[Bug middle-end/19920] [4.0 Regression] build broken on several targets due to recent 'DC' type update to libgcc2

--- Additional Comments From corsepiu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 07:35 --- (In reply to comment #12) > A call for testing patch is here: . With this patch applied, GCC-4.0 (20050216) builds again for avr-rtems* and h8300-rt

[Bug libgcj/10353] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] Java testsuite failures

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 07:31 --- > But since none of us have solaris we could not test it. Not sure what you meant with "us", we are all GCC hackers here. > So which testcases are regressions now (well just to make sure that I don't > m

[Bug c/19994] warn on parameter name mismatch

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 07:08 --- One more note from me on this bug forever. Most people don't use parameter names in prototypes to make sure that this confussion does not happen. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19994

[Bug c/19994] warn on parameter name mismatch

--- Additional Comments From cyeoh at samba dot org 2005-02-16 07:05 --- prototypes in header files can get out of sync with the function definitions (or parameters are simply get swapped around accidentally) - even with experienced programmers. Users of that interface then get unexpec

[Bug c++/19997] enum5.C complitation failed to produce

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 07:01 --- I had meant to close this. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/20000] missing warning for noreturn function returning non-void

--- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com 2005-02-16 06:51 --- Subject: Re: missing warning for noreturn function returning non-void On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, zack at codesourcery dot com wrote: > ... because the attribute used to get translated to a volatile qualifier >

[Bug c/20000] missing warning for noreturn function returning non-void

--- Additional Comments From zack at codesourcery dot com 2005-02-16 06:48 --- ... because the attribute used to get translated to a volatile qualifier on the function type, iirc. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2

[Bug c/19999] -Wfloat-equal does not warn for complex numbers

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 06:48 --- Confirmed, it is easy to see where the problem is when we look at the source: if (warn_float_equal && (code0 == REAL_TYPE || code1 == REAL_TYPE)) warning ("comparing floating point with == or !

[Bug c/20000] missing warning for noreturn function returning non-void

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 06:45 --- Confirmed, it is ovbious where the bug is if we look at the source: /* GNU C interprets a volatile-qualified function type to indicate that the function does not return. */ if ((t

[Bug c/20000] New: missing warning for noreturn function returning non-void

GCC warns for noreturn functions returning non-void, but only when declared in the obsolete way using volatile. typedef int ft(void); volatile ft f; warns "'noreturn' function returns non-void value", but int f(void) __attribute__((noreturn)); does not. -- Summary: missing warning

[Bug libstdc++/19998] FAIL: ext/enc_filebuf/char/13189.cc

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 06:42 --- Well actually this was fixed in 3.4.4 by: 2005-01-01 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * testsuite/ext/enc_filebuf/char/13189.cc: Fix, first include testsuite_hooks.h, to know whether incl

[Bug c/19999] New: -Wfloat-equal does not warn for complex numbers

-Wfloat-equal warns for comparison of real floating-point numbers, but not for complex numbers. double a, b; _Complex double c, d; int f(void) { return a == b; } int g(void) { return c == d; } warns for the comparison in f, but not for that in g. -- Summary: -Wfloat-equal does not wa

[Bug libstdc++/19998] FAIL: ext/enc_filebuf/char/13189.cc

--- Additional Comments From giftbound at verizon dot net 2005-02-16 06:41 --- Subject: Re: FAIL: ext/enc_filebuf/char/13189.cc On Wednesday 16 February 2005 01:33 am, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > --- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 >

[Bug libstdc++/19998] FAIL: ext/enc_filebuf/char/13189.cc

-- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19998

[Bug libstdc++/19998] FAIL: ext/enc_filebuf/char/13189.cc

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 06:33 --- Please read http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs for what we really need. Also what target is this? Because I don't see these failures in . Also what is the

[Bug regression/19829] [4.0 regression] cris-elf testsuite failure: 21_strings/basic_string/find/char/3.cc execution test

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 06:31 --- (In reply to comment #4) > Changed from fail with "Tue Feb 15 18:04:03 UTC 2005" > to pass with "Wed Feb 16 04:21:14 UTC 2005" werid because there does not look anything (at least to my eyes) which could h

