[Bug tree-optimization/23948] [4.1 Regression] internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed
--- Additional Comments From bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 07:00 --- I don't know the tree-cfg bits very well, but the patch seems wrong; you are not committing the edge insertion. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23948
[Bug fortran/24008] New: gfortran too permissive about ENTRY syntax
The following testcase should issue an error in strict F95 mode: REAL FUNCTION funct() funct = 0.0 RETURN ! ENTRY enter RESULT (answer) answer = 1.0 RETURN END FUNCTION funct The f95 standard forbids ENTRY enter RESULT (answer) because Section 12.5.2.5 syntax rule R1225 says ENTRY entry-name [([dummy-argument-list]) [RESULT(result-name)]] which would require at least ENTRY enter() RESULT (answer) The Portland and Lahey compilers indeed reject that code. -- Summary: gfortran too permissive about ENTRY syntax Product: gcc Version: 4.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority: P2 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24008
[Bug tree-optimization/23948] [4.1 Regression] internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed
--- Additional Comments From bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 07:09 --- I have a patch but it only works in the -fno-trapping-math case. Given that trapping math is much more complex, that the code quality improves for -ftrapping-math, and that we are late in the development of 4.1, I'll probably punt and disable the optimization for -ftrapping-math. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23948
[Bug libstdc++/22205] [4.1 Regression] errors debug mode on aix
--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 08:16 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22205
[Bug libstdc++/22222] New Tru64 UNIX libstdc++ testsuite failures: #warning debug mode disabled due to lack of weak symbol support
--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 08:16 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
[Bug libstdc++/21674] basic_string vs debug_mode
--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 08:27 --- Hey Paolo. I consider this fixed for mainline. I don't want to port this to gcc-4_0-branch. First of all, this isn't a regression since debug mode was introduced in 3.4 and refined in 4.0.x, but is essentially the same. In addition, this turned out to be a messy area. Fixing this took a lot, including the header work to remove cassert and moving all those patches over to the stable branch is more movement and change than I feel comfortable with. So, permission to change to WONTFIX for gcc-4_0-branch and leave as fixed for gcc-4.1.0? -benjamin -- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21674
[Bug tree-optimization/24001] Simple redundancy not eliminated
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 08:31 --- load-pre should sink the load and fix the problem at the tree level. GCSE does it at rtl level for both -O2 and -Os on i686, so maybe costs on alpha are weird enough to prevent it from doing its work at -O2? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24001
[Bug ada/23788] s-taprop.adb:69:06: warning: cannot depend on "Interrupt_Operations" (wrong categorization)
--- Additional Comments From charlet at adacore dot com 2005-09-22 08:34 --- Subject: Re: s-taprop.adb:69:06: warning: cannot depend on "Interrupt_Operations" (wrong categorization) > This bug is also present on the 4.0 branch. This is a regression > from 4.0.0 Could you double check ? I cannot see how this is possible, since the 4.0 branch hasn't been modified in this area at all. The regression is very recent and HEAD only AFAIK. The patch is fine BTW, feel free to commit it (I'll do it when I get a chance otherwise). Arno -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23788
[Bug libstdc++/21674] basic_string vs debug_mode
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-09-22 08:49 --- Sure! And thanks a lot for your concise and very effective fix! -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21674
[Bug libstdc++/23956] Class __mt_alloc overexerts __policy_type::_S_get_pool
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 08:49 --- Subject: Bug 23956 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-22 08:48:33 Modified files: libstdc++-v3 : ChangeLog libstdc++-v3/include/ext: mt_allocator.h Log message: 2005-09-21 Guillaume Melquiond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR libstdc++/23956 * include/ext/mt_allocator.h: Remove excess policy_type::_S_get_pool calls in constructors. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.3110&r2=1.3111 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/mt_allocator.h.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.48&r2=1.49 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23956
[Bug libstdc++/23956] Class __mt_alloc overexerts __policy_type::_S_get_pool
--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 08:50 --- in on mainline, queued for 4.0.3 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23956
[Bug libstdc++/21674] basic_string vs debug_mode
--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 08:58 --- This is WONTFIX for 4.0.x, but is fixed in 4.1.x and later. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21674
[Bug ada/23788] s-taprop.adb:69:06: warning: cannot depend on "Interrupt_Operations" (wrong categorization)
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 10:29 --- Subject: Bug 23788 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-22 10:28:17 Modified files: gcc/ada: ChangeLog s-tpinop.ads Log message: 2005-09-16 Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR ada/23788 * s-tpinop.ads: Make this unit Preelaborate. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ada/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.684&r2=1.685 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ada/s-tpinop.ads.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.9&r2=1.10 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23788
[Bug c++/24009] New: [4.1 regression] C++ fails to print #include stack
For the following program #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 1 #include g++ issues the following error message: /gcc-current/bin/../lib/gcc/i386-unknown-freebsd5.4/4.1.0/../../../../include/c++/4.1.0/cwchar:166: error: '::vfwscanf' has not been declared /gcc-current/bin/../lib/gcc/i386-unknown-freebsd5.4/4.1.0/../../../../include/c++/4.1.0/cwchar:170: error: '::vswscanf' has not been declared /gcc-current/bin/../lib/gcc/i386-unknown-freebsd5.4/4.1.0/../../../../include/c++/4.1.0/cwchar:174: error: '::vwscanf' has not been declared /gcc-current/bin/../lib/gcc/i386-unknown-freebsd5.4/4.1.0/../../../../include/c++/4.1.0/cwchar:191: error: '::wcstof' has not been declared This bug report is _not_ about the specific error messages as such, but about the fact that g++ fails to provide the full #include stack, that is, a) the name of the file compiled, and b) the name of all the #include files involved which led to this. Contrast this with the corresponding diagnosis from GCC 3.4: In file included from /usr/include/c++/3.4/bits/postypes.h:46, from /usr/include/c++/3.4/iosfwd:50, from /usr/include/c++/3.4/ios:44, from /usr/include/c++/3.4/ostream:45, from /usr/include/c++/3.4/iostream:45, from x.cc:3: /usr/include/c++/3.4/cwchar:166: error: `::vfwscanf' has not been declared /usr/include/c++/3.4/cwchar:170: error: `::vswscanf' has not been declared /usr/include/c++/3.4/cwchar:174: error: `::vwscanf' has not been declared /usr/include/c++/3.4/cwchar:191: error: `::wcstof' has not been declared which is much more useful. -- Summary: [4.1 regression] C++ fails to print #include stack Product: gcc Version: 4.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: gerald at pfeifer dot com CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24009
