[Bug other/26056] code quality
--- Comment #4 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-02-02 08:29 --- (In reply to comment #3) > In fact I cannot reproduce the code gen that you get with 4.0.2. > You,re right. Posted 4.0.2 output was generated from slightly different sources :/ -- pluto at agmk dot net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26056
[Bug target/25960] __gcc_add doesn't handle -0.0L properly
--- Comment #6 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 08:50 --- I agree with Alan. Although the format is not compatible with IEEE arithmetic, this applies only because the arithmetic is different, not the handling of special cases. In every case where the inputs are exactly representable as a double (including +/-0, Inf, and NaN) and 'double' arithmetic would be exact, the result of the computation in this 'long double' representation should be the same as if it had been done in 'double'. As for the patch, it looks right to me, but it's probably better for performance if instead it does if (zz == 0.0) return z; -- geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25960
[Bug c++/26070] New: [3.4/4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] ICE declaring data member virtual and static
The following invalid code snippet causes an ICE in grokdeclarator:
===
struct A
{
virtual static int i;
};
===
bug.cc:3: error: member 'i' cannot be declared both virtual and static
bug.cc:3: error: 'i' declared as a 'virtual' field
bug.cc:3: internal compiler error: tree check: expected var_decl or
function_decl or parm_decl, have field_decl in grokdeclarator, at
cp/decl.c:8409
This is a regression from GCC 2.95.3.
Will post patch soon.
--
Summary: [3.4/4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] ICE declaring data member
virtual and static
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code, error-recovery, monitored
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26070
[Bug c++/26070] [3.4/4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] ICE declaring data member virtual and static
-- reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc- ||patches/2006- ||02/msg00112.html Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Keywords||patch Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 09:06:06 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26070
[Bug c++/26070] [3.4/4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] ICE declaring data member virtual and static
-- reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.0.3 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26070
[Bug c++/26071] [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] ICE declaring destructor virtual and static
-- reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc- ||patches/2006- ||02/msg00114.html Keywords||patch Target Milestone|--- |4.0.3 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26071
[Bug c++/26071] New: [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] ICE declaring destructor virtual and static
The following invalid code snippet causes an ICE:
===
struct A
{
virtual static ~A();
};
===
'
Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug report, [etc.]
This a regression from GCC 3.4.x. Before we got the error message:
bug.cc:3: error: member `A' cannot be declared both virtual and static
which is not quite correct, but tolerable.
Will post patch soon.
--
Summary: [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] ICE declaring destructor
virtual and static
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code, monitored
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26071
[Bug c++/26071] [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] ICE declaring destructor virtual and static
-- reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 09:07:41 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26071
[Bug c++/23372] [4.0/4.1 Regression] Temporary aggregate copy not elided when passing parameters by value
--- Comment #23 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 09:16
---
I cannot get a target selector work that would exclude the patterns you
mention. This seems to work though:
/* { dg-do compile { xfail { powerpc*-*-darwin* powerpc*-*-aix* rs6000-*-* } ||
{ powerpc64-*-linux* && lp64 } } } */
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23372
[Bug c++/26072] New: missed diagnostic about initialization with an uninitialized variable.
struct A {
A(int v) : v_(v_) { }
^^ I would love to see a warning here.
int v_;
};
--
Summary: missed diagnostic about initialization with an
uninitialized variable.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pluto at agmk dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26072
[Bug java/26073] New: [4.2 regression] libjava fails to compile
libjava fails to build in a cross compiler (using newlib):
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/java/lang/Class.h: In member
function 'java::lang::Class* java::lang::Class::getComponentType()':
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/java/lang/Class.h:371: warning:
dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc: At global scope:
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:775: error: variable or
field '_Jv_ThrowNoClassDefFoundErrorTrampoline' declared void
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:775: error: 'ffi_cif' was
not declared in this scope
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:775: error: expected
primary-expression before ',' token
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:776: error: expected
primary-expression before 'void'
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:777: error: expected
primary-expression before 'void'
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:778: error: expected
primary-expression before 'void'
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:778: error: initializer
expression list treated as compound expression
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:779: error: expected ','
or ';' before '{' token
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc: In static member
function 'static void _Jv_Linker::link_symbol_table(java::lang::Class*)':
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1127: error:
'ffi_closure' was not declared in this scope
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1127: error: 'closure'
was not declared in this scope
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1128: error: expected
primary-expression before ')' token
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1128: error: expected `;'
before '_Jv_Malloc'
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1129: error: 'ffi_cif'
was not declared in this scope
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1129: error: 'cif' was
not declared in this scope
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1129: error: expected
primary-expression before ')' token
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1129: error: expected `;'
before '_Jv_Malloc'
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1133: error: 'ffi_type'
was not declared in this scope
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1133: error: 'arg_types'
was not declared in this scope
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1133: error: expected
primary-expression before ')' token
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1133: error: expected `;'
before '_Jv_Malloc'
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1134: error:
'ffi_type_void' was not declared in this scope
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1138: error:
'FFI_DEFAULT_ABI' was not declared in this scope
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1139: error:
'ffi_prep_cif' was not declared in this scope
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1139: error: 'FFI_OK' was
not declared in this scope
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/gcc-cross/trunk/libjava/link.cc:1143: error:
'ffi_prep_closure' was not declared in this scope
