[Bug c++/17743] dependent expressions in attributes

--- Additional Comments From bkoz at redhat dot com 2004-10-19 06:23 --- Subject: Re: dependent expressions in attributes >Yes, but how do you force the compiler to ensure that the alignment of char foo >[] is sufficient to placement-allocate an object of type T into it? ...get __alig

[Bug target/16482] [4.0 Regression] gcc.c-torture/unsorted/SFset.c fails with "-O2 -m4"

--- Additional Comments From sanjivkumargupta at yahoo dot com 2004-10-19 06:06 --- Anyways, Kaz's method of determining pressure on R0 looks more correct than what I had written. So, I think we should keep his patch besides waiting for a fix in lcm.c Thanks --Sanjiv -- Wha

[Bug target/16482] [4.0 Regression] gcc.c-torture/unsorted/SFset.c fails with "-O2 -m4"

--- Additional Comments From naveen dot sharma at noida dot hcltech dot com 2004-10-19 05:57 --- (In reply to comment #6) > > I am wondering why this was missed? Was R0 a > > fixed_reg sometime during pre-3.3 > > releases, so as to generate (mem (r0) (pesudo)) > > instead of (mem (pseud

[Bug tree-optimization/14859] [tree-ssa] integrate identical cases of a switch statement.

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-19 04:29 --- And I was right on the tree-cleanup-branch: addi r3,r3,-14 subfic r3,r3,2 subfe r3,r3,r3 nand r3,r3,r3 andi. r3,r3,123 blr -- What|Removed

[Bug middle-end/18005] [4.0 Regression] ICE with simple loop with VLA

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-19 04:14 --- *** Bug 18052 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug c/18052] segmentation fault compiling ffv1.c from ffmpeg

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-19 04:14 --- Reduces to the testcase in PR 18005 (it obvious does as it is a VLA and crashes in the same spot). *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 18005 *** -- What|Removed

[Bug c/18052] segmentation fault compiling ffv1.c from ffmpeg

--- Additional Comments From phython at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-19 04:10 --- Created an attachment (id=7375) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7375&action=view) small testcase -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18052

[Bug c/18052] New: segmentation fault compiling ffv1.c from ffmpeg

ffv1.c doesn't compile with gcc 4.0 because cc1 segfaults trying to STRIP_NOPS compiling the function encode_rgb_frame. -- Summary: segmentation fault compiling ffv1.c from ffmpeg Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug target/18051] Internal compiler error in gen_lowpart

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-19 03:31 --- This is not an official FSF port, report the bug to the sourceforge project: . -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/18049] wrong result without -O2 with g++-3.4.2 and completely wrong result with any other g++ version

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-10-19 02:18 --- You are storing pointers to temporaries. Look here: - template class Constant { public: typedef T Type; private: const T* value_; public: Constant()

[Bug c/18051] Internal compiler error in gen_lowpart

--- Additional Comments From get at cs dot berkeley dot edu 2004-10-19 01:29 --- Created an attachment (id=7374) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7374&action=view) Preprocessed source that causes this bug -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18051

[Bug c/18051] New: Internal compiler error in gen_lowpart

Here is the GCC version information, from msp430-gcc: Reading specs from /cygdrive/c/mspgcc/bin/../lib/gcc-lib/msp430/3.2.3/specs Configured with: ./configure --target=msp430 -- prefix=/c/daten/mspgcc/build/installed --disable-nls Thread model: single gcc version 3.2.3 This is the command line:

[Bug target/18010] bad unwind info due to multiple returns (missing epilogue)

--- Additional Comments From wilson at specifixinc dot com 2004-10-19 01:07 --- Subject: Re: New: bad unwind info due to multiple returns (missing epilogue) On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 04:14, davidm at hpl dot hp dot com wrote: > To fix this bug, GCC should be emitting a ".restore sp

[Bug c/17807] [4.0 Regression] No warning/error for undefined local function.