[Bug libstdc++/23978] tr1::tie doesn't work with std::pair
--- Additional Comments From chris at bubblescope dot net 2005-09-22 10:49 --- Ah ha, found the problem. tuple has a copy constructor for std::pair, but not an operator=(std::pair). It should. I'll prepare a patch. While I'm at fixing this, there are quite a lot of functions (make_tuple, ref, cref, tie) that should really be marked inline, and aren't. I'll fix that at the same time. -- What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23978
[Bug pch/13675] #including a precompiled header more than once in the same unit fails
--- Additional Comments From a dot darovskikh at compassplus dot ru
2005-09-22 10:54 ---
The same problem stays unresolved in GCC-3.4.4
My test is:
$ cat header1.h
$ cat header2.h
#include "header1.h"
$ cat test.cpp
#include "header1.h"
#include "header2.h"
main()
{
}
$g++ -x c++ -c header1.h
g++ test.cpp
In file included from test.cpp:2:
header2.h:1:21: calling fdopen: Bad file descriptor
test.cpp:4: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13675
[Bug tree-optimization/22438] [4.1 Regression] ICE SEGV in is_gimple_variable at tree-gimple.c:239
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 11:24 --- Subject: Bug 22438 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-22 11:24:01 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c Log message: PR tree-optimization/22438 * tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c (rewrite_use_nonlinear_expr): Handle all preserved iv rhs rewriting specially. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.10001&r2=2.10002 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.88&r2=2.89 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22438
[Bug c/24010] New: Duplicate dot initializer warning
Compiling a program like this with -Wall doesn't generate a warning, even
though the result very likely is not intended:
struct s {
int a;
};
struct s s = {
.a = 5,
.a = 6,
};
Can a duplicate initializers warning please be added? Thank you!
--
Summary: Duplicate dot initializer warning
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: agruen at suse dot de
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24010
[Bug c/24010] Duplicate C99 dot initializer warning missing
-- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||diagnostic Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-09-22 12:50:28 date|| Summary|Duplicate dot initializer |Duplicate C99 dot |warning |initializer warning missing http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24010
[Bug target/19161] No emms or femms emitted between MMX and FP instructions
--- Additional Comments From pluto at agmk dot net 2005-09-22 13:10 ---
Uros,
The mode switching patch ICEs current mainline on ix86.
gcc fbmmx.i -msse -O0,-O1 fails with different insn-errors.
[ -msse -O0 ]
fbmmx.c: In function
‘_cairo_pixman_composite_src_add_8000x8000mmx’:
fbmmx.c:2169: error: unable to find a register to spill in class
‘MMX_REGS’
fbmmx.c:2169: error: this is the insn:
(insn 174 172 175 7 (set (reg:V8QI 59 [ D.8903 ])
(mem/c/i:V8QI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 20 frame)
(const_int -16 [0xfff0])) [0 __m2+0 S8 A32])) 776
{*movv8qi_internal} (nil)
(nil))
fbmmx.c:2169: internal compiler error: in spill_failure, at reload1.c:1890
[ -msse -O1 ]
fbmmx.c: In function
‘_cairo_pixman_composite_src_add_8000x8000mmx’:
fbmmx.c:2169: error: unable to find a register to spill in class
‘MMX_REGS’
fbmmx.c:2169: error: this is the insn:
(insn 166 165 169 9 (set (reg:V8QI 167)
(us_plus:V8QI (mem:V8QI (reg/v/f:SI 4 si [orig:120 src ] [120]) [0 S8
A64])
(mem:V8QI (reg/v/f:SI 2 cx [orig:122 dst ] [122]) [0 S8 A64])))
812 {mmx_usaddv8qi3} (nil)
(nil))
fbmmx.c:2169: internal compiler error: in spill_failure, at reload1.c:1890
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19161
[Bug target/23988] ICE / spill_failure, at reload1.c:1890
--- Additional Comments From pluto at agmk dot net 2005-09-22 13:15 --- You're right, the mainline is ok. This bug is related to PR19161. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23988
[Bug target/15397] [3.4 only] [g77] c float function called from fortran gives wrong result
--- Additional Comments From kmccarty at princeton dot edu 2005-09-22 14:17 --- Could anyone find out whether this g77 bug applies to other 64-bit Linux architectures as well as AMD64? I'm thinking of Alpha, Itanium, S390x, and 64-bit PowerPC and SPARC. Thanks in advance for any such information, especially on the first two of these. -- What|Removed |Added CC||kmccarty at princeton dot ||edu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15397
[Bug target/24007] very weird register allocation, putting a fp in the ctr register
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 15:04 --- Subject: Bug 24007 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-22 15:03:35 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/config/rs6000: rs6000.md Log message: PR target/24007 * config/rs6000/rs6000.md (movsf_hardfloat): Ignore special registers when choosing register preferences. (movdf_hardfloat): Same. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.10003&r2=2.10004 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.md.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.409&r2=1.410 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24007
[Bug c++/24009] [4.0/4.1 regression] C++ fails to print #include stack
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 15:04 --- Confirmed, 4.0.0 have the same issue. To reproduce this on i686-pc-linux-gnu use cc1 directly so _GNU_SOURCE is not defined or undefine it in the source or invoke gcc as g++ t.cc -U_GNU_SOURCE the C front-end works still too. I am thinking this comes from the tokenize before parsing start parsing. -- What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Known to fail||4.0.0 4.1.0 Known to work||3.4.0 Summary|[4.1 regression] C++ fails |[4.0/4.1 regression] C++ |to print #include stack |fails to print #include ||stack Target Milestone|--- |4.0.2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24009
[Bug c++/24011] New: ambiguous overload reported for no obvious reason
// Barebones code to reproduce the problem:
// Interface
namespace NS
{
template class X {};
template X operator*(const X &a, const X &b);
}
// Implementation
