--- Comment #7 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-21 21:53 ---
Subject: Bug 2
Author: tromey
Date: Wed May 21 21:52:57 2008
New Revision: 135740
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=135740
Log:
gcc/testsuite
PR preprocessor/2:
--- Comment #8 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-21 21:56 ---
Fixed on trunk.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-22 19:51 ---
Treelang has been removed.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-22 19:52 ---
Treelang has been removed.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-24 16:21 ---
Confirmed. This seems like a weird design to me, but my reading of the
standard text agrees with yours.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-24 18:04 ---
Testing a patch.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-30 14:25 ---
Subject: Bug 36320
Author: tromey
Date: Fri May 30 14:25:09 2008
New Revision: 136209
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=136209
Log:
gcc/testsuite
PR preprocessor/36320:
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-30 15:07 ---
Fixed on trunk.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-30 15:15 ---
Not a regression, so I'm closing it.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-06 20:23 ---
By my reading of the standard, issuing an error here is correct.
The restrictions on #elif are only lifted if it is in a skipped group.
But, in this case, it is not.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi
d when code
expanded from macro
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tromey at gcc dot gnu dot
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36479
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-14 19:48 ---
Subject: Bug 36247
Author: tromey
Date: Sat Jun 14 19:48:05 2008
New Revision: 136786
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=136786
Log:
PR java/36247:
* class.c (build_c
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-14 19:50 ---
Subject: Bug 36247
Author: tromey
Date: Sat Jun 14 19:49:45 2008
New Revision: 136787
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=136787
Log:
PR java/36247:
* class.c (build_c
--- Comment #6 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-14 19:50 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-19 15:27 ---
Confirmed; I think the analysis is correct here.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-24 18:32 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-24 18:32 ---
Subject: Bug 32198
Author: tromey
Date: Tue Jun 24 18:31:49 2008
New Revision: 137084
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=137084
Log:
PR libgcj/32198:
* tools/gnu/classpa
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-06 03:25 ---
Sorry, I somehow missed the followup comment.
>> #elif defined(BOOST_PP_ITERATION_DEPTH) && BOOST_PP_ITERATION_DEPTH() == 1
The expression has to be valid after preprocessing.
So, if BOOST_PP_ITERATIO
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-08 02:45 ---
My guess is that comment #3 is the right theory, because
this warning is issued from the front end. I did not
investigate deeply though.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36760
--- Comment #7 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-12 17:06 ---
Fixed on trunk.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-12 17:10 ---
I tried this and it is fixed on trunk.
Closing.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-12 17:18 ---
This was fixed for 4.3, and I think it unlikely that anyone will
backport the doc fix. So, I am closing this.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-12 17:19 ---
This was fixed for 4.3 and I think it unlikely that anyone will backport
the doc fix. So, I am closing this.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-18 17:32 ---
Just FYI -- this is known fallout from the patch to remove
no-unit-at-a-time. Andrew Haley is looking into it.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-21 14:36 ---
Seems like a reasonable idea to me.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-29 21:26 ---
> I don't know why line_table was changed into a pointer
It was because PCH does not know how to write structs.
I agree with your analysis; we have to save that field
across PCH loading.
--
tromey at
--- Comment #11 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-30 17:44 ---
Please ping that patch on the gcc-patches list.
Thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19541
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25934
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-30 16:37 ---
You may want to send the GC patch upstream, to the GC list.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-31 17:40 ---
Thanks for the concise report.
This abort occurs when computing a GC bitmap descriptor of a class.
What it means is that we think we've seen overlapping fields in the
class -- which is a "can't happe
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-01 18:32 ---
FWIW, some embedded users want to be able to remove ffi --
not for its own sake but because they also want to remove
the interpreter, reflection info (see David Daney's recent
proposal). It doesn't seem th
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 02:29 ---
Quick update... we debugged this a bit and found that
the field decl representing Three's superclass (the one made
by push_super_field) claims to have size 16 -- and yet
the 'b' field claims to have
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 02:45 ---
ISTR seeing this one before.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 02:47 ---
I believe this is fixed in svn.
