--- Comment #5 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 19:40 ---
Please open a separate bug if you still experience build problems. This one
(problem with generated assembler when compiling Ada code) should be closed as
it has been resolved by yourself.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 19:56 ---
>From what I understand:
- "access T1" is an access_definition and thus a general access type (RM
3.10(12/2))
- "Y'Access" is of the type of its context, which should be a general
--- Comment #3 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 19:59 ---
Lowering priority: opened more than 4 years ago, concerns Ada 83, pathological
case.
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.4.0 20081021 (experimental) (x86_64-unknown-linux
--- Comment #10 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 20:13 ---
Lowering priority, 3 years without feedback despite a new request 7 months ago.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 20:15 ---
This is fixed in GCC 4.4.0 and gives the expected error.
GNAT 4.4.0 20081116 (experimental)
Copyright 1992-2008, Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Compiling: three.adb (source file time stamp: 2008-11-17 20:14:51
--- Comment #5 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 20:28 ---
% gcc -c x-toolkit.adb
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.4.0 20081116 (experimental) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Assert_Failure
atree.adb:886|
| Error detected at x
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 21:13 ---
This check is still present in the sources, albeit now using
CROSS_DIRECTORY_STRUCTURE.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 21:16 ---
The proposed fix has been withheld by Robert Dewar who was not entirely
satisfied by the proposed solution and proposed to send an alternate fix.
Unassigning and lowering priority (the only issue is the error message
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-05 09:02 ---
This bug has been fixed already in GCC 4.4.0.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
ic
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37038
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-06 14:49 ---
(read "the line containing 'Val", not "'Pos")
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37038
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-06 15:39 ---
The warning comes from a range check which is emitted by Gigi. The backend
knows that this check is useless, and warns about it. As far as I can tell,
there is no way to suppress the warning in shorten_compare (c
--- Comment #4 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-06 16:57 ---
Andrew, you're right, I got confused by the build_binary_op() which is present
both in ada/gcc-interface/utils2.c and c-typeck.c, and that the warning appears
as is in c-common.c.
The warning is likely to come
--- Comment #6 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-10 20:30 ---
Subject: Re: Bogus warning from GCC
>> The warning is likely to come from tree-vrp.c.
> The only place which emits this warning is from c-common.c so I
> think someone needs to debug this a little b
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-13 10:59 ---
Subject: Bug 36777
Author: sam
Date: Wed Aug 13 10:57:43 2008
New Revision: 139051
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=139051
Log:
gcc/ada/
PR ada/36777
* sem_
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-13 11:01 ---
This bug has been fixed in GCC SVN trunk. Thanks for the report.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-17 10:56 ---
This appears to have been fixed in SVN trunk.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-17 12:58 ---
This appears to be fixed in SVN trunk and GCC 4.3.1.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #5 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-17 13:19 ---
This appears to be fixed in SVN trunk.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-17 13:22 ---
This appears to be fixed in GCC 4.3.1.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-17 14:29 ---
This appears to have been fixed in GCC 4.3.1.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-18 09:00 ---
Subject: Bug 15808
Author: sam
Date: Mon Aug 18 08:58:58 2008
New Revision: 139190
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=139190
Log:
gcc/ada/
PR ada/15808
* sem
--- Comment #4 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-18 09:10 ---
This has been fixed in SVN trunk.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-18 09:10 ---
Subject: Bug 30827
Author: sam
Date: Mon Aug 18 09:09:24 2008
New Revision: 139192
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=139192
Log:
2008-08-18 Samuel Tardieu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #3 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-18 09:10 ---
Fixed in SVN trunk.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-18 09:49 ---
This may be a duplicate of PR 34598.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: arm-elf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37283
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-29 20:37 ---
Created an attachment (id=16166)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16166&action=view)
crtstuff.s produced by GCC
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37283
--- Comment #3 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-29 22:53 ---
Right. There are two problems indeed, fix is being tested.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-29 23:46 ---
I think the fix is wrong: when optimization_options() is called, user options
have not been processed yet. It is likely that section anchors are always
disabled by this change.