template
NS::Xoperator*(const NS::X &a,const NS::X &b)
{
return NS::X();
}
// Application
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
NS::X tmp = NS::X() * NS::X();
}
What I get:
-bash-3.00$ uname -a
Linux elisha.research.canon.com.au 2.6.12-1.1447_FC4smp #1 SMP Fri Aug 26
20:57:13 EDT 2005 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
-bash-3.00$ gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.0.1 20050727 (Red Hat 4.0.1-5)
Copyright (C) 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
-bash-3.00$ make strange
g++ -gstrange.cpp -o strange
strange.cpp: In function 'int main(int, char**)':
strange.cpp:19: error: ambiguous overload for 'operator*' in 'NS::X() *
NS::X()'
strange.cpp:11: note: candidates are: NS::X operator*(const NS::X&,
constNS::X&) [with T = int]
strange.cpp:6: note: NS::X NS::operator*(const NS::X&,
const NS::X&) [with T = int]
make: *** [strange] Error 1
If I place the implementation within the scope of the namespace geometry{...}
then it seems to compile fine. However the above does not appear to cause
problems using MSVC. Problem exists with gcc 3.3.2 and 3.3.4. Is this code
incorrect???
Thanks
--
Summary: ambiguous overload reported for no obvious reason
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: andre_orwell at yahoo dot com dot au
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: redhat.x86.linux
GCC host triplet: redhat.x86.linux
GCC target triplet: redhat.x86.linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24011
[Bug libstdc++/24012] New: [3.4,4.0,4,1 regression] #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE breaks #include
The following simple program fails to compile on FreeBSD 5.4: #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 1 #include g++ issues the following error message: /gcc-current/bin/../lib/gcc/i386-unknown-freebsd5.4/4.1.0/../../../../incl ude/c++/4.1.0/cwchar:166: error: '::vfwscanf' has not been declared /gcc-current/bin/../lib/gcc/i386-unknown-freebsd5.4/4.1.0/../../../../incl ude/c++/4.1.0/cwchar:170: error: '::vswscanf' has not been declared /gcc-current/bin/../lib/gcc/i386-unknown-freebsd5.4/4.1.0/../../../../incl ude/c++/4.1.0/cwchar:174: error: '::vwscanf' has not been declared /gcc-current/bin/../lib/gcc/i386-unknown-freebsd5.4/4.1.0/../../../../incl ude/c++/4.1.0/cwchar:191: error: '::wcstof' has not been declared The FreeBSD 5.4 system compiler, which basically is GCC 3.4.2, has the same issue. -- Summary: [3.4,4.0,4,1 regression] #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE breaks #include Product: gcc Version: 4.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: libstdc++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: gerald at pfeifer dot com CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC host triplet: i386-unknown-freebsd5.4 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24012
[Bug c++/24011] ambiguous overload reported for no obvious reason
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22
15:17 ---
the error message about ambiguous overload is correct as there are two
functions there.
operator* in the global namespace and operator* in the NS namespace.
You most likely wanted to implement operator* in the NS namespace and not a new
one in the global
namespace.
The following code does what you wanted to do:
// Barebones code to reproduce the problem:
// Interface
namespace NS
{
template class X {};
template X operator*(const X &a, const X &b);
}
// Implementation
template
NS::XNS::operator*(const NS::X &a,const NS::X &b)
{
return NS::X();
}
// Application
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
NS::X tmp = NS::X() * NS::X();
}
Notice how I wrote the Implementation.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution||INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24011
[Bug libstdc++/24012] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE breaks #include
-- What|Removed |Added Summary|[3.4,4.0,4,1 regression]|[3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] |#define _POSIX_C_SOURCE |#define _POSIX_C_SOURCE |breaks #include |breaks #include http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24012
[Bug target/24012] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE breaks #include
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 15:20 --- This is a target issue. The way we work around this on GNU/Linux is that we define _GNU_SOURCE all the time. -- What|Removed |Added Component|libstdc++ |target GCC host triplet|i386-unknown-freebsd5.4 | GCC target triplet||i386-unknown-freebsd5.4 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24012
[Bug tree-optimization/22438] [4.1 Regression] ICE SEGV in is_gimple_variable at tree-gimple.c:239
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 15:25 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22438
[Bug libstdc++/24013] New: [3.4,4.0,4,1 regression] #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE breaks #include
The following simple program fails to compile on FreeBSD 5.4: #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 1 #include g++ issues the following error message: /gcc-current/bin/../lib/gcc/i386-unknown-freebsd5.4/4.1.0/../../../../incl ude/c++/4.1.0/cwchar:166: error: '::vfwscanf' has not been declared /gcc-current/bin/../lib/gcc/i386-unknown-freebsd5.4/4.1.0/../../../../incl ude/c++/4.1.0/cwchar:170: error: '::vswscanf' has not been declared /gcc-current/bin/../lib/gcc/i386-unknown-freebsd5.4/4.1.0/../../../../incl ude/c++/4.1.0/cwchar:174: error: '::vwscanf' has not been declared /gcc-current/bin/../lib/gcc/i386-unknown-freebsd5.4/4.1.0/../../../../incl ude/c++/4.1.0/cwchar:191: error: '::wcstof' has not been declared The FreeBSD 5.4 system compiler, which basically is GCC 3.4.2, has the same issue. -- Summary: [3.4,4.0,4,1 regression] #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE breaks #include Product: gcc Version: 4.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: libstdc++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: gerald at pfeifer dot com CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC host triplet: i386-unknown-freebsd5.4 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24013
[Bug libstdc++/24013] [3.4,4.0,4,1 regression] #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE breaks #include
-- What|Removed |Added CC||rittle at latour dot rsch ||dot comm dot mot dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24013
[Bug libstdc++/24013] [3.4,4.0,4,1 regression] #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE breaks #include
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 15:37 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 24012 *** -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24013
[Bug target/24012] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE breaks #include
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 15:37 --- *** Bug 24013 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24012
[Bug c++/24014] New: casting int to double with got wrong result
I've written an macro for log2 calculation to calculate the exponent of
one value.