Please reopen if it still fails.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 02:50 ---
The simplest way to solve the memory leak is to make a new structure
which holds all the data, then allocate an instance of this.
This structure can be allocated with _Jv_AllocBytes, I believe, as the
atable ought
--- Comment #7 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 21:49 ---
At least the change in push_type is wrong.
Perhaps others too, I'm looking.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26097
--- Comment #8 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 21:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=10778)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10778&action=view)
proposed patch
Please try this patch.
Thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26097
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tromey at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 22:29 ---
Testing a patch.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 22:29 ---
I played with this a bit today and I'm not able to reproduce.
Do you need special arguments to the test program?
I tried with my current 4.0.x and 4.1 builds.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org ch
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 22:36 ---
Testing a patch.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo
--- Comment #10 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 23:30 ---
Subject: Bug 26097
Author: tromey
Date: Sat Feb 4 23:30:01 2006
New Revision: 110598
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110598
Log:
PR java/26097:
* expr.c (push_type
--- Comment #11 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 23:30 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 23:34 ---
Subject: Bug 25676
Author: tromey
Date: Sat Feb 4 23:34:06 2006
New Revision: 110599
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110599
Log:
gcc/java
PR java/25676:
* bu
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 23:35 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 23:51 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 24461 ***
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-04 23:51 ---
*** Bug 25948 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tromey at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-06 21:05 ---
Testing a patch.
This may have been fixed, but it fails now.
Setting TREE_USED on the syms decl in GEN_TABLE fixes it.
But maybe that is just papering over the bug?
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #20 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-06 21:54 ---
The included xmlParserAPIs.jar and xercesImpl.jar compiled fine for
me on x86 FC4 using svn gcc 4.0.x.
So, I'm closing this.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Re
--- Comment #9 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-06 22:12 ---
This seems to have stalled.
I think my preferred solution here would be to use memcmp and
let gcc and glibc fight it out for the best implementation.
How far are we from having that be a reasonable approach
Priority: P3
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26139
--- Comment #6 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-07 18:28 ---
You can't build just the gcj bits of gcc -- you have to build the whole thing.
There are instructions on the gcc web site:
http://gcc.gnu.org/install/
BTW, thanks for the self-contained bug report. We like t
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-07 18:43 ---
Andrew pointed out on irc that we could also implement this by
installing a pointer to a "constructor" which would simply throw
the appropriate exception.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22377
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-07 19:23 ---
I looked at this a bit more.
We don't want to set TREE_USED on the itable syms decl, because
that will still cause it to be emitted, even though it is not used.
It would be preferable to not create the various
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-07 20:12 ---
Testing a patch
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-08 18:06 ---
Subject: Bug 22578
Author: tromey
Date: Wed Feb 8 18:06:11 2006
New Revision: 110759
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110759
Log:
gcc/java
PR java/22578:
* chec
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-08 18:08 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #7 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-08 18:54 ---
The regex changes are unlikely to cause big destabilization for 3 reasons:
* They are pure java
* The regex code has historically been somewhat broken, so we're unlikely
to make the situation worse
* They&#x
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-08 20:07 ---
Subject: Bug 17978
Author: tromey
Date: Wed Feb 8 20:07:29 2006
New Revision: 110763
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110763
Log:
PR libgcj/26063, PR libgcj/17978, PR libg
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-08 20:07 ---
Subject: Bug 10598
Author: tromey
Date: Wed Feb 8 20:07:29 2006
New Revision: 110763
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110763
Log:
PR libgcj/26063, PR libgcj/17978, PR libg
--- Comment #12 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-08 20:07 ---
Subject: Bug 26063
Author: tromey
Date: Wed Feb 8 20:07:29 2006
New Revision: 110763
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110763
Log:
PR libgcj/26063, PR libgcj/17978, PR libg
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-08 20:08 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-08 20:09 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #13 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-08 20:10 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-08 20:13 ---
Note that this bug may not be as severe now that we've simplified
Class marking in _Jv_MarkObj.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18086
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 19:47 ---
Fixed in svn.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 19:52 ---
Subject: Bug 26202
Author: tromey
Date: Fri Feb 10 19:52:44 2006
New Revision: 110847
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110847
Log:
Re-merged all regular expression code.