gnumake[5]: *** [link.lo] Error 1
--
Summary: [4.2 regression] libjava fails to compile
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
Component: java
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: arm-elf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26073
[Bug c++/26036] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] Treating a class object as a function with member variables causes hang
--- Comment #4 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 09:54
---
Here's a simpler testcase with only one error:
===
struct A
{
int i;
};
A foo(int);
void bar()
{
foo().i;
}
===
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
Keywords||monitored
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26036
[Bug fortran/26074] New: Module array cannot be automatic or assumed shape
Reported to the fortran list by Jonathan Dursi http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2006-02/msg00016.html I can confirm this bug and that the source of the problem is exactly as suspected by Andrew Pinksi. A patch is on its way, which also fixes PR25103 - "Automatic object allowed in main program" and tidies up resolve_symbol. In particular, this compiles: program foo integer, parameter :: len = 5 integer :: arr(max(len,1)) end wheras changing `program' to `module': module foo integer, parameter :: len = 5 integer :: arr(max(len,1)) end produces this: In file foo.F90:4 integer :: arr(max(len,1)) 1 Error: Module array 'arr' at (1) cannot be automatic or assumed shape -- Summary: Module array cannot be automatic or assumed shape Product: gcc Version: 4.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26074
[Bug rtl-optimization/24376] wrong-code unless -fno-sched-interblock
--- Comment #15 from nickc at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 10:54 --- Subject: Bug 24376 Author: nickc Date: Thu Feb 2 10:54:53 2006 New Revision: 110510 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110510 Log: PR 24376 * sched-rgn.c (add_branch_dependences): For cc0 targets extend the dependencies inside a block back to the very first cc0 setter in the block. Modified: branches/gcc-3_4-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-3_4-branch/gcc/sched-rgn.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24376
[Bug fortran/26064] 4.1 regression introduced with patch for bug 18197
--- Comment #8 from sven dot buijssen at math dot uni-dortmund dot de 2006-02-02 11:30 --- I tested the patch and encountered another internal compiler error. The problem, however, is that this new error so far only occurs with a code consisting of several thousand code lines and disappears as soon as I try to remove some complexity. Nevertheless, I'm trying to deduce a reasonably sized test case. I recon the error message I get does not help you to much in the meantime: internal compiler error: tree check: expected record_type or union_type or qual_union_type, have omp_clause in gfc_get_derived_type, at fortran/trans- types.c:1458 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26064
[Bug libgcj/26063] memory leak in _Jv_Linker::link_symbol_table
--- Comment #5 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 12:06 --- The ffi usage breaks the build on arm :( Can someone tell me which macro I can use to test ffi availability? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26063
[Bug libgcj/26063] memory leak in _Jv_Linker::link_symbol_table
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:10 --- See java/lang/reflect/natMethod.cc: #if USE_LIBFFI #include #else #include #endif -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26063
[Bug middle-end/25990] gomp ICE with -fopenmp
--- Comment #14 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:27 --- Subject: Bug 25990 Author: dnovillo Date: Thu Feb 2 12:27:02 2006 New Revision: 110511 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110511 Log: PR 25990 * tree-cfg.c (move_block_to_fn): Clear out the basic block array after growing it. testsuite/ PR 25990 * gcc.dg/gomp/pr25990.c: New test. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-cfg.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25990
[Bug bootstrap/26053] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Misdetection of COMDAT group support with GNU as and non-GNU ld
--- Comment #5 from ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de 2006-02-02 12:32 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] Misdetection of COMDAT group support with GNU as and non-GNU ld mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org writes: > We could have a --enable-comdat option, or, as you say, we could have > something > in the target configuration file. I think your patch is the right idea, but I > do think we need a --enable-comdat option, if we go that route, so that we can > specifically indicate that a particular linker *does* support COMDAT. Would you be ok with applying the current patch (mainline testing is in progress, but as expected it correctly detected non COMDAT support on IRIX 6.5 with gas 2.16.1 and the MIPSpro ld) to mainline and the 4.1 branch now (since it fixes a bootstrap failure) and implementing --enable-comdat in a follow-up patch? Rainer -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26053
[Bug middle-end/25990] gomp ICE with -fopenmp
--- Comment #15 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:37 --- Fixed. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00121.html -- dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25990
[Bug libgcj/26073] [4.2 regression] libjava fails to compile
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Component|java|libgcj Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26073
[Bug rtl-optimization/24376] [3.4 Regression] wrong-code unless -fno-sched-interblock
--- Comment #16 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:41 --- Fixed in 3.4.6 now. Thanks for your report and helping out testing the patches. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Known to fail||3.4.4 Known to work||3.3.3 Resolution||FIXED Summary|wrong-code unless -fno- |[3.4 Regression] wrong-code |sched-interblock|unless -fno-sched-interblock Target Milestone|--- |3.4.6 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24376
[Bug libgcj/26063] memory leak in _Jv_Linker::link_symbol_table & ffi usage breaks build on ARM
--- Comment #7 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 12:52 --- Changed the title and have a preliminary patch. -- thebohemian at gmx dot net changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |thebohemian at gmx dot net |dot org | Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2006-02-01 14:43:40 |2006-02-02 12:52:37 date|| Summary|memory leak in |memory leak in |_Jv_Linker::link_symbol_tabl|_Jv_Linker::link_symbol_tabl |e |e & ffi usage breaks build ||on ARM http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26063
[Bug libgcj/26073] [4.2 regression] libjava fails to compile
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 12:56:09 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26073
[Bug libgcj/26063] memory leak in _Jv_Linker::link_symbol_table & ffi usage breaks build on ARM
--- Comment #8 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 12:56 --- Created an attachment (id=10771) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10771&action=view) a preliminary patch (not tested) Unfortunately I am in a hurry and have to leave soon. If anyone depends on the ARM compilation problem being fixed immediately then this patch will be the start. Complains, hints, remarks and so on are appreciated. :) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26063
[Bug libgcj/26063] memory leak in _Jv_Linker::link_symbol_table & ffi usage breaks build on ARM
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:56 --- PR 26073 is the PR for ffi usage that breaks ARM. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||26073 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26063
[Bug c++/26072] missed diagnostic about initialization with an uninitialized variable.