The patch for PR37283 at
http
--- Comment #4 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-30 13:45 ---
Subject: Bug 37283
Author: sam
Date: Sat Aug 30 13:44:22 2008
New Revision: 139803
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=139803
Log:
gcc/
PR target/37283
* config/a
--- Comment #5 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 16:24 ---
Subject: Bug 37283
Author: sam
Date: Tue Sep 2 16:23:29 2008
New Revision: 139892
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=139892
Log:
gcc/
PR target/37283
* opts.c (decode
--- Comment #6 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 16:25 ---
This is fixed in SVN trunk.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-17 07:59 ---
Subject: Bug 21327
Author: sam
Date: Wed Sep 17 07:58:12 2008
New Revision: 140411
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140411
Log:
2008-09-17 Pascal Rigaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #6 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-17 08:00 ---
Pascal's fix committed as trivial documentation fix in SVN trunk.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-17 11:06 ---
You should sent a patch against the latest SVN trunk, so that it can be
reviewed.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-19 09:05 ---
Could you try a more recent GCC version and check whether the bug is still
present or not? It compiles fine with GCC 4.3.1 on x86_64/Debian GNU/Linux.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
nedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37602
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-20 20:08 ---
Rolf,
could you include the problematic assembler code? On i686-pc-linux-gnu, it
looks like it generates the expected code except for the bogus extra access
that I submitted as a separate bug in PR ada/37602:
_ada_b
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-21 12:23 ---
Well, in the second example I give (variable declared in the same compilation
unit), the access is optimized. What I don't get is the difference between both
cases, while the compiler does have the same informati
--- Comment #4 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-23 11:32 ---
I don't agree with your reasoning: X is not referenced. The fact that it has a
constructor should not change anything. For example, access types are
initialized to Null as well, so you could count that as a refe
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-25 13:47 ---
Kai, I didn't notice that you assigned the bug to yourself. Feel free to
followup on my mail titled "[PATCH] ada/37641: Remplace mingw
FILE_WRITE_PROPERTIES by FILE_WRITE_EA" sent to gcc-patches.
--
--- Comment #4 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-25 15:13 ---
Subject: Bug 37641
Author: sam
Date: Thu Sep 25 15:12:26 2008
New Revision: 140665
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140665
Log:
gcc/ada/
PR ada/37641
*
--- Comment #5 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-25 15:14 ---
Fixed in current SVN trunk, thanks.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-07 10:53 ---
A warning would be of no use, as it would be too late to recover the input
file. Having GCC refuse to run in this case would be great.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37775
--- Comment #7 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-09 20:39 ---
Note that this has been fixed in Boost SVN repository recently
(http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2069).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36453
--- Comment #4 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-24 08:36 ---
Confirmed with trunk, with the error signaled at another place:
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.4.0 20080223 (experimental) (i686-pc-linux-gnu) GCC error
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-24 08:40 ---
This appears to be fixed in 4.3.0 already.
GNAT 4.3.0 20080202 (experimental) [trunk revision 132072]
Copyright 1992-2007, Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Compiling: xxx/tasks.adb (source file time stamp: 2008-02-24 08
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-24 08:45 ---
Fabio,
since you already have this version of PolyORB around, could you please try a
pre-release of GCC 4.3.0 and see if this bug is still present?
Sam
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #4 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-24 09:15 ---
Still present on trunk
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.4.0 20080223 (experimental) (i686-pc-linux-gnu) Assert_Failure
atree.adb:886|
| Error detected at fp-dbs.adb:3489
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-27 11:57 ---
Fixed in SVN trunk
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #4 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-27 12:13 ---
Subject: Bug 22255
Author: sam
Date: Wed Feb 27 12:12:14 2008
New Revision: 132708
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132708
Log:
gcc/ada/
PR ada/22255
* s-fileio.adb (Re
--- Comment #5 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-27 12:13 ---
Fixed in SVN trunk
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-27 11:54 ---
Subject: Bug 34799
Author: sam
Date: Wed Feb 27 11:53:55 2008
New Revision: 132707
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132707
Log:
gcc/ada/
PR ada/34799
* sem_
--- Comment #3 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-29 16:10 ---
Tero,
your patch is similar to the one I proposed a few days ago :)
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gcc.patches/157295
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35050
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-05 08:34 ---
Confirmed on GCC 4.4.0 20080303.