--- Comment #8 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 19:52 ---
Subject: Bug 26177
Author: tromey
Date: Fri Feb 10 19:52:44 2006
New Revision: 110847
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110847
Log:
Re-merged all regular expression code.
--- Comment #9 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 19:53 ---
Fix checked in.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26177
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 19:54 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #10 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 19:54 ---
Forgot to mark as fixed.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-11 00:41 ---
Subject: Bug 26204
Author: tromey
Date: Sat Feb 11 00:41:08 2006
New Revision: 110866
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110866
Log:
PR java/26204:
* jcf
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-11 00:42 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 22:25 ---
Marking as fixed.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-14 22:29 ---
I couldn't find any documentation for this format, so
interoperation is not easily possible.
Also this page (see bottom) indicates that we ought to try
loading the prefs provider via the service factory code:
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 20:53 ---
Testing a patch.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-01 16:01 ---
Subject: Bug 24321
Author: tromey
Date: Wed Mar 1 16:01:34 2006
New Revision: 111603
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=111603
Log:
PR java/24321:
* testsuite/libj
--- Comment #6 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-01 16:29 ---
Fix checked in to trunk.
This may be a good 4.1.1 candidate.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-01 17:13 ---
That format is used for exporting preferences to a file.
It turns out they use a variant of that for writing the
preferences to the preference store. However, how locking is
handled is undocumented. So
--- Comment #9 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-06 17:08 ---
You can read about the java programming language's requirements
for floating point here:
http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/third_edition/html/typesValues.html#4.2.3
Relevant quote:
In particular, the
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 15:16 ---
Now I think the idea in comment #3 is incorrect.
I looked at implementing it today, and I realized that
it will also cause a super() constructor call to
throw an exception.
The idea in comment #1 may still work
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 16:14 ---
It would be helpful to have a stack trace for the exception.
Or, Anthony, if you know more about the problem, could you update
this PR?
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 16:16 ---
Does this stop the build? I think this error can safely be ignored.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 16:37 ---
I'm testing a patch.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 16:58 ---
3.4.x is closed, we won't be putting any bug fixes on that branch.
(I think the next 3.4.x release will be the last one ever.)
This bug does seem to appear on the 4.0 branch.
I think I'll check in your
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 17:07 ---
Subject: Bug 26351
Author: tromey
Date: Tue Mar 7 17:07:37 2006
New Revision: 111814
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=111814
Log:
2006-03-07 fexx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
P
--- Comment #6 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 17:08 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 18:16 ---
I think this was just fixed by David Daney:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=111815
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26073
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 18:52 ---
Testing a patch.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 21:34 ---
Subject: Bug 26103
Author: tromey
Date: Tue Mar 7 21:34:46 2006
New Revision: 111819
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=111819
Log:
PR libgcj/26103:
* java/lang/ClassLoa
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 21:39 ---
Subject: Bug 26103
Author: tromey
Date: Tue Mar 7 21:39:44 2006
New Revision: 111820
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=111820
Log:
PR libgcj/26103:
* java/lang/ClassLoa
--- Comment #6 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 21:41 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 22:41 ---
I believe this was fixed a while back.
The test cases work for me with 4.1.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 22:44 ---
Testing a patch.
I think this bug report is a bit wrong, in that we don't actually
need to link the JNI library into libgcj. loadLibrary seems appropriate
here, particularly given that this code is seldom
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 22:49 ---
I tried this test case with my 4.1 build and it seemed to work fine.
opsy. gij HServer &
[1] 21044
opsy. gij HClient
READ: 224
READ: 12
opsy. java.net.SocketException: Socket Closed
at HServer$1.run (HServer.
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-07 23:00 ---
Defining these types seems ok to me.
It would be nice if there were front end documentation
explaining that front ends are required to, though.
FWIW Alexandre Oliva has a patch to bug 8620
the "other way&q
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26495
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-08 00:37 ---
I looked and as far as I can see, this bug is fixed in 4.1.
PersistentByteMap.close now throws IOException.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
1201 - 1300 of 1894 matches
Mail list logo