Than I cast this value to from double to int.
The 2 values double and int differs.
example:
log2(8) should be 3 but after casting to int its 2.
This bug could be reproduced on 2 different linux distributions (Debian
GNU/Linux and Fedora Core 2) with different compiler versions.
Environment:
System: Linux lux 2.6.9 #2 Tue Dec 28 22:27:56 CET 2004 i686 GNU/Linux
Architecture: i686
host: i486-pc-linux-gnu
build: i486-pc-linux-gnu
target: i486-pc-linux-gnu
configured with: ../src/configure -v
--enable-languages=c,c++,java,f77,pascal,objc,ada,treelang --prefix=/usr
--mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info
--with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/3.3 --enable-shared
--enable-__cxa_atexit --with-system-zlib --enable-nls
--without-included-gettext --enable-clocale=gnu --enable-debug
--enable-java-gc=boehm --enable-java-awt=xlib --enable-objc-gc i486-linux
How-To-Repeat:
use this code to reproduce it
--- code ---
#include
#include
#define log2(val) (log((val))/log(2.0))
int main()
{
int n1=log2(8);
double d1=log2(8);
printf("%d %f\n",n1,d1);
return 0;
}
--- end ---
--- Additional Comments From u dot strempel at gmx dot de 2005-09-22 15:44
---
Fix:
For workaround I implemented a function for log2.
--
Summary: casting int to double with got wrong result
Product: gcc
Version: 3.3.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P2
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: u dot strempel at gmx dot de
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i486-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i486-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i486-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24014
[Bug c++/24014] casting int to double with got wrong result
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 15:48 --- This is really not a bug. This is a dup of 323. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 323 *** -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24014
[Bug rtl-optimization/323] optimized code gives strange floating point results
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 15:48 --- *** Bug 24014 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||u dot strempel at gmx dot de http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323
[Bug target/24012] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE breaks #include
-- What|Removed |Added CC||rittle at latour dot waar ||dot labs dot mot dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24012
[Bug rtl-optimization/23043] [4.1 regression] [m68k-linux] bootstrap error on m68k-linux
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 15:58 --- Subject: Bug 23043 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Branch: gcc-4_0-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-22 15:57:49 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog postreload-gcse.c Log message: PR rtl-optimization/23043 * postreload-gcse.c (eliminate_partially_redundant_load): Fix typo when allocating a struct unoccr. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=2.7592.2.433&r2=2.7592.2.434 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/postreload-gcse.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=2.9&r2=2.9.10.1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23043
[Bug rtl-optimization/23043] [4.1 regression] [m68k-linux] bootstrap error on m68k-linux
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 16:06 --- I applied this patch to the 4.0 branch. -- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.1.0 |4.0.2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23043
[Bug c/24015] New: Wrong code generated when using optimizer
gcc produces wrong code when optimizer (O1 O2 or O3) is used. The c-source showing the problem is generated by the flex lexical scanner. Applies to gcc versions 3.0.4, 3.3.5 and 3.4.4 (and maybe others not tested). Tested on Debian/Intel platforms only. On gcc 2.95 and multiple former versions of gcc, the problem does not occur. -- Summary: Wrong code generated when using optimizer Product: gcc Version: 3.4.4 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: buergel at limmat dot ch CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: i486-pc-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: i486-pc-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: i486-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24015
[Bug middle-end/24015] Wrong code generated when using optimizer
-- What|Removed |Added Severity|critical|normal Component|c |middle-end Keywords||wrong-code http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24015
[Bug middle-end/24015] Wrong code generated when using optimizer
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 16:26 --- Of course, we cannot guess what the issue is from your description. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24015
[Bug middle-end/24015] Wrong code generated when using optimizer
--- Additional Comments From buergel at limmat dot ch 2005-09-22 16:28 --- Created an attachment (id=9792) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9792&action=view) Testcase. Unpack and make reproduces the bug Testcase requires flex (>= 2.5.4) lexical scanner to be installed -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24015
[Bug c++/21983] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] multiple diagnostics
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 16:35 --- Subject: Bug 21983 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-22 16:34:59 Modified files: gcc/cp : ChangeLog class.c gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog Added files: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn: pr21983.C Log message: PR c++/21983 * class.c (find_final_overrider): Move diagnostic about no unique final overrider to... (update_vtable_entry_for_fn): ... here. * g++.dg/warn/pr21983.C: New test. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.4900&r2=1.4901 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/class.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.732&r2=1.733 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.6095&r2=1.6096 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/pr21983.C.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21983
[Bug middle-end/24015] Wrong code generated when using optimizer
--- Additional Comments From buergel at limmat dot ch 2005-09-22 16:39 --- >How-To-Repeat: Unpack the attached archive, cd showbug, make. It will first compile the program, then process and display some test data. Prerequisites: You must have the flex lexical parser installed for this to work Expected behavior: Some HTML code shows up like ... Actual behavior: The HTML appears crippled, the first character of many tags is missing, e.g. HTML ang="it"> BODY> ... >Fix: No fix is known to me, workaround is -O0 or using gcc 2.95 -- What|Removed |Added Known to fail||3.0.4 3.3.5 3.4.4 Known to work||2.95 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24015
[Bug middle-end/24015] Wrong code generated when using optimizer
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 16:40 --- html_purify.l:24: warning: operation on `data' may be undefined -- What|Removed |Added Known to fail|3.0.4 3.3.5 3.4.4 | Known to work|2.95| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24015
[Bug middle-end/24015] Wrong code generated when using optimizer
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22
16:43 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> html_purify.l:24: warning: operation on `data' may be undefined
Does fixing that line help?