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-19 00:48 --- I will see if I can have this rejected in the front-end. -- What|Removed |Added Ke

[Bug middle-end/17909] [4.0 Regression] ICE: verifiy_stms failed

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-19 00:46 --- I am updating the patch per my suggestion and Jason asking for it. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/18005] [4.0 Regression] ICE with simple loop with VLA

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 22:55 --- It really has nothing to do with that patch we are losing the TYPE_SIZE of the VLA, why? -- What|Removed |Added -

[Bug tree-optimization/17757] [4.0 Regression] emptyif.f90

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 22:51 --- Steven asked me to take care about the patch. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unas

[Bug tree-optimization/18046] Missed jump threading optimization

--- Additional Comments From stevenb at suse dot de 2004-10-18 22:50 --- Subject: Re: Missed jump threading optimization Hmm, threading the default case sounds interesting, but the real reason why the RTL threader catches this and the tree threader does not is because on RTL the test ca

[Bug middle-end/18045] [4.0 Regression] signed integer remainder for power of 2 broken

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 22:47 --- See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-10/msg01571.html -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug c/18050] -Wsequence-point reports false positives

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 22:45 --- Actually the patch will not work when we start warning about full expression, here is the patch just to give an example of what the final patch would look like: Index: c-common.c ==

[Bug middle-end/18045] [4.0 Regression] signed integer remainder for power of 2 broken

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 22:45 --- Subject: Bug 18045 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-18 22:45:01 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog expmed.c gcc/tests

[Bug target/18032] [4.0.0] SH: wrong code for EH

--- Additional Comments From kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 22:43 --- I'm testing a patch you suggest with the usual bootstrap and regression test. I'll send it to gcc-patches if it passes. --- ORIG/gcc/gcc/config/sh/sh.c 2004-10-08 07:46:30.0 +0900 +++ LOCAL/gcc/gcc

[Bug c/18050] -Wsequence-point reports false positives

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 22:35 --- We cannot just ignore ADDR_EXPR outright though (this is undefined): struct x { int i; }; void g(struct x*, int *); void f(struct x *y) { g(y++, &y->i); } I think I have a fix will test the fix. --

[Bug c/18050] -Wsequence-point reports false positives

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 22:25 --- Oh, you are right I need to look at the test more closely. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/17990] [3.4/4.0 Regression] unaligned xmm movaps on the stack with -O2 -msse

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-10-18 22:24 --- Uros, Jan, can you have a look at this bug? It's about an unaligned XMM operation to the stack. There is a small testcase and it is a pretty serious regression. -- What|Removed

gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 22:17 --- My patch is wrong, RTH is working on this now. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|pin

[Bug c/18050] -Wsequence-point reports false positives

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-10-18 22:15 --- Uh? How can an increment operation change the address of a variable? -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/17757] [4.0 Regression] emptyif.f90

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 22:12 --- Patch here: which fixes it. -- What|Removed |Added -

[Bug middle-end/17813] [4.0 regression] ada bootstrap failure on i486-linux

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 22:10 --- See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-10/msg01562.html -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/17813] [4.0 regression] ada bootstrap failure on i486-linux

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 22:06 --- Subject: Bug 17813 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-18 22:06:37 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog dojump.c expr.h explow.c

[Bug c/18050] -Wsequence-point reports false positives

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 22:01 --- No the warning is correct. ++a could come before or after taking the address of a which is why this is undefined. -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c/18050] New: -Wsequence-point reports false positives

void f(int a, int *b) { *b = a; } void g(void) { int a = 5; f(++a, &a); } with -Wall reports t.c:1: warning: operation on `a' may be undefined. This is with the following gcc versions: [I realize they are all Red Hat versions, not official releases, but I think that this happening on three differ

[Bug c++/18049] wrong result without -O2 with g++-3.4.2 and completely wrong result with any other g++ version

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-10-18 21:22 --- I'm working on a reduced testcase. I'll have to leave now but will report back when I'm back online later tonight. W. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18049

[Bug c++/18049] wrong result without -O2 with g++-3.4.2 and completely wrong result with any other g++ version

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-10-18 20:32 --- Actually, the typedef has nothing to do with it. Here's a modified FEMmain.cc file: - #include #include "Elements.h" int main() { Container2D Vec(6,6,1.0); FiniteElement SP2

[Bug c++/18049] wrong result without -O2 with g++-3.4.2 and completely wrong result with any other g++ version