[Bug libstdc++/19998] New: FAIL: ext/enc_filebuf/char/13189.cc

FAIL: ext/enc_filebuf/char/13189.cc (test for excess errors) WARNING: ext/enc_filebuf/char/13189.cc compilation failed to produce executable FAIL: ext/enc_filebuf/wchar_t/13189.cc (test for excess errors) WARNING: ext/enc_filebuf/wchar_t/13189.cc compilation failed to produce executable --

[Bug regression/19829] [4.0 regression] cris-elf testsuite failure: 21_strings/basic_string/find/char/3.cc execution test

--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 06:27 --- Changed from fail with "Tue Feb 15 18:04:03 UTC 2005" to pass with "Wed Feb 16 04:21:14 UTC 2005" -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19829

[Bug c++/19997] enum5.C complitation failed to produce

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 06:27 --- Fixed already in 4.0.0. the warning is correct this should not even try to compile to an executable. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/18491] testsuite failure: WARNING: g++.old-deja/g++.mike/p10769a.C compilation failed to produce executable

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 06:19 --- *** Bug 19996 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug debug/19996] p107669a.C Complitation failed

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 06:19 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 18491 *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug debug/19997] New: enum5.C complitation failed to produce

WARNING: g++.old-deja/g++.other/enum5.C compilation failed to produce executable -- Summary: enum5.C complitation failed to produce Product: gcc Version: 3.4.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: d

[Bug debug/19996] New: p107669a.C Complitation failed

WARNING: g++.old-deja/g++.mike/p10769a.C compilation failed to produce executable -- Summary: p107669a.C Complitation failed Product: gcc Version: 3.4.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: debug

[Bug tree-optimization/15784] fold misses binary optimization

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 05:38 --- Patch here: . Thanks James for looking into this. -- What|Removed |Added -

[Bug libstdc++/19995] libstdc++ fails to build correctly on AIX 5.2

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 05:14 --- Cannot run a 64-bit program on a 32-bit machine. You want --disable-aix64 but that does not work for 3.4.x where x < 4 (maybe even when build normal it should have dected it I don't know). Anyways this i

[Bug bootstrap/18033] [3.4/4.0 Regression] --disable-aix64 doesn't remove ppc64 from multilib list

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 05:15 --- *** Bug 19995 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/19995] New: libstdc++ fails to build correctly on AIX 5.2

I had no problem building gcc-3.3.1 on this system. However, when I went to build gcc-3.4.3, it failes in the ppc64 portion of libstdc++. The error given is the same as seen in this very old thread: Configure is run as: cd ../gcc-build/rs_aix52

[Bug c++/10] handling of non-type template parameters

-- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |3.0.x http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10

[Bug libgcj/10353] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] Java testsuite failures

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 04:55 --- The Process_* failure should be fixed by: 2005-02-15 David Daney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bryce McKinlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * prims.cc (_Jv_CreateJavaVM): Add comment about ini

[Bug bootstrap/18810] [4.0 Regression] Darwin's as unlinks /dev/null

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 04:49 --- Fixed finnally in gcc. (this has been also reported and fixed in a newer cctools too by Geoff Keating). Thanks for convencing me there was a workaround and a place to fix this. -- What|Re

[Bug bootstrap/18810] [4.0 Regression] Darwin's as unlinks /dev/null

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 04:49 --- Subject: Bug 18810 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-16 04:48:48 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog mklibgcc.in Log message:

[Bug c/19994] warn on parameter name mismatch

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 04:39 --- Why, the name in the prototype means nothing. Yes it would be useful for the first time programer but it might get in the way of valid and defined code. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=

[Bug c/19994] New: warn on parameter name mismatch

Would like to be able to get a warning when parameter names don't match the prototype. eg. void foo(int x, int y); then doing void foo(int y, int x) { } should generate a warning. -- Summary: warn on parameter name mismatch Product: gcc Version: unknown

[Bug libgcj/19823] java fails with non-executable memory

--- Additional Comments From mckinlay at redhat dot com 2005-02-16 04:22 --- Michael (or someone else who has seen this bug), Could you confirm that this patch fixes it? Thanks -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19823

