, this is the same with any warning/error message? why would this case be
special?
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #4 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-16 15:34 ---
use -Woverloaded-virtual
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|trivial |minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24525
--- Comment #14 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-16 15:37
---
*** Bug 26298 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-16 15:37 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26167 ***
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
iority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29485
--- Comment #5 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-17 09:34 ---
take a look at the testcase in bugreport 29485 - there it should have at least
instantiated the method
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21678
IRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: i686-suse-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30629
--- Comment #3 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-30 13:09 ---
I'm not flagging this as diagnostic for now, because it is imho still a bug in
ccp that could cause other side-effects (aliasing analysis?).
if it is clear that the only problem this causes is the warning
--- Comment #13 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-30 16:20
---
Subject: Bug 30601
Author: mueller
Date: Tue Jan 30 16:20:06 2007
New Revision: 121342
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=121342
Log:
2007-01-30 Dirk Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #45 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-30 17:17
---
Subject: Bug 8268
Author: mueller
Date: Tue Jan 30 17:17:39 2007
New Revision: 121346
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=121346
Log:
backport from mainline:
2007-01-21 Dirk
--- Comment #9 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-30 17:18 ---
Subject: Bug 30511
Author: mueller
Date: Tue Jan 30 17:17:39 2007
New Revision: 121346
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=121346
Log:
backport from mainline:
2007-01-21 Dirk Mueller
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mueller at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #8 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-01 13:27 ---
removing diagnostic keyword again. This is latent wrong-code.
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #21 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-05 12:43
---
Subject: Bug 30510
Author: mueller
Date: Mon Feb 5 12:43:17 2007
New Revision: 121596
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=121596
Log:
2007-02-05 Dirk Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&
--- Comment #22 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-05 12:43
---
Fixed in 4.3.
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-19 10:21
---
I've submitted a patch
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #1 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-19 16:43 ---
manu, is this something already covered by your pending -Wconversion fixes?
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-19 20:23 ---
there is an implicit value conversion, boolean "false" to address "0". I think
that is the definition of -Wconversion, no?
anyway, I'll work on a patch.
--
mueller at gc
u dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31058
--- Comment #1 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-06 15:22 ---
after prefetch-loop-arrays run, vrp2 looks like this:
:;
D.1885_87 = &r_4(D)->sig[i_13];
D.1886_88 = D.1885_87 + 160B;
__builtin_prefetch (D.1886_88, 1);
r_4(D)->sig[i_13] = 0;
i_8 = i_13 +
--- Comment #7 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-07 10:59 ---
I don't think this is the same testcase. you will get any warning in this case,
because the compiler cannot determine that it is supposed to be dead code.
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org ch
--- Comment #9 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-07 11:34 ---
well, the unrolled body is generated code, it could set TREE_NO_WARNING (for
example). or it could avoid unrolling if its not a flex array.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31058
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #18 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-07 22:03
---
IIRC there are some cases that are only caught in the 2nd vrp run. It is still
a possibility if this bug cannot be fixed otherwise.
However, I don't see the issue with this testcase.
a) its not a flex ar
--- Comment #23 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-08 21:32
---
Great, this patch makes a -fprefetch-loop-arrays bootstrap succeed. I think
LSHIFT_EXPR should be handled similar.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31058
--- Comment #13 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-09 16:16
---
Subject: Bug 17946
Author: mueller
Date: Fri Mar 9 16:16:35 2007
New Revision: 122751
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122751
Log:
2007-03-09 Dirk Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #14 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-09 16:17
---
Fixed for 4.3.
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #17 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-10 17:26
---
Subject: Bug 17946
Author: mueller
Date: Sat Mar 10 17:26:33 2007
New Revision: 122798
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122798
Log:
2007-03-10 Dirk Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #10 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 23:17
---
Subject: Bug 30860
Author: mueller
Date: Wed Mar 14 23:17:03 2007
New Revision: 122934
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122934
Log:
2007-03-15 Dirk Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #11 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 23:20
---
Fixed for 4.3.
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-19 13:21 ---
it seems to be caused by -r121780
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30864
--- Comment #7 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-20 12:48 ---
testcase works after PR31146 fix
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 31146 ***
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-20 12:48 ---
*** Bug 30864 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-21 09:05 ---
both are caused by our well known offender -fivopts.
the problem why the existing workarounds don't work is because the adress is
first converted to unsigned int before +/- modification is done. the trav
--- Comment #4 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-21 14:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=13242)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13242&action=view)
patch
this is the patch I'm currently testing. would be nice if you could confirm
that this is
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31227
--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 21:09 ---
Subject: Bug 31227
Author: mueller
Date: Wed Apr 18 21:09:21 2007
New Revision: 123958
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123958
Log:
2007-04-18 Dirk Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&
--- Comment #7 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 21:10 ---
Fixed in 4.3.