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 20:31 --- Also I cannot compile this on ppc-darwin because you are using _X which is in the reserved identifier space for implementors (darwin defines it to be something). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug

[Bug c++/18049] wrong result without -O2 with g++-3.4.2 and completely wrong result with any other g++ version

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-10-18 20:24 --- Just for the reference, here's what I get: g/x> /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-3.4.3-pre/bin/c++ *.cc -o x ; ./x *** Before Declaration of typedef *** 3 -1.98746 12.1079 16.1439 2

[Bug c++/18049] wrong result without -O2 with g++-3.4.2 and completely wrong result with any other g++ version

--- Additional Comments From dkouroun at mailbox dot gr 2004-10-18 20:07 --- Created an attachment (id=7371) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7371&action=view) source code(important files: FEMmain.cc, Elements.h ) This is the source code. It uses expression templates.

[Bug c++/18049] New: wrong result without -O2 with g++-3.4.2 and completely wrong result with any other g++ version

Only g++-3.4.2 performs well and gives correct results if and only if it is compiled with -O2. Basically dx function takes an argument of type ***AssemblyTerm<0, Simplex, _2D, P2>,*** and returns ***AssemblyTerm<1, Simplex, _2D, P2>.*** Then in the main I declare AssemblyTerm<0, Simplex, _2D, P

[Bug middle-end/16973] [4.0 Regression] Differences between addresses of labels broken

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 19:39 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug middle-end/16973] [4.0 Regression] Differences between addresses of labels broken

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 19:38 --- Subject: Bug 16973 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-18 19:38:47 Modified files: gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog Added files: gcc/t

[Bug middle-end/16973] [4.0 Regression] Differences between addresses of labels broken

-- Bug 16973 depends on bug 15014, which changed state. Bug 15014 Summary: [4.0 regression] labels after are removed even though they are used http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15014 What|Old Value |New Value --

[Bug middle-end/15014] [4.0 regression] labels after are removed even though they are used

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 19:30 --- Fixed, since the testcases are already there, there is no need to apply any more. -- What|Removed |Added -

[Bug middle-end/15014] [4.0 regression] labels after are removed even though they are used

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 19:29 --- Subject: Bug 15014 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-18 19:29:53 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog tree-cfg.c Log message:

[Bug middle-end/16973] [4.0 Regression] Differences between addresses of labels broken

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 19:29 --- Subject: Bug 16973 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-18 19:29:53 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog tree-cfg.c Log message:

[Bug tree-optimization/18048] [4.0 Regression] mgrid loop performance regression with ivopts

-- What|Removed |Added CC||rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Keywords|

[Bug tree-optimization/18048] New: mgrid loop performance regression with ivopts

172.mgrid performance degraded after ivopts were introduced. The patch to improve iv selection did not improve the performance. This is separate from the register pressure problems. The tree loop optimization appears to be leaving unnecessary computations in loops. -- Summary: mg

[Bug c++/17743] dependent expressions in attributes

--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 18:57 --- Giovanni, this is applicable to TR1 via 4.5.5 Other transformations [tr.meta.trans.other] template struct aligned_storage { typedef unspecified type ; }; 1 type: an implementation defined POD type with size L

[Bug rtl-optimization/18002] [3.4/4.0 Regression] 'while' loop performace regression on avr target

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 18:47 --- Subject: Bug 18002 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-18 18:47:40 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog Log message: Note

[Bug c++/18047] [4.0 Regression] Wrong precedence between equality (==, !=) and < operators

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 18:36 --- Paolo since now I have been convinced that your patch caused this regression, could you look into it? -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug regression/17919] [4.0 Regression] ICE at cgraphunit.c:2907

-- What|Removed |Added Summary|[4.0 Regression] ICE at |[4.0 Regression] ICE at |/cgraphunit.c:2907 |cgraphunit.c:2907 http://gcc.gnu.org/

[Bug middle-end/17967] [4.0 Regression] Expand is considered slower? (remove_useless_stmts is considered part of expand)

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 18:31 --- I am testing a new patch which this time I fully tested it (it only removes the fold_stmt from the COND_EXPR as that is not needed at all). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17967