[Bug libgcj/19823] java fails with non-executable memory

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 04:10 --- Subject: Bug 19823 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-16 04:10:42 Modified files: boehm-gc : ChangeLog configure.ac configure.host

[Bug ada/19900] [4.0 Regression] ACATS c391002 c432002 ICE categorize_ctor_elements_1

--- Additional Comments From kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu 2005-02-16 04:08 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] ACATS c391002 c432002 ICE categorize_ctor_elements_1 Thanks for looking into this. I hadn't gotten a chance yet, but was very close to getting to it. Just fo

[Bug fortran/15181] gfc_conv_component_ref: Assertion `c->backend_decl' failed

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 03:50 --- Fixed. Most likely for a while now. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug target/18482] mmix-knuth-mmixware testsuite failure: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 03:48 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW E

[Bug tree-optimization/18527] cannot determine number of iterations for loops with <=

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 03:37 --- Also related to PR 19210 where we don't use bdnz because we don't know if the loop is finite. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/18883] ICE in gfc_finish_var_decl

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 03:32 --- *** Bug 19971 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/19971] Internal compiler error

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 03:32 --- After looking into another example, this is a dup of bug 18883 which already have a small testcase. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 18883 *** -- What|Removed

[Bug fortran/18883] ICE in gfc_finish_var_decl

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 03:31 --- Only the module is needed to reproduce the bug: module helper implicit none contains function dud(x) integer, intent(in) :: x character(selected_int_kind(x)+2) dud dud

[Bug fortran/19971] Internal compiler error

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 03:29 --- *** Bug 19990 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/19990] internal compiler error gfc_finish_var_decl

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 03:29 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19971 *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/19971] Internal compiler error

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 03:26 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW E

[Bug target/19924] [AVR] MODES_TIEABLE incorrect

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 03:22 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug ada/19900] [4.0 Regression] ACATS c391002 c432002 ICE categorize_ctor_elements_1

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 03:21 --- Just for the record UNION TYPE is defined in tree.def as something different than what the Ada front- end is using it for, From tree.def: /* Union in C. Like a struct, except that the offsets of the fields

[Bug c/19924] [AVR] MODES_TIEABLE incorrect

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 03:17 --- Subject: Bug 19924 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-16 03:17:13 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/config/avr : a

[Bug tree-optimization/19967] [4.0 Regression] built-in folding causes excess diagnostics

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 02:05 --- Patch here: . -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/19317] [4.0 Regression] removing a temporary return value when we cannot

--- Additional Comments From mueller at kde dot org 2005-02-16 02:02 --- bootstrap failure is fixed, and 16405 works too, but this testcase still fails. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/19993] -mlong-double-128 weirdness

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16 02:01 --- First: printf( "sin( 1.2345) = %.30f = %.30f\n", R, R); Is wrong, as R is pased as a two doubles (as this is the how 128bit long doubles are done in IBM's 128bit format). Second the following shows the

[Bug target/19718] [3.3 Regression] longcall attributed doesn't work for standard C function names

--- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2005-02-16 01:11 --- Does -fno-builtin cure the problem? See also pr19746 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19718

[Bug target/19993] New: -mlong-double-128 weirdness

[G5:gpc/testgpc/adriaan] adriaan% gcc -v Reading specs from /Developer/Pascal/gcc343/lib/gcc/powerpc-apple-darwin7.7.0/3.4.3/specs Configured with: ../gcc-3.4.3/configure --enable-languages=c --enable-threads=posix --prefix=/Developer/Pascal/gcc343 Thread model: posix gcc version 3.4.3 [G5:gpc/test

[Bug target/19411] Simple program causes gcc to run out of memory

--- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2005-02-16 01:03 --- Changing to target since this is due to Aldy's altivec.h implementation. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/19931] gcc 3.4.x. internal compiler error: Segmentation fault; cross-powerpc on winxp

--- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2005-02-16 00:28 --- This has been fixed, most likely by 2004-10-13 Richard Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * crtstuff.c (__FRAME_END__): Remove mode attribute. Find 32-bit integer from internal limits macros.