It should look like:
static void strtolower(char *data) { while (*data != '\0') { *data =
tolower(*data); data++;} }
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24015
[Bug middle-end/24015] Wrong code generated when using optimizer
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 17:04 --- >From the private email: Hello and thanks for the quick answer! Yes it does! But: I am not getting the warning: operation on `data' may be undefined when using gcc 3.4.4 and -Wall. So how could I (and someone else) find this type of error? Regards Friede PS: Wow! Never received an answer that fast! -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24015
[Bug middle-end/24015] Wrong code generated when using optimizer
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22
17:06 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Hello and thanks for the quick answer! Yes it does! But: I am not getting the
> warning: operation on `data' may be undefined
>
> when using gcc 3.4.4 and -Wall.
Try at -O0, glibc changes tolower to a macro which causes issues with the
warning, I will file another
bug about that soon.
The short testcase for your issue would be:
#include
void strtolower(char *data) { while (*data != '\0') *data++ = tolower(*data); }
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 11751 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution||DUPLICATE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24015
[Bug c/11751] wrong evaluation order of an expression
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 17:07 --- *** Bug 24015 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||buergel at limmat dot ch http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11751
[Bug c/24016] New: Missing "operation on xxx may be undefined" on obvious undefined code
Take the following example:
void f(int *a)
{
*a++ = __extension__ ({ int bb = *a; bb; });
}
---
We don't warn for the operation on a. This is most likely we don't look into a
BLOCK or a statement list,
I don't know which one. If I remove the declation of bb, it works, so I am
going to assume we don't
look into BLOCKs.
This was reduced from the following code with glibc and -O1:
#include
void strtolower(char *data) { while (*data != '\0') *data++ = tolower(*data); }
--
Summary: Missing "operation on xxx may be undefined" on obvious
undefined code
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24016
[Bug middle-end/23991] [4.1 Regression]: Gcc failed to build on ia64
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-09-22 17:14 --- Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression]: Gcc failed to build on ia64 Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >>2005-09-21 J"orn Rennecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> * final.c (get_attr_length_1): In !HAVE_ATTR_length case, define as >> macro. Don't attach ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED to arguments. >> (get_attr_length, get_attr_min_length): Add ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED. >> >> > >Ick, don't do that. Suppose you just #define insn_default_length and >insn_min_length as macros ifndef HAVE_ATTR_length. > >Ian > > Do you like the attached patch better? 2005-09-22 J"orn Rennecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * final.c (insn_default_length, insn_min_length): In !HAVE_ATTR_length case, define as macros. Index: final.c === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/final.c,v retrieving revision 1.361 diff -p -r1.361 final.c *** final.c 20 Sep 2005 21:48:36 - 1.361 --- final.c 22 Sep 2005 17:10:14 - *** get_attr_length_1 (rtx insn ATTRIBUTE_UN *** 443,448 --- 443,450 return length; #else /* not HAVE_ATTR_length */ return 0; + #define insn_default_length 0 + #define insn_min_length 0 #endif /* not HAVE_ATTR_length */ } -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23991
[Bug c/24016] Missing "operation on xxx may be undefined" on obvious undefined code
--- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com 2005-09-22
17:24 ---
Subject: Re: New: Missing "operation on xxx may be undefined"
on obvious undefined code
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> Take the following example:
> void f(int *a)
> {
> *a++ = __extension__ ({ int bb = *a; bb; });
> }
I'm not convinced this is undefined: statement expressions act like
(inline) function calls for the purpose of sequence point rules so the
execution of the statement expression suspends the execution of the rest
of the surrounding expression and there are sequence points at the
beginning and end of the statement expression.