[Bug tree-optimization/18046] Missed jump threading optimization

--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-10-18 18:31 --- Subject: Re: Missed jump threading optimization On Mon, 2004-10-18 at 11:30, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > --- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 17:30 > ---

[Bug tree-optimization/17656] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: in replace_immediate_uses, at tree-ssa.c:1041

--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 18:05 --- Fix: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-10/msg01502.html -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/17656] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: in replace_immediate_uses, at tree-ssa.c:1041

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 17:39 --- Subject: Bug 17656 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-18 17:39:47 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog tree-ssa.c gcc/tes

[Bug tree-optimization/17841] table lookups vs binary search in switch-statements

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 17:32 --- We already get much better code on the mainline for this testcase as the constant for x is progated into the case statements so we only get the storing of the value into g. I have a fix for 4.x, there is a

[Bug tree-optimization/18046] Missed jump threading optimization

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 17:30 --- Diego told me to bug Law. Obedient as I always am, I hereby do so :-) Jeff, this is a missed jump threading opportunity, the default case can be threaded here. Any ideas how to fix this? --

[Bug c++/16564] g++ seems to go into an infinite loop after errors

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-10-18 17:14 --- Ah, never mind. I had misread my own example in that I thought that the instantiation of S only required instantiation of A, but in fact it also requires S > which requires S > >, etc, so we do have in fact an

[Bug other/17464] The newly built gcc shared libraries aren't used for bootstap and check

-- Bug 17464 depends on bug 17684, which changed state. Bug 17684 Summary: [3.4/4.0 Regression] /usr/ccs/bin/ld: Can't create libgcc_s.sl http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17684 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug bootstrap/17684] [3.4/4.0 Regression] /usr/ccs/bin/ld: Can't create libgcc_s.sl

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 17:00 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug tree-optimization/17529] [4.0 Regression] ICE in get_indirect_ref_operands

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-10-18 16:48 --- Looks like you reverted the patch but not the testcase which now fails. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17529

[Bug c++/17743] dependent expressions in attributes

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-10-18 16:38 --- (In reply to comment #15) > I guess I don't see why/how alignof should be different than sizeof > here (which works): > template > struct A > { >char foo[sizeof(T)]; > }; Yes, but how do you force

[Bug java/17845] can't build GNU Classpath

--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 16:13 --- I can't duplicate this problem, nor can anyone else duplicate it on any machine to which I have access. -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug rtl-optimization/17752] Hot/cold basic block partitioning optimization has problems

--- Additional Comments From ctice at apple dot com 2004-10-18 16:06 --- Subject: Re: Hot/cold basic block partitioning optimization has problems Actually, I had some private communication with Zack Weinberg, Mark Mitchell, and Richard Henderson about the hot/cold patches. The decis

[Bug target/16300] Bug in vendor /usr/include/net/if.h needs fixincluding

--- Additional Comments From bkorb at veritas dot com 2004-10-18 16:06 --- Subject: Re: Bug in vendor /usr/include/net/if.h needs fixincluding skunk at iskunk dot org wrote: > > --- Additional Comments From skunk at iskunk dot org 2004-10-18 15:16 --- > The build still fai

[Bug c++/16564] g++ seems to go into an infinite loop after errors

--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 16:04 --- I don't quite agree. The error about the hosed typedef is issued almost at once by the compiler. But since the compiler doesn't give up after the first error, it tries to instantiate the template without th

[Bug bootstrap/17684] [3.4/4.0 Regression] /usr/ccs/bin/ld: Can't create libgcc_s.sl

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 16:01 --- Subject: Bug 17684 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Branch: gcc-3_4-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-18 16:00:53 Modified files: gcc: Change

[Bug bootstrap/17684] [3.4/4.0 Regression] /usr/ccs/bin/ld: Can't create libgcc_s.sl

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 15:53 --- Subject: Bug 17684 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-18 15:52:52 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog Makefile.in mklibgcc.in

[Bug c++/18047] [4.0 Regression] Wrong precedence between equality (==, !=) and < operators

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-10-18 15:50 --- Well, in any case it's definitely a critical regression! W. -- What|Removed |Added Se

[Bug target/18032] [4.0.0] SH: wrong code for EH

--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 15:49 --- We don't emit call frame information for the epilogue. If we did, than any basic blocks that happen to come after the epilogue due to block reordering would end up with incorrect cfi information, since we d