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:58 --- This is an exact dup of bug 19808. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19808 *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26072
[Bug c++/19808] miss a warning about uninitialized members in constructor
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:58 --- *** Bug 26072 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pluto at agmk dot net http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19808
[Bug fortran/26074] Module array cannot be automatic or assumed shape
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 13:26 --- Confirmed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Keywords||rejects-valid Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 13:26:55 date|| Summary|Module array cannot be |Module array cannot be |automatic or assumed shape |automatic or assumed shape http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26074
[Bug target/545] -std=c89 defines macros it shouldn't
--- Comment #15 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 13:35 --- PR 26052 is the bug for cgwin. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||26052 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=545
[Bug rtl-optimization/24082] Not that good register allocating on powerpc for vectors
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 13:53 --- Confirmed, note vector here is a define for __attribute__((vector_size(16))) and from the include of altivec.h as there is no vector long long in altivec. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 13:53:17 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24082
[Bug target/24647] two copies of a constant in two different registers
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 13:55:06 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24647
[Bug target/24647] two copies of a constant in two different registers
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-02-02 14:15 ---
on x86-64 I get:
f: movli.0(%rip), %eax
testl %eax, %eax
jne .L2
movb$2, %al
movl$2, i.0(%rip)
.L2:rep ; ret
$ pr24647.c.t97.final_cleanup
f() {
static int i;
int i1;
static int i;
:
i1 = i;
if (i1 == 0) goto ; else goto ;
:;
i = 2;
i1 = 2;
:;
return i1;
}
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pluto at agmk dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24647
[Bug middle-end/26061] error and warning count
--- Comment #2 from hyperquantum at gmail dot com 2006-02-02 14:39 --- IMO this is a useful feature because the number of lines of error output that GCC produces for a file is not (always) a correct measure for the amount of errors and warnings produced for that file. This is because GCC produces not only the error messages themselves, but also extra helpful output. And it is also nice to see in one fast look how many errors I still have to fix in my code. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26061
Re: [Bug middle-end/26061] error and warning count
> > > > --- Comment #2 from hyperquantum at gmail dot com 2006-02-02 14:39 > --- > IMO this is a useful feature because the number of lines of error output that > GCC produces for a file is not (always) a correct measure for the amount of > errors and warnings produced for that file. This is because GCC produces not > only the error messages themselves, but also extra helpful output. And it is > also nice to see in one fast look how many errors I still have to fix in my > code. It is not really a good measure as sometimes fixing one error will fix the rest. -- Pinski
[Bug middle-end/26061] error and warning count
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 14:42 --- Subject: Re: error and warning count > > > > --- Comment #2 from hyperquantum at gmail dot com 2006-02-02 14:39 > --- > IMO this is a useful feature because the number of lines of error output that > GCC produces for a file is not (always) a correct measure for the amount of > errors and warnings produced for that file. This is because GCC produces not > only the error messages themselves, but also extra helpful output. And it is > also nice to see in one fast look how many errors I still have to fix in my > code. It is not really a good measure as sometimes fixing one error will fix the rest. -- Pinski -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26061
[Bug fortran/26064] 4.1 regression introduced with patch for bug 18197
--- Comment #9 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-02-02 14:49 --- If you back out the change for bug 18197, does several thousand lines of code compile? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26064
[Bug c++/26032] [gomp-branch] ICE in copy_body_r
--- Comment #3 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 14:53 --- Should be fixed with the patch for PR 25990. -- dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26032
[Bug rtl-optimization/26069] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] Runtime endian-ness check is no longer optimized out.