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #4 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-20 11:13 ---
ping.. any results?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32756
--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-20 12:43 ---
I`d be happy to help with testing :)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32756
2 regression] -fvisibility=hidden not working after
including STL headers
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-11 22:37 ---
I can confirm it as well
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-11 22:39 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 32470 ***
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-11 22:39 ---
*** Bug 33399 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #22 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-25 07:59
---
there is currently no good way to detect if a block is dead during the VRP
pass, as the VRP information is used for *determining* wether or not a block is
dead.
Is there a general warning-queuing implementation
.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: i686-suse-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35135
--- Comment #4 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-12 17:18 ---
new testcase:
-O2 -fno-gcse -fomit-frame-pointer
=== Cut ===
__extension__ typedef unsigned long long int uint64_t;
typedef unsigned int target_ulong;
register struct CPUX86State *env asm ("ebp")
--- Comment #3 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-12 16:31 ---
the original code uses -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-gcse -O2. I can verify that
-O3 fixes the issue.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35135
--- Comment #7 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-29 13:57 ---
how about
extern "C" void abort();
extern "C" { static int i; }
int *p = &i;
int main()
{
int i;
{
extern int i;
i = 1;
*p = 2;
if (i == 2)
abort ();
}
r
Version: 4.1.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet:
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: i686-suse-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32135
--- Comment #5 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-30 22:46 ---
is it okay that was_readonly will eventually turn on TREE_READONLY()
afterwards?
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-31 09:06 ---
PR 31806 is not fixed by this, and it contains a reference type.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31809
--- Comment #8 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 15:02 ---
testcase works with gcc 3.4 and gcc 3.3
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-08 21:48 ---
Subject: Bug 31806
Author: mueller
Date: Fri Jun 8 21:48:34 2007
New Revision: 125580
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125580
Log:
2007-06-08 Dirk Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #10 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-08 21:48
---
Subject: Bug 31809
Author: mueller
Date: Fri Jun 8 21:48:34 2007
New Revision: 125580
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125580
Log:
2007-06-08 Dirk Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #10 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-14 23:12
---
Subject: Bug 31806
Author: mueller
Date: Thu Jun 14 23:12:25 2007
New Revision: 125726
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125726
Log:
2007-06-14 Dirk Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #11 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-20 16:27
---
Subject: Bug 31806
Author: mueller
Date: Wed Jun 20 16:27:23 2007
New Revision: 125887
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125887
Log:
2007-06-20 Dirk Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #11 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-20 16:27
---
Subject: Bug 31809
Author: mueller
Date: Wed Jun 20 16:27:23 2007
New Revision: 125887
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125887
Log:
2007-06-20 Dirk Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #12 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-20 16:28
---
Fixed.
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #12 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-20 16:28
---
Fixed
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-13 11:10 ---
unfortunately setting TREE_NO_WARNING on the synthesized delete[] parameters
does not help because it is lost during middle end folding
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32546
--- Comment #1 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-13 11:05 ---
this is yet another case of the middle end folding memory arithmetics back into
an array ref that is out of bounds:
operator delete [] ((void *) A + 0xfffc);
(from orig dump)
later it is:
D
ong ambiguous overload error?
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.
--- Comment #1 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-14 07:33 ---
this was introduced by the following patch:
2007-05-30 Russell Yanofsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Pedro Lamarao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-14 10:00 ---
Created an attachment (id=13914)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13914&action=view)
patch
the following patch moves the change of ranking described in the working draft
under a "di
++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34111
--- Comment #1 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-15 16:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=14559)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14559&action=view)
the preprocessed source
.ii file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34111
--- Comment #1 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-15 18:21 ---
temp_stack.reg[i_90] is the access, compare_for_stack_reg is the function,
and i_90 has the VRP determined range [-1, 2147483646].
it shouldn't warn for that. I'll work on a patch.
--
mueller at g
--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-15 23:17 ---
reduced testcase:
class QChar
{
};
struct QString
{
QString(QChar);
};
struct QPainter
{
void drawText (int x, int y, const QString &);
};
class KHEChar:public QChar
{
public:KHEChar (QCh
--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-16 11:37 ---
workaround:
--- reg-stack.c (revision 130198)
+++ reg-stack.c (working copy)
@@ -925,7 +925,7 @@ swap_to_top (rtx insn, stack regstack, r
/* Place operand 1 at the top of stack. */
regno = get_hard_regnum
--- Comment #4 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-22 22:34 ---
thanks for the analysis. I would go for a slightly more verbose version of the
same patch:
--- gcc/tree-vrp.c (revision 130297)
+++ gcc/tree-vrp.c (working copy)
@@ -4339,7 +4339,7 @@ check_array_ref
--- Comment #6 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-22 22:40 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 34197 ***
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-22 22:40 ---
*** Bug 32546 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
1 - 100 of 179 matches
Mail list logo