[Bug c++/16564] g++ seems to go into an infinite loop after errors

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-10-18 15:47 --- I think your testcase isn't very good. After all, you really try to instantiate A>> and the compiler only gives up after its 500 nested instantiations. Your testcase is really badly constructed since it necess

[Bug target/16300] Bug in vendor /usr/include/net/if.h needs fixincluding

--- Additional Comments From skunk at iskunk dot org 2004-10-18 15:16 --- The build still fails with the patched inclhack.def (same error, same place). fixincludes does not appear to have patched the header in question; there is no if.h present in the build tree. -- http://gcc.gnu.org

[Bug target/16482] [4.0 Regression] gcc.c-torture/unsorted/SFset.c fails with "-O2 -m4"

--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at superh-support dot com 2004-10-18 15:16 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] gcc.c-torture/unsorted/SFset.c fails with "-O2 -m4" > The patch submitted by Kaz looks OK to me. The bug is in lcm.c, so it should be fixed there. > I am wonde

[Bug tree-optimization/17656] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: in replace_immediate_uses, at tree-ssa.c:1041

--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 15:13 --- Testing patch. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17656

[Bug c++/18047] [4.0 Regression] Wrong precedence between equality (==, !=) and < operators

--- Additional Comments From zack at codesourcery dot com 2004-10-18 15:02 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] Wrong precedence between equality (==, !=) and < operators I doubt that. I'd be inclined to point fingers at the operator-precedence parser patch, myself. zw -- http://g

[Bug libgcj/18036] Bad interaction between interpreter and Class.forName()

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 14:39 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug libgcj/18036] Bad interaction between interpreter and Class.forName()

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 14:26 --- Subject: Bug 18036 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Branch: gcj-abi-2-dev-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-18 14:26:27 Modified files: libjava:

gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 14:25 --- Patch here: . -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug libgcj/18036] Bad interaction between interpreter and Class.forName()

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 14:07 --- Subject: Bug 18036 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-18 14:07:42 Modified files: libjava: ChangeLog libjava/gnu/gcj/ru

[Bug middle-end/17549] [4.0 Regression] 15% increase in codesize with C code

--- Additional Comments From dberlin at dberlin dot org 2004-10-18 14:06 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] 15% increase in codesize with C code On Oct 18, 2004, at 9:55 AM, giovannibajo at libero dot it wrote: > > --- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it > 2004

[Bug c++/18047] [4.0 Regression] Wrong precedence between equality (==, !=) and < operators

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 14:06 --- Confirmed, the regression showed up on 2004-09-23 (between 01:40:01 and 16:10:02 EST/EDT). Since this effects only the C++ front-end, the patch which looks the most likely is: 2004-09-23 Zack Weinberg <[E

[Bug middle-end/17549] [4.0 Regression] 15% increase in codesize with C code

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-10-18 13:55 --- Yes, also on x86, we save approx 2k: 212134.0.0 -Os 191584.0.0 -Os -fno-tree-pre 184664.0.0 -Os -fno-tree-pre -fno-ivopts 201724.0.0 -Os -fno-ivopts 179713.4.1 -Os Daniel? --

[Bug c++/18047] New: Wrong precedence between equality (==, !=) and < operators

gcc-4.0 gives operator== higher precedence than operator<, which is against 5.10 paragraph 1: "Note: ahttp://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18047

[Bug middle-end/18045] [4.0 Regression] signed integer remainder for power of 2 broken

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 13:44 --- Thanks for confirming (I think -mtune=i486 is sufficient). Patch in testing. -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug target/16300] Bug in vendor /usr/include/net/if.h needs fixincluding

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-10-18 13:37 --- Subject: Re: Bug in vendor /usr/include/net/if.h needs fixincluding Bruce Korb wrote: >> I can only fix things about which I get feedback so it >> incrementally gets better. I'm sorry you found it diffi

[Bug middle-end/17549] [4.0 Regression] 15% increase in codesize with C code

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 13:35 --- Turning off GVN-PRE at least on PPC gets back to what it was for 3.3: 5704 temp.s 5796 temp1.s 11500 total -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17549