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 14:56 --- One may be able to teach forwprop about this optimization, i.e. turn x = 1; x.0_3 = (char *) &x; D.1522_4 = *x.0_3; into D.1522_4 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR (x); if that has the right semantics. CCP fold may then be able to optimize it. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26069
[Bug target/23359] [4.1/4.2 regression] Many Solaris 10/x86 testsuite failures with native as: use of .word
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 14:58 --- Patch posted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00130.html -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc- ||patches/2006- ||02/msg00130.html Keywords||patch http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23359
[Bug middle-end/26061] error and warning count
--- Comment #4 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2006-02-02 15:12 --- Subject: Re: error and warning count "pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > IMO this is a useful feature because the number of lines of error output that | > GCC produces for a file is not (always) a correct measure for the amount of | > errors and warnings produced for that file. This is because GCC produces not | > only the error messages themselves, but also extra helpful output. And it is | > also nice to see in one fast look how many errors I still have to fix in my | > code. | | It is not really a good measure as sometimes fixing one error will fix the | rest. true, but it is still a helpful information. That reminds of when I first iused sun's CC -- it really was a pleasant experience. -- Gaby -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26061
[Bug c++/26076] New: [gomp] ICE in can_throw_internal_1 at except.c:2581
The following valid code snippet causes an ICE when compiled with -fopenmp:
=
struct A
{
~A();
};
void foo()
{
#pragma omp parallel
{
A a, b;
}
}
=
bug.cc: In function 'void _Z3foov.omp_fn.0(void*)':
bug.cc:8: internal compiler error: vector VEC(eh_region,base) index domain
error, in can_throw_internal_1 at except.c:2581
Please submit a full bug report, [etc.]
--
Summary: [gomp] ICE in can_throw_internal_1 at except.c:2581
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, monitored, openmp
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26076
[Bug target/26052] cygwin's defnes does not honor the -undef option
--- Comment #4 from gerrit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 16:09 --- IMO it should be coded in the executable itself that -undef skips reading the specs at all. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26052
[Bug fortran/26064] 4.1 regression introduced with patch for bug 18197
--- Comment #10 from sven dot buijssen at math dot uni-dortmund dot de 2006-02-02 16:12 --- They did with gfortran < Revision 108555. With current revision 110515 backing out only the patch for 18197 (and not applying your patch) they do not. The error message I get with revision 110515 backing out only the patch for 18197 is exactly the same as with revision 110515 integrating your patch. So, it's probably a separate regression. I'll continue to distillate a test case and file a separate bug report. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26064
[Bug target/26052] cygwin's defnes does not honor the -undef option
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 16:39 --- (In reply to comment #4) > IMO it should be coded in the executable itself that -undef skips reading the > specs at all. No, that would not work as this SPECs is used for other things too. The correct way to fix this is to move the specs handling of defines to TARGET_OS_CPP_BUILTINS. That will also fix the problems referenced in PR 545. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26052
[Bug target/26052] cygwin's defnes does not honor the -undef option and -std=c89 is not the same as -ansi
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 16:42 --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > No, that would not work as this SPECs is used for other things too. > The correct way to fix this is to move the specs handling of defines to > TARGET_OS_CPP_BUILTINS. For cygwin.h, the correct macro is EXTRA_OS_CPP_BUILTINS as TARGET_OS_CPP_BUILTINS is used in cygming.h already and just calls EXTRA_OS_CPP_BUILTINS for the cygwin specific defines. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26052
[Bug target/9703] [arm] Accessing data through constant pool more times could be solved in less instructions
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 16:54 --- Should be helped or almost ready to be fixed by: http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Section%20Anchor%20Optimisations -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9703
[Bug c++/24996] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] ICE on throw code
--- Comment #20 from matz at suse dot de 2006-02-02 16:56 --- I've put the patch to testing. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24996
[Bug target/26015] ICE during bootstrap for vax architecture
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:08 --- Can you attach the preprocessed source? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26015
[Bug tree-optimization/17106] Opportunity to eliminate loads from TOC.
--- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:09 --- Patch posted here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00133.html -- rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Keywords||patch Last reconfirmed|2006-02-01 04:43:47 |2006-02-02 17:09:08 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17106
[Bug inline-asm/26077] New: ice on inline asm with invalid constraint
The following invalid code produces an internal compiler error on 4.0.0. 3.3.0
and 2.95.2:
$ cat ros.i
struct s {
int x, y, z;
};
void f (struct s s) {
asm ("%0" : : "a" (s));
}
$ gcc-4.0 ros.i
ros.i: In function 'f':
ros.i:6: internal compiler error: in emit_move_insn, at expr.c:3092
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
--
Summary: ice on inline asm with invalid constraint
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: inline-asm
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: gcc at broadmeadow dot plus dot com
GCC build triplet: i386-gnu-linux
GCC host triplet: i386-gnu-linux
GCC target triplet: i386-gnu-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26077
[Bug inline-asm/26077] ice on inline asm with invalid constraint
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:13 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 8788 *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26077
[Bug inline-asm/8788] ICE in emit_move_insn, at expr.c:3089
--- Comment #20 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:13 --- *** Bug 26077 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gcc at broadmeadow dot plus ||dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8788
[Bug target/9703] [arm] Accessing data through constant pool more times could be solved in less instructions
--- Comment #7 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:14 --- Patch posted here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00133.html -- rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|pb at gcc dot gnu dot org |rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Keywords||patch Last reconfirmed|2005-02-16 03:47:22 |2006-02-02 17:14:49 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9703
[Bug c++/23372] [4.0/4.1 Regression] Temporary aggregate copy not elided when passing parameters by value
--- Comment #24 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2006-02-02 17:16 --- This test is also failing on hppa*-*-hpux* and ia64-*-hpux*. -- sje at cup dot hp dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sje at cup dot hp dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23372
[Bug c++/26078] New: g++ compile error in calling another constructor inside a constructor
---Code---
1 #include
2 using namespace std;
3 class tclass {
4 public:
5tclass();
6tclass(int);
7 };
8 tclass::tclass(int j)
9 {
10cout << j << endl;
11 }
12 tclass::tclass()
13 {
14int i ;
15i = 90;
*16tclass::tclass(i);
17 }
18 int main()
19 {
20tclass t;
21 }
---Compile---
g++ -o tclass tclass.C
---Error Info---
tclass.C: In constructor `tclass::tclass()':
tclass.C:16: conflicting types for `tclass i'
tclass.C:14: previous declaration as `int i'
---Description---
If you change line 16 to cast explicitly the type of i:
tclass::tclass((int)i);
Then there is no problem compiling and linking it. I think g++, inside of
constructor, always assumes implicitly a constructor tclass(tclass&) and
doesn't interpret other constructors with one input parameter correctly. Should
be a easy fix! I tried to compile the original code on VC++ 7.1, there is no
problem, which confirms that this might be a bug in g++.
--
Summary: g++ compile error in calling another constructor inside
a constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 3.3.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: ian dot yanliu at gmail dot com
GCC host triplet: RedHat Linux 9 i686; Fedora Core 2 i686; SUSE Linux 8.1
IA-64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26078
[Bug target/26015] ICE during bootstrap for vax architecture
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:48 ---
Confirmed, reduced testcase:
void __muldi3 (long long u,long long v){}
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 17:48:06
date||
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26015
[Bug c++/24996] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] ICE on throw code
--- Comment #21 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:57 --- I have posted the patch, let's see what the reactions will be. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00146.html -- rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc- ||patches/2006- ||02/msg00146.html Keywords||patch http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24996
[Bug c++/26078] g++ compile error in calling another constructor inside a constructor
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:58 --- Actually this is invalid code: "tclass::tclass(i);" does not what you think it does. It declares the variable "i" as the type tclass::tclass. Now "tclass::tclass" is invalid type anyways but that is a different bug and filed as PR 11764. Now the cast will force what you want as the parse is not ambiguous as before it was and the C++ standard says that declared a variable. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26078
[Bug target/22097] libgfortran build failure on mips-sgi-irix6.5
--- Comment #12 from r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com 2006-02-02 18:01 --- Subject: Re: libgfortran build failure on mips-sgi-irix6.5 fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org schrieb: > --- Comment #11 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-12 13:08 > --- > This could be fixed by something similar to > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-12/msg01578.html > > Is somebody working on this? Rainer -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22097
[Bug middle-end/24929] long long shift/mask operations should be better optimized
--- Comment #2 from ian at airs dot com 2006-02-02 18:14 --- With an updated version of RTH's subreg lowering pass, I get this instruction sequence: f: movl16(%esp), %eax movl4(%esp), %edx movl8(%esp), %ecx shrl$16, %eax andl$255, %eax shldl $8, %edx, %ecx sall$8, %edx orl %edx, %eax movl%ecx, %edx ret This is one instruction shorter than the icc sequence, due to the use of shldl. It could be improved by switching the roles of %ecx and %edx to avoid the final move, although that is complex to implement give the way the register allocator currently handles pseudo-registers larger than word mode. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24929
[Bug middle-end/24929] long long shift/mask operations should be better optimized
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 18:16 --- Confirmed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 18:16:13 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24929
[Bug fortran/25103] Automatic object allowed in main program
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 18:17 --- Confirmed. Related to PR 26074 -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||26074 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 18:17:47 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25103
[Bug rtl-optimization/15792] missed subreg optimization
--- Comment #6 from ian at airs dot com 2006-02-02 18:18 --- With the version of RTH's subreg lowering pass which I am working on, I get identical code for both functions: test1: movl8(%esp), %eax orl 4(%esp), %eax jne .L7 ret .p2align 4,,7 .L7: jmp gh -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15792
[Bug c++/26079] New: Template instantiation behavior change in 4.1 (regression?)
The following short code fragment no longer compiles with gcc 4.1.
I've no clue if this a regression or mandated by the standard.
#include
#include
#include
int size(char x) { return (int) sizeof(x); }
int size(int x) { return (int) sizeof(x); }
int size(const std::string &x) {
return (int) x.size() + (int) sizeof(int);
}
template
int size(const std::vector &x) {
int result = (int) sizeof(int);
typename std::vector::const_iterator iter;
for (iter = x.begin() ; iter != x.end() ; iter++)
result += size(*iter);
return result;
}
template
int size(const std::pair &x) {
return size(x.first) + size(x.second);
}
int foo() {
std::vector > pvec;
return size(pvec);
}
Sorry to not reduce a stand-alone testcase without headers. The STL isn't
important. The issue is that the list of candidates for "size(std::pair<...>)"
doesn't include the templates, only the functions, when instantiating
"size(std::vector<...>).