It is, however, at least unspecified order of evaluation and a warning
here would still make sense.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24016
[Bug java/24018] New: [meta-bug] Patches that should be applied to 4.0 branch
This is a tracker for Java patches that should be appled to 4.0 branch, once it thaws after the 4.0.2 release. Please add PR fixes as dependencies, and for other patches link to their URLs in a comment. -- Summary: [meta-bug] Patches that should be applied to 4.0 branch Product: gcc Version: 4.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: meta-bug Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: java AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: mckinlay at redhat dot com CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24018
[Bug java/24018] [meta-bug] Patches that should be applied to 4.0 branch
--- Additional Comments From mckinlay at redhat dot com 2005-09-22 17:28 --- PR 23891 fix. This is required to build ECJ. -- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||23891 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-09-22 17:28:55 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24018
[Bug java/24018] [meta-bug] Patches that should be applied to 4.0 branch
--- Additional Comments From mckinlay at redhat dot com 2005-09-22 17:30 --- Patch to fix classloader deadlock. Needed for Jonas. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2005-q3/msg00412.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24018
[Bug java/24018] [meta-bug] Patches that should be applied to 4.0 branch
--- Additional Comments From mckinlay at redhat dot com 2005-09-22 17:34 --- PR 21418. Needed to build classpath reliably. -- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||21418 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24018
[Bug rtl-optimization/23837] [4.0/4.1 regression] Wrong code with -fschedule-insns
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-09-22 17:37 --- Subject: RFA: fix PR 23837 (Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] Wrong code with -fschedule-insns) I have regtested the attached patch on i686-pc-linux-gnu in mainline from 2005-09-19 18:00 UTC. 2005-09-22 J"orn Rennecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR rtl-optimization/23837 * optabs.c (no_conflict_move_test): Don't set must_stay for a clobber / clobber match between dest and p->first. Index: optabs.c === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/optabs.c,v retrieving revision 1.291 diff -p -r1.291 optabs.c *** optabs.c15 Sep 2005 21:51:13 - 1.291 --- optabs.c22 Sep 2005 17:31:13 - *** no_conflict_move_test (rtx dest, rtx set *** 3021,3027 return; /* If this insn sets / clobbers a register that feeds one of the insns already in the list, this insn has to stay too. */ ! else if (reg_mentioned_p (dest, PATTERN (p->first)) || reg_used_between_p (dest, p->first, p->insn) /* Likewise if this insn depends on a register set by a previous insn in the list. */ --- 3021,3028 return; /* If this insn sets / clobbers a register that feeds one of the insns already in the list, this insn has to stay too. */ ! else if (reg_overlap_mentioned_p (dest, PATTERN (p->first)) ! || (CALL_P (p->first) && (find_reg_fusage (p->first, USE, dest))) || reg_used_between_p (dest, p->first, p->insn) /* Likewise if this insn depends on a register set by a previous insn in the list. */ -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23837
[Bug java/24018] [meta-bug] Patches that should be applied to 4.0 branch
--- Additional Comments From mckinlay at redhat dot com 2005-09-22 17:39 --- PR 23182. Fixes a miscompilation affecting Eclipse. -- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||23182 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24018
[Bug libgcj/23182] instanceof sometimes fails if compiled with -findirect-dispatch
-- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.0.3 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23182
[Bug java/23891] [4.0 Regression] Problem folding static fields across packages
-- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.0.2 |4.0.3 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23891
[Bug java/21418] Order of source files matters when compiling
--- Additional Comments From mckinlay at redhat dot com 2005-09-22 17:45 --- This patch should go into the 4.0 branch, once that thaws. -- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.1.0 |4.0.3 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21418
[Bug libfortran/15234] libgfortran doesn't compile on Tru64 UNIX V4.0F
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 17:50 --- (In reply to comment #30) > Can you re-submit the patch on the fortran ml for approval? ping -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15234
[Bug target/24007] very weird register allocation, putting a fp in the ctr register
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 18:33 --- Confirmed fixed. Thanks again David. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24007
[Bug c++/21983] [3.4/4.0 Regression] multiple diagnostics
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 18:36 --- Fixed for 4.1.0. -- What|Removed |Added Known to fail|3.4.0 4.0.0 4.1.0 |3.4.0 4.0.0 Known to work|3.2.3 3.0.4 2.95.3 |3.2.3 3.0.4 2.95.3 4.1.0 Summary|[3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression]|[3.4/4.0 Regression] |multiple diagnostics|multiple diagnostics http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21983
Re: [Bug tree-optimization/24001] Simple redundancy not eliminated
On Thu, 2005-09-22 at 08:31 +, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > --- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 > 08:31 --- > load-pre should sink the load and fix the problem at the tree level. Uh, load PRE doesn't sink loads, it would lift it.
[Bug tree-optimization/24001] Simple redundancy not eliminated
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 18:40 --- Subject: Re: Simple redundancy not eliminated On Thu, 2005-09-22 at 08:31 +, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > --- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 > 08:31 --- > load-pre should sink the load and fix the problem at the tree level. Uh, load PRE doesn't sink loads, it would lift it. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24001
[Bug fortran/23516] IMAG is not a generic function when implicit none is declared
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 19:00 --- Subject: Bug 23516 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-22 19:00:25 Modified files: gcc/fortran: ChangeLog intrinsic.c intrinsic.h intrinsic.texi iresolve.c simplify.c Log message: PR fortran/23516 * intrinsic.c (add_function): Add IMAG, IMAGPART, and REALPART intrinsics. * intrinsic.h: Prototypes for gfc_simplify_realpart and gfc_resolve_realpart. * intrinsic.texi: Document intrinsic procedures. * simplify.c (gfc_simplify_realpart): New function. * irseolve.c (gfc_resolve_realpart): New function. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.564&r2=1.565 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.54&r2=1.55 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.h.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.32&r2=1.33 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.texi.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.16&r2=1.17 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/iresolve.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.39&r2=1.40 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/simplify.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.31&r2=1.32 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23516
[Bug fortran/23516] IMAG is not a generic function when implicit none is declared
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 19:05 --- Subject: Bug 23516 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-22 19:04:14 Modified files: gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog Added files: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg: imag_1.f imag_2.f Log message: PR fortran/23516 * gfortran.dg/imag_1.f: New test. * gfortran.dg/imag_2.f: Ditto. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.6097&r2=1.6098 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/imag_1.f.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/imag_2.f.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23516