[Bug tree-optimization/18046] Missed jump threading optimization

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 13:22 --- Might I propose we don't deal with this as an enhancement request but as a "normal" bug? Killing the jump threader in cfgcleanup.c would be a mighty feat, it's one of the slowest parts of the cfgcleanup on R

[Bug regression/17919] [4.0 Regression] ICE at /cgraphunit.c:2907

--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2004-10-18 13:17 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] ICE at /cgraphunit.c:2907 > --- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 > 04:31 --- > I see that this looks fixed: >

[Bug middle-end/18045] [4.0 Regression] signed integer remainder for power of 2 broken

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 12:56 --- Confirmed (-march=i486 will show the bug on i686-*). -- What|Removed |Added Stat

[Bug tree-optimization/18046] Missed jump threading optimization

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 12:52 --- Confirmed. To summarize what the code should look like: extern void foo (void); extern int i; void bar (void) { switch (i) { case 0: foo (); break; default: goto other_block;

[Bug middle-end/18045] [4.0 Regression] signed integer remainder for power of 2 broken

-- What|Removed |Added CC||roger at eyesopen dot com Keywords||wrong-code Summary|Wrong

[Bug target/15286] ICE cause by reload

--- Additional Comments From uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 12:47 --- On s390, CANNOT_CHANGE_MODE_CLASS does indeed return false for such superclasses: #define CANNOT_CHANGE_MODE_CLASS(FROM, TO, CLASS) \ (GET_MODE_SIZE (FROM) != GET_MODE_SIZE (TO)

[Bug tree-optimization/18046] New: Missed jump threading optimization

Filed under unknown since there is no version tag for the tree-cleanup-branch. The problem probably also exists on mainline, but I have not tried it there. Consider this code, - extern void foo (void); extern int i; void bar (void) { switch (i

[Bug c++/16564] g++ seems to go into an infinite loop after errors

--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 12:14 --- Upon closer inspection, gcc does not enter an infinite loop, it just takes a while to finish. The point is that the default for -ftemplate-depth used to be 17 in older compilers. This was changed to 50 qui

[Bug libstdc++/17755] Can't compile djgpp cross-compiler

--- Additional Comments From psychonaut at nothingisreal dot com 2004-10-18 12:09 --- Is it possible you're jumping the gun again, Andris? I tried recompiling with the sys-include directory created as you indicated, and the build still fails. However, it does fail at a different point

[Bug middle-end/18045] New: Wrong code for signed integer remainder

The following testcase: extern void abort(void); long long smod16(long long x) { return x % 16; } int main(void) { if (smod16 (0x) != 0xF) abort (); return 0; } distilled from ada/uintp.adb:UI_From_Dint is miscompiled on i486 because of 2004-06-27 Roger Sayle <[EMAIL PROTE

[Bug target/16482] [4.0 Regression] gcc.c-torture/unsorted/SFset.c fails with "-O2 -m4"

--- Additional Comments From naveen dot sharma at noida dot hcltech dot com 2004-10-18 12:03 --- The patch submitted by Kaz looks OK to me. There are some heuristics in sh.c that were written to disable ready queue reordering when R0 is under pressure. But (mem (pseudo) (pseudo)) is a

[Bug c++/18044] method signatures with argument overloading does not work across class boundaries

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 11:36 --- Invalid, test in Bar hides test in Foo. Either use: using Foo::test; in front of the declaration of test in Bar. Or use the full name of test in Foo: class Foo { public: void test(char *x) { } }; cl

[Bug libgcj/18036] Bad interaction between interpreter and Class.forName()

-- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org | Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/16564] g++ goes into an infinite loop after errors

--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-18 10:36 --- > That's likely the smallest possible testcase: No, it isn't ;-) === template struct A { A a; }; A a; === This example is even worse, since th

[Bug c++/18044] New: method signatures with argument overloading does not work across class boundaries

This does not compile: class Foo { public: void test(char *x) { } }; class Bar : public Foo { public: void test(double t) { test("x"); } }; $ g++ -c test2.cc test2.cc: In member function `void Bar::test(double)': test2.cc:14: error: no matching function for call to `Bar::test(co

  1   2   >