On IRC they thought this looked reasonable enough to file a PR.
This works fine in 4.0.2 and 3.4.x and many other C++ compilers.
--
Summary: Template instantiation behavior change in 4.1
(regression?)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: roger at eyesopen dot com
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26079
[Bug c++/26080] New: Template instantiation behavior change in 4.1 (regression?)
The following short code fragment no longer compiles with gcc 4.1.
I've no clue if this a regression or mandated by the standard.
#include
#include
#include
int size(char x) { return (int) sizeof(x); }
int size(int x) { return (int) sizeof(x); }
int size(const std::string &x) {
return (int) x.size() + (int) sizeof(int);
}
template
int size(const std::vector &x) {
int result = (int) sizeof(int);
typename std::vector::const_iterator iter;
for (iter = x.begin() ; iter != x.end() ; iter++)
result += size(*iter);
return result;
}
template
int size(const std::pair &x) {
return size(x.first) + size(x.second);
}
int foo() {
std::vector > pvec;
return size(pvec);
}
Sorry to not reduce a stand-alone testcase without headers. The STL isn't
important. The issue is that the list of candidates for "size(std::pair<...>)"
doesn't include the templates, only the functions, when instantiating
"size(std::vector<...>).
On IRC they thought this looked reasonable enough to file a PR.
This works fine in 4.0.2 and 3.4.x and many other C++ compilers.
--
Summary: Template instantiation behavior change in 4.1
(regression?)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: roger at eyesopen dot com
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26080
[Bug c++/26080] Template instantiation behavior change in 4.1 (regression?)
--- Comment #1 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2006-02-02 18:43 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26079 *** -- roger at eyesopen dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26080
[Bug c++/26079] Template instantiation behavior change in 4.1 (regression?)
--- Comment #1 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2006-02-02 18:43 --- *** Bug 26080 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26079
[Bug c++/26079] Template instantiation behavior change in 4.1 (regression?)
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 18:47 ---
The issue here (in the source) is that the overloaded of
"result += size(*iter);" is only the size functions above that call so it
does not see the template below that call which is the function you would like
to call.
This is how standard C++ works (with the correction from DR 197).
This is a dup of bug 2922 which was fixed by rejecting invalid code and fixing
wrong code for 4.1.
The way to fix the code is to add a forward to the template function.
So the following code is the legal corrected code:
#include
#include
#include
int size(char x) { return (int) sizeof(x); }
int size(int x) { return (int) sizeof(x); }
int size(const std::string &x) {
return (int) x.size() + (int) sizeof(int);
}
template
int size(const std::pair &x);
template
int size(const std::vector &x) {
int result = (int) sizeof(int);
typename std::vector::const_iterator iter;
for (iter = x.begin() ; iter != x.end() ; iter++)
result += size(*iter);
return result;
}
template
int size(const std::pair &x) {
return size(x.first) + size(x.second);
}
int foo() {
std::vector > pvec;
return size(pvec);
}
The missing of the first template in the diangostic is just a diagnostic bug
which was reported somewhere else too, PR 16057.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 2922 ***
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 2922 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution||DUPLICATE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26079
[Bug c++/2922] [DR 197] two-stage lookup for unqualified function calls with type-dependent arguments
--- Comment #22 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 18:47 --- *** Bug 26079 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||roger at eyesopen dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2922
[Bug target/25750] g++ internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 18:51 --- This works on the mainline. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.2.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25750
[Bug target/25780] ICE on -O2
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:02 --- This works on the mainline. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Known to work||4.2.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25780
[Bug fortran/25072] non PURE function used in For-All
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:12 --- Subject: Bug 25072 Author: kargl Date: Thu Feb 2 19:11:58 2006 New Revision: 110517 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110517 Log: 2006-02-02 Steven G. Kargl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR fortran/24958 match.c (gfc_match_nullify): Free the list from head not tail. PR fortran/25072 * match.c (match_forall_header): Fix internal error caused by bogus gfc_epxr pointers. gfortran.dg/nullify_2.f90: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/nullify_2.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/match.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25072
[Bug fortran/24958] ICE on invalid nullify
--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:12 --- Subject: Bug 24958 Author: kargl Date: Thu Feb 2 19:11:58 2006 New Revision: 110517 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110517 Log: 2006-02-02 Steven G. Kargl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR fortran/24958 match.c (gfc_match_nullify): Free the list from head not tail. PR fortran/25072 * match.c (match_forall_header): Fix internal error caused by bogus gfc_epxr pointers. gfortran.dg/nullify_2.f90: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/nullify_2.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/match.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24958
[Bug target/22097] libgfortran build failure on mips-sgi-irix6.5
--- Comment #13 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:18 --- (In reply to comment #12) > Is somebody working on this? I am not (though it shouldn't take too much time, I'm positively squashed under real life work). And, IIRC, the mips maintainers don't have access to IRIX any more. So, if you want to submit something for this, please do! -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22097