[Bug target/24012] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE breaks #include
--- Additional Comments From ljrittle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 19:20 --- The better way to fix this IMHO is to mirror how we fixed other conditionally missing symbols. Add a _DYNAMIC hook, add the support guards in various places where the HAVE_X guards exist, add a correctly written define in os_defines.h to describe the OS-level macro used to key the visibility of the "standard" function or other symbol. See the current FreeBSD os_defines.h for some examples. In my further opinion, this is merely a QoI issue (granted, annoying): The user defining a macro in implementor space may get this type of result. Regards, Loren -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-09-22 19:20:40 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24012
[Bug middle-end/23991] [4.1 Regression]: Gcc failed to build on ia64
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2005-09-22 19:23 --- Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression]: Gcc failed to build on ia64 Joern RENNECKE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 2005-09-22 J"orn Rennecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * final.c (insn_default_length, insn_min_length): In !HAVE_ATTR_length > case, define as macros. I do like it better. This patch is approved after testing. Thanks. Ian -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23991
[Bug c++/24009] [4.0/4.1 regression] C++ fails to print #include stack
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 19:24 --- Confirmed, reduced testcase: # 1 "t.c" # 1 "" # 1 "" # 1 "t.c" # 1 "t.h" 1 1 # 2 "t.c" 2 -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-09-22 19:24:11 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24009
[Bug ada/24019] New: Run-time error not detected, deallocating busy protected object, RM 9.4(20)
(Debian bug #329691) In the following program, the environment task deallocates a protected object while a task is busy in it. Per RM 9.4(20), the task should receive a Program_Error. In gnat 3.15p-13, gnat-3.4 3.4.3-13 and gnat-4.0 4.0.1-2, the program teminates immediately but without an exception (no output). $ gnatmake test_329691 $ ./test_329691 $ (no output, exception message expected) with Ada.Exceptions; with Ada.Text_IO; with Ada.Unchecked_Deallocation; procedure Test_329691 is protected type P is procedure E; end P; protected body P is procedure E is G : Integer; begin for K in 1 .. 10 ** 8 loop G := K - 1 + K * (1 - K); end loop; end E; end P; task type T (Prot : access P); task body T is begin Prot.E; exception when E : others => Ada.Text_IO.Put_Line (Ada.Exceptions.Exception_Information (E)); end T; type Access_T is access T; New_T : Access_T; type Access_P is access P; procedure Free is new Ada.Unchecked_Deallocation (Object => P, Name => Access_P); New_P : Access_P := new P; begin New_T := new T (New_P); Free (New_P); exception when E : others => Ada.Text_IO.Put_Line (Ada.Exceptions.Exception_Information (E)); end Test_329691; -- Summary: Run-time error not detected, deallocating busy protected object, RM 9.4(20) Product: gcc Version: 3.4.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: ada AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: ludovic at ludovic-brenta dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: i486-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: i486-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: i486-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24019
[Bug tree-optimization/19507] missed tree-optimization (constant for the rest of the function)
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 19:33 --- This is a dup of bug 13397. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 13397 *** -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19507
[Bug tree-optimization/13397] Optimizer doesn't take into account protection flags
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 19:33 --- *** Bug 19507 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at tat dot physik ||dot uni-tuebingen dot de http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13397
[Bug c/24020] New: Excessive (x20) stack usage for 4.0 with -O3
When compiling the attached program (-std=c99 -march=i486 -O?), GCC allocates the following stacks for the recursive function "f" (in bytes): GCC 3.4.5 (20050821) -O2: 16 -O3: 16 GCC 4.0.2 (20050917) -O2: 40 -O3: 360 (!) GCC 4.1.0 (20050904) -O2: 28 -O3: 28 There are only 10 local int variables in the function, so the 360-byte consumption with GCC 4.0.2 seems a bit high, with respect to the 16 bytes with GCC 3.4.5. Especially since the code actually runs 25% slower when compiled with 4.0.2 whatever the optimization level (17% with 4.1.0). -- Summary: Excessive (x20) stack usage for 4.0 with -O3 Product: gcc Version: 4.0.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: guillaume dot melquiond at ens-lyon dot fr CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC target triplet: i486-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24020
[Bug c/24020] Excessive (x20) stack usage for 4.0 with -O3
--- Additional Comments From guillaume dot melquiond at ens-lyon dot fr 2005-09-22 20:16 --- Created an attachment (id=9793) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9793&action=view) Testcase -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24020
[Bug middle-end/24020] Excessive (x20) stack usage for 4.0 with -O3
-- What|Removed |Added Component|c |middle-end http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24020
[Bug middle-end/24020] [4.0 regression] Excessive (x20) recusive inlining for 4.0 with -O3
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 20:27 --- This is just excessive recusive inlining. -- What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot ||org, hubicka at gcc dot gnu ||dot org Keywords||missed-optimization Summary|Excessive (x20) stack usage |[4.0 regression] Excessive |for 4.0 with -O3|(x20) recusive inlining for ||4.0 with -O3 Target Milestone|--- |4.0.2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24020
[Bug fortran/23516] IMAG is not a generic function when implicit none is declared
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 20:28 --- Fixed in 4.1.0. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23516
[Bug tree-optimization/24021] New: VRP does not work with floating points
Take the following example:
double BG_SplineLength ()
{
double lastPoint;
double i;
for (i = 0.01;i<=1;i+=0.1f)
if (!(i != 0.0))
{
lastPoint = i;
}
else
{
lastPoint = 2;
}
return lastPoint;
}
The loop is useless and we should remove the loop and make the function just
return 2.0;
--
Summary: VRP does not work with floating points
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24021
[Bug preprocessor/24024] New: gcc -E -C processes "\" incorrectly inside C comments
Try the following stripped-down example file: -- dummy.txt - /* Execute example with: gcc -E -P -C -x c dummy.txt a \ b \ c */ -- dummy.txt - i.e. there are continuation lines *inside* C comments. Result with GCC <= 3.4 (verified with 3.2.3, 3.3.2): /* Execute example with: gcc -E -P -C -x c dummy.txt a \ b \ c */ i.e. unchanged. Result with GCC >= 3.4 (verified with 3.4.1, 3.4.3 [RHEL4], 3.4.4, 4.0.0, 4.1-20050625): /* Execute example with: gcc -E -P -C -x c dummy.txt a b c \ c */ i.e. the lines were merged but the some of the original contents are still there! I know this is arcane but I'm using cpp to process #if's and it should leave the contents of the comments untouched as it is used by another tool down the line. I'm not so sure what the standard says about line continuation inside C comments but if the lines should be merged I would expect the following result: /* Execute example with: gcc -E -P -C -x c dummy.txt a b c */ which would be OK. -- Summary: gcc -E -C processes "\" incorrectly inside C comments Product: gcc Version: 3.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: preprocessor AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: stefan dot becker at nokia dot com CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC host triplet: i386-redhat-linux GCC target triplet: i386-redhat-linux http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24024