I think this warning is disabled on purpose on instances because you may end up
with conditions being always true or false *in somes instances only*. And in
these cases, you certainly
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-05 08:38 ---
Also note that for the same reason, you will not get a warning from an inlined
body. See sem_warn.adb (Warn_On_Known_Condition).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35464
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-13 15:47 ---
Confirmed on trunk:
GNAT 4.4.0 20080311 (experimental)
Copyright 1992-2007, Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.4.0 20080311 (experimental
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: ada
AssignedTo: sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35886
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-09 13:38 ---
Confirmed on GCC 4.4.0 20080409.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-09 14:22 ---
Subject: Bug 28305
Author: sam
Date: Wed Apr 9 14:21:18 2008
New Revision: 134142
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134142
Log:
gcc/ada/
PR ada/28305
* sem
--- Comment #4 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-09 14:22 ---
Fixed in SVN trunk.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://g
--- Comment #3 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-17 14:28 ---
This is not a bug. The compiler really has no way to distinguish between the
following two interpretations for "Put (Get_Name (7))":
1- Get_Name (7) is a call to Get_Name with argument 7, which returns a
--- Comment #5 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-19 10:15 ---
Matthias,
I think Laurent was asking for an executable test case, which fails before your
test and succeeds after, so that it can enter the regression suite.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
Component: ada
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: i386-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39944
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-02 21:04 ---
Indeed. Closing as invalid, thanks Pierre-Nicolas.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-02 21:16 ---
The problem is still present in the trunk: datagram based streams are
meaningless in most cases.
The more I think about it, the more I think they should be removed from
GNAT.Sockets completely instead of half-fixed
--- Comment #5 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-02 21:19 ---
Reconfirmed on SVN trunk
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.5.0 20090930 (experimental) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Assert_Failure
exp_disp.adb:1363|
| Error detected at
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|sam at gcc dot gnu dot org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-02 21:25 ---
Reconfirmed on SVN trunk:
GNAT 4.5.0 20090930 (experimental)
Copyright 1992-2009, Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Compiling: p1.ads (source file time stamp: 2009-10-02 21:23:50)
2.type T1 is tagged null
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-02 21:26 ---
Reconfirmed on SVN trunk.
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.5.0 20090930 (experimental) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Program_Error
exp_disp.adb:7340 explicit raise|
| Error
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-02 21:36 ---
Still present in GCC trunk (4.5.0 20090930)
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-02 21:38 ---
Reconfirmed on SVN trunk: gcc (GCC) 4.5.0 20090930 (experimental)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37775
--- Comment #7 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-03 09:53 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> committed to trunk, 4.4 will follow.
Any news about the 4.4 commit?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41122
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-03 10:11 ---
It has been fixed on trunk by commit 134020. The fix will be in GCC 4.5.0.
2008-04-08 Javier Miranda
Robert Dewar
Ed Schonberg
[...]
(Null_Exclusion_Static_Checks): If the non
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-03 10:41 ---
This has been fixed in GCC 4.4 already.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-03 10:42 ---
This has been fixed in SVN, the fix will be in GCC 4.5.0.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-03 10:57 ---
This has been fixed in commit 149326 and will be in GCC 4.5.0.
2009-07-07 Pascal Obry
* s-osprim-mingw.adb (Get_Base_Time): Avoid infinite loop.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #3 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-03 11:01 ---
No reproducer, no answer for 4+ months, closing.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-03 11:23 ---
It is triggered if you instantiate pak1 as a pure unit:
% cat p.ads
with Pak1;
package P is new Pak1;
pragma Pure (P);
% gcc -c p.ads
p.ads:2:01: instantiation error at pak1.ads:4
p.ads:2:01: named access type not
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-03 11:24 ---
Confirmed on trunk
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.5.0 20091003 (experimental) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) GCC error: |
| in bitmap_first_set_bit, at bitmap.c:770
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-03 11:27 ---
Confirmed on SVN trunk.
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.5.0 20091003 (experimental) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Assert_Failure
atree.adb:765|
| Error detected at
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-03 11:32 ---
Wouldn't it be enough to replace ";" by "&&" between the various steps?
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|R
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-03 11:43 ---
It would help if you provided the RM reference that you think is violated here.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-03 12:55 ---
This has been fixed alreayd in SVN.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41563
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-06 07:20 ---
Subject: Bug 38333
Author: sam
Date: Tue Oct 6 07:19:54 2009
New Revision: 152486
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=152486
Log:
gcc/ada/
PR ada/38333
* sem_
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-06 07:21 ---
Subject: Bug 41383
Author: sam
Date: Tue Oct 6 07:20:53 2009
New Revision: 152487
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=152487
Log:
gcc/ada/
PR ada/41383
* a-rt
1 - 100 of 348 matches
Mail list logo