[Bug libgcj/26063] memory leak in _Jv_Linker::link_symbol_table & ffi usage breaks build on ARM
--- Comment #10 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 19:26 --- (From update of attachment 10771) Forget about this patch. it doesnt compile and there is a working one on the java-patches list. -- thebohemian at gmx dot net changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #10771|0 |1 is obsolete|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26063
[Bug libgcj/26073] [4.2 regression] libjava fails to compile
--- Comment #1 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 19:28 --- Posted a patch to fix the issue: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2006-q1/msg00139.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26073
[Bug target/25514] [m68k] internal consistency failure
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:32 ---
Reduced testcase on the mainline:
void __attribute__((const)) g(void);
struct variable_set{int i;};
struct variable_set_list
{
struct variable_set_list *next;
struct variable_set *set;
};
extern struct variable_set_list *current_variable_set_list;
static struct variable_set global_variable_set;
static struct variable_set_list global_setlist = { 0, &global_variable_set };
void pop_variable_scope (void)
{
struct variable_set_list *setlist;
if (current_variable_set_list->next == 0)
g();
if (current_variable_set_list != &global_setlist)
{
setlist = current_variable_set_list;
current_variable_set_list = setlist->next;
}
else
{
setlist = global_setlist.next;
global_setlist.set = setlist->set;
global_setlist.next = setlist->next;
}
free ((char *) setlist);
}
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 19:32:25
date||
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25514
[Bug bootstrap/25842] Error in building libiberty
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:40 --- I tried again with 4.2 trunk, from 2005-01-31, and it still fails with the same message. I will attach the preprocessed source md5.i, although I tried to look into it and don't really understand why the ansidecl.h definition for ATTRIBUTE_ALIGNED_ALIGNOF is not used. If I can debug further, please ask. -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 19:40:32 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25842
[Bug bootstrap/25842] Error in building libiberty
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:41 --- Created an attachment (id=10773) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10773&action=view) Preprocessed md5.c source file -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25842
[Bug c++/25751] Poor error when templating on undefined types
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:47 --- Confirmed. What should happen here is that when foo is not declared in this context, we should try to figure out if it was going to be used as a type or a variable. Right now we assume it is used as a variable. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 19:47:04 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25751
[Bug libstdc++/26006] tr1/8_c_compatibility/cfenv/functions.cc (test for excess errors) fails with pre-C99-TC1 libc
--- Comment #4 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-02-02 19:49 --- Fixed. -- pcarlini at suse dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26006
[Bug c++/25759] Documentation not clear, attribute packed on class in C++
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:51 --- Confirmed, more of the issue is really the documenation is more C based than C++ based. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 19:51:35 date|| Summary|Missing Documentation: |Documentation not clear, |__attribute__((packed)) |attribute packed on class in |attached to a class |C++ |definiton | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25759
[Bug target/25755] ICE in testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/20050316-1.c
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:52 --- Confirmed based on http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-02/msg00038.html -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 19:52:52 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25755
[Bug fortran/25576] [4.0 only] checking failure in execute/intrinsic_eoshift.f90
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |minor Target Milestone|--- |4.0.3 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25576
[Bug c++/25814] Request for warning for parser ambiguity of function declarations and variable declarations with initializations
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25814
[Bug target/25127] internal compiler error: in rs6000_emit_prologue, at config/rs6000/rs6000.c:14039
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:56 --- Reducing. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25127
[Bug target/25127] internal compiler error: in rs6000_emit_prologue, at config/rs6000/rs6000.c:14039
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 20:22 ---
Reduced testcase:
struct _Unwind_Context
{
void *ra;
}
init_dwarf_reg_size_table (void)
{
struct _Unwind_Context this_context, cur_context;
__builtin_unwind_init ();
long offset = uw_install_context_1 ((&this_context), (&cur_context));
void *handler = __builtin_frob_return_addr ((&cur_context)->ra);
__builtin_eh_return (offset, handler);
}
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
GCC build triplet|powerpc-apple-darwin8.3.0 |
GCC host triplet|powerpc-apple-darwin8.3.0 |
GCC target triplet|powerpc-apple-darwin8.3.0 |powerpc-*-darwin*
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 20:22:25
date||
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25127
[Bug target/24476] [4.1/4.2 Regression] gcc.dg/tls/pr24428.c execution test and gcc.dg/tls/pr24428-2.c execution test fail on IA64
--- Comment #4 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2006-02-02 22:41 --- These tests, along with g++.dg/tls/static-1.C are failing due to a bug in the HP linker. The linker has been fixed but not yet released. The problem is that the linker is using the SHF_HP_TLS (0x0100) flag for thread local storage instead of SHF_TLS. I am going to see if I can get a patch accepted into binutils where we set both flags so that we don't need to wait for the patched linker. But first I need to figure out how to do it. -- sje at cup dot hp dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sje at cup dot hp dot com Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-02-02 22:41:01 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24476