[Bug rtl-optimization/23898] basic block reordering excessively increases code size; get_uncond_jump_length pessimistic
--- Additional Comments From jbglaw at lug-owl dot de 2005-09-22 21:33 --- The patch that was imported two days ago seems to break architectures that don't have length defines in their MD files (eg. VAX). I haven't checked if there are other architectures affected, though... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23898
[Bug rtl-optimization/23898] basic block reordering excessively increases code size; get_uncond_jump_length pessimistic
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 21:37 --- (In reply to comment #5) > The patch that was imported two days ago seems to break architectures that > don't have length > defines in their MD files (eg. VAX). I haven't checked if there are other > architectures affected, > though... And that is PR 23991 which is about to be fixed. -- What|Removed |Added CC||jbglaw at lug-owl dot de http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23898
[Bug preprocessor/24024] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] gcc -E -C processes "\" incorrectly inside C comments
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 21:39 --- (In reply to comment #0) > I'm not so sure what the standard says about line continuation inside C > comments > but if the lines should be merged I would expect the following result: The standard says nothing about C comments except that they are ignored. Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 GCC host triplet|i386-redhat-linux | GCC target triplet|i386-redhat-linux | Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-09-22 21:39:50 date|| Summary|gcc -E -C processes "\" |[3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] gcc |incorrectly inside C|-E -C processes "\" |comments|incorrectly inside C ||comments Target Milestone|--- |4.0.2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24024
[Bug preprocessor/23779] '-C' option produces wrong output
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 21:41 --- This looks like PR 24024. -- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||24024 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23779
[Bug preprocessor/13726] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression]cpp -C -dI loses comments on same line as #include directives
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 21:41 --- I think this is related to PR 24024. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13726
[Bug fortran/23843] Access restrictions on derived types in modules too strict.
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 21:52 --- Subject: Bug 23843 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-22 21:52:09 Modified files: gcc/fortran: ChangeLog resolve.c gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog Added files: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg: der_io_2.f90 der_io_3.f90 Log message: fortran/ 2005-09-22 Erik Edelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR fortran/23843 * resolve.c (derived_inaccessible): New function. (resolve_transfer): Use it to check for private components. testsuite/ 2005-09-22 Erik Edelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tobias Schl"uter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR fortran/23843 * gfortran.dg/der_io_2.f90, gfortran.dg/der_io_3.f90: New test. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.565&r2=1.566 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/resolve.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.54&r2=1.55 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.6098&r2=1.6099 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/der_io_2.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/der_io_3.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23843
[Bug libstdc++/24025] New: libstdc++ crashes when out of memory exception thrown
In __cxa_get_globals, the code does: if ((g = (__cxa_eh_globals *) std::malloc (sizeof (__cxa_eh_globals))) == 0 || __gthread_setspecific (globals_key, (void *) g) != 0) std::terminate (); but since __cxa_get_globals is called in __cxa_allocate_exception, the effect of this is that if the first exception thrown in a program is an out-of-memory exception, the program will instead call std::terminate, because it won't be able to allocate a new __cxa_eh_globals. std::terminate itself expects __cxa_get_globals to work, so it'll call itself recursively, leading to an abort() in __verbose_terminate_handler. -- Summary: libstdc++ crashes when out of memory exception thrown Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: libstdc++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24025
[Bug libfortran/20406] SIZE() matters?
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 22:01 --- Agreed, noone cotradicted. -- What|Removed |Added CC||tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20406
[Bug libfortran/20406] SIZE() matters?
--- Additional Comments From dave dot offiler at metoffice dot gov dot uk 2005-09-22 22:01 --- Subject: Out of Office AutoReply: SIZE() matters? Sorry, I'm away just now. I'll be back in the office on Monday 26th September 2005 and will read your message then. If the matter is urgent, please try one of the following: - Scatterometers (Seawinds, ERS): Simon Keogh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - Ground-based GPS: Adrian Jupp ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - Radio Occultation: Axel von Engeln or Carlo Buontempo ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (carlo,[EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20406
[Bug libfortran/21468] vectorizing libfortran
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 22:02 --- Can this be done now that PR22480 is fixed? -- What|Removed |Added CC||tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21468
[Bug fortran/17815] Language name for --enable-languages should be "fortran" instead of "f95"
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 22:04 --- Fixed by FX' recent patch. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.0.3 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17815
[Bug fortran/17815] Language name for --enable-languages should be "fortran" instead of "f95"
-- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.0.3 |4.0.2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17815
[Bug fortran/24005] Ambiguous INTERFACE leads to seg fault
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 22:46 --- Subject: Bug 24005 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-22 22:45:43 Modified files: gcc/fortran: ChangeLog interface.c Log message: PR fortran/24005 * interface.c (check_interface1): Fix NULL dereference. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.566&r2=1.567 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/interface.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.19&r2=1.20 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24005
[Bug fortran/24005] Ambiguous INTERFACE leads to seg fault
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 22:47 --- Subject: Bug 24005 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-22 22:47:45 Modified files: gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog Added files: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg: interface_1.f90 Log message: PR fortran/24005 gfortran.dg/interface_1.f90: New test. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.6099&r2=1.6100 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/interface_1.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24005
[Bug libstdc++/24025] libstdc++ crashes when out of memory exception thrown
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 23:04 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-09-22 23:04:26 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24025
[Bug fortran/24008] gfortran too permissive about ENTRY syntax
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22 23:58 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||accepts-invalid Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-09-22 23:58:09 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24008
[Bug middle-end/23960] [4.1 regression] ICE in compare_values in VRP
-- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org | Status|NEW |ASSIGNED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23960