[Bug target/25960] __gcc_add doesn't handle -0.0L properly
-- amodra at bigpond dot net dot au changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |amodra at bigpond dot net |dot org |dot au Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2006-01-25 14:39:25 |2006-02-02 23:32:19 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25960
[Bug libgomp/25852] libgomp testing does not work for multilib (-m32 on x86_64-linux-gnu)
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 23:40 --- Can someone please fix this bug, it is useless to get all these failures? -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rth at gcc dot gnu dot org, ||dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25852
[Bug libgomp/25883] libgomp call pthread functions directly
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 23:42 --- I should note that the pthread calls are not from the config directories but instead from the toplevel. This is just wrong. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25883
[Bug libgomp/25938] [4.2 regression] libgomp installs header files in version and target independent location
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 23:45 --- Can you instead fix this now as this is a regression and really regressions should not be left to the last minute any more. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25938
[Bug c++/26084] New: [gomp-branch] ICE (segfault) on C++ OpenMP coce
New ICE on the gomp branch. ~/data/planck/LevelS>g++ -v -fopenmp -c bug.ii Using built-in specs. Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: /scratch/gompcc/configure --quiet --prefix=/scratch/ugccgomp --enable-languages=c++,fortran --with-gmp=/usr/local/appl/gmp-4.1.4 --enable-checking=release Thread model: posix gcc version 4.2.0-gomp-20050608-branch 20060202 (experimental) (merged 20060202) /scratch/ugccgomp/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.2.0-gomp-20050608-branch/cc1plus -fpreprocessed bug.ii -quiet -dumpbase bug.ii -mtune=generic -auxbase bug -version -fopenmp -o /tmp/ccQCx6GI.s GNU C++ version 4.2.0-gomp-20050608-branch 20060202 (experimental) (merged 20060202) (i686-pc-linux-gnu) compiled by GNU C version 4.2.0-gomp-20050608-branch 20060202 (experimental) (merged 20060202). GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=100 --param ggc-min-heapsize=131072 Compiler executable checksum: c854429a5b3be01718b61b454f3d31d6 /afs/mpa/data/martin/planck/LevelS/Healpix_cxx/alm_map_tools.cc: In function 'void _Z7map2almIfEvRKSt6vectorI8ringpairSaIS1_EEPKT_R3AlmI8xcomplexIS6_EEb.omp_fn.19(void*)': /afs/mpa/data/martin/planck/LevelS/Healpix_cxx/alm_map_tools.cc:257: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. -- Summary: [gomp-branch] ICE (segfault) on C++ OpenMP coce Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: martin at mpa-garching dot mpg dot de GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26084
[Bug c++/26084] [gomp-branch] ICE (segfault) on C++ OpenMP coce
--- Comment #1 from martin at mpa-garching dot mpg dot de 2006-02-02 23:48 --- Created an attachment (id=10774) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10774&action=view) unreduced test case -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26084
[Bug other/25527] [gomp] segfault with locale
--- Comment #8 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 00:10 --- The same bug that's affecting libgfortran is affecting libstdc++ -- we've done a tail-call to a weakref function. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 25377 *** -- rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25527
[Bug target/25377] [4.2 Regression] weakref sibcalled with -fPIC
--- Comment #7 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 00:10 --- *** Bug 25527 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dev at stuffit dot at http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25377
[Bug c++/26085] New: missing warning on non-void function with no return statement where parameter is UDT with destructor
Here's a simple repro:
struct s {
~s() {} // comment out this line to see warning
};
int f(s) {
}
int main() {
f(s());
}
It seems if a function takes a user-defined type that has a destructor, the
warning is inhibited.
--
Summary: missing warning on non-void function with no return
statement where parameter is UDT with destructor
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jwray at google dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26085
[Bug testsuite/26086] New: FAIL: gcc.dg/gomp/pr25990.c (test for excess errors)
Executing on host: /mnt/gnu/gcc-3.3/objdir/gcc/xgcc -B/mnt/gnu/gcc-3.3/objdir/gc c/ /mnt/gnu/gcc-3.3/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gomp/pr25990.c -fopenmp -O2 -std= c99 -fno-show-column -S -o pr25990.s(timeout = 300) /mnt/gnu/gcc-3.3/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gomp/pr25990.c:9: error: complex.h: No such file or directory /mnt/gnu/gcc-3.3/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gomp/pr25990.c: In function 'main': /mnt/gnu/gcc-3.3/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gomp/pr25990.c:203: warning: implicit declaration of function 'cabsf' /mnt/gnu/gcc-3.3/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gomp/pr25990.c:203: warning: incompati ble implicit declaration of built-in function 'cabsf' /mnt/gnu/gcc-3.3/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gomp/pr25990.c:211: warning: implicit declaration of function 'sqrtf' /mnt/gnu/gcc-3.3/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gomp/pr25990.c:211: warning: incompati ble implicit declaration of built-in function 'sqrtf' compiler exited with status 1 -- Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/gomp/pr25990.c (test for excess errors) Product: gcc Version: 4.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: testsuite AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 GCC host triplet: hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 GCC target triplet: hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26086
[Bug c++/26085] missing warning on non-void function with no return statement where parameter is UDT with destructor
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 00:52 --- Which target is this for, I cannot reproduce this on powerpc-darwin or x86_64-linux-gnu or i866-linux-gnu with 4.0.0, 4.1.0, 4.0.3 or 4.2.0. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26085