[Bug target/19087] Overflowed address in dwarf debug line information

--- Additional Comments From dwatkins at tascsystems dot com 2005-02-16 00:04 --- Regarding this bug and AVRFreaks Forum topic: http://www.avrfreaks.com/index.php? name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=23436&highlight=&sid=e1dbd9f208947a5efc679075b4af f237 in which the debug info for code pas

[Bug c++/19992] -fhosted/-ffreestanding for C++

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 23:48 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW E

[Bug preprocessor/19077] [3.4 Regression] Internal compiler error compiling MPlayer

--- Additional Comments From echristo at redhat dot com 2005-02-15 23:45 --- I suppose I could apply the patch there too. -- What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED

[Bug middle-end/19988] [4.0 Regression] pessimizes fp multiply-add/subtract combo

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 23:42 --- Almost want to say this is caused by: 2004-07-11 Roger Sayle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * fold-const.c (fold) : Canonicalize X + -C as X - C for floating point additions, to keep real immediate c

[Bug preprocessor/19077] [3.4 Regression] Internal compiler error compiling MPlayer

--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 23:36 --- Not fixed on the 3.4 branch. -- What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED

[Bug c++/19992] New: -fhosted/-ffreestanding for C++

C++ has the concepts of hosted and freestanding implementations, so the -fhosted and -ffreestanding flags should be supported for C++ rather than being C-only. -- Summary: -fhosted/-ffreestanding for C++ Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libstdc++/19955] [3.4/4.0 regression] Second std::ctype::narrow() does not call std::ctype::do_narrow()

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 23:29 --- Subject: Bug 19955 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-15 23:29:52 Modified files: libstdc++-v3 : ChangeLog libstdc++-v3/inclu

[Bug middle-end/19920] [4.0 Regression] build broken on several targets due to recent 'DC' type update to libgcc2

--- Additional Comments From bjoern dot m dot haase at web dot de 2005-02-15 23:24 --- FYI: I have just tested the patch posted in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00858.html After applying this patch, the build for the avr target again succeeds. Yours, Björn

[Bug tree-optimization/18947] [4.0 Regression] [non-UAAT] external inline and normal function of the same name

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 23:23 --- Patch here: . -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/19991] [3.4/4.0 regression] Enum not accepted in array-size

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 23:20 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at

[Bug preprocessor/19077] [3.4/4.0 Regression] Internal compiler error compiling MPlayer

--- Additional Comments From echristo at redhat dot com 2005-02-15 23:18 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug preprocessor/19077] [3.4/4.0 Regression] Internal compiler error compiling MPlayer

: ChangeLog macro.c Added files: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/cpp: 20050215-1.c Log message: 2005-02-15 Eric Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR preprocessor/19077 * macro.c (cpp_macro_definition): Move handling of whitespace to PREV_WHITE condi

[Bug target/19019] GCC ldouble format incompatibility with XLC long double

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 23:17 --- Subject: Bug 19019 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-15 23:16:49 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/config/rs6000:

[Bug c++/19991] [3.4/4.0 regression] Enum not accepted in array-size

--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 23:16 --- Sorry, this is related to PR19883, of course. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19991

[Bug middle-end/19988] [4.0 Regression] pessimizes fp multiply-add/subtract combo

-- What|Removed |Added Component|c |middle-end Keywords||missed-optimization Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/19991] New: [3.4/4.0 regression] Enum not accepted in array-size

The following valid code snippet is rejected since gcc 3.4.0: = enum { e = 1 }; template struct A { static const int i = e; char a[i]; }; = The error message is: bug.cc:6: error: size of array `a' is not an integral consta

[Bug fortran/19990] New: internal compiler error gfc_finish_var_decl

Internal compiler error in compiling a f90-module of the HSL library on RedHat Fedora Core 3 Linux, i686, IBM Thinkpad, Kernel 2.6.10 > version informations > ./gcc -v Using built-in specs. Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: ../gcc/configure --enable-languages=c,f95 --prefix=/usr/work/2005

[Bug c++/19989] New: Inconsistency with zero-sized arrays

The following testcase shows some inconsistency w.r.t zero-size arrays. Without "-pedantic" we diagnose the array(s) whose dimension is found via dependent lookup. == template struct A { static const int i = 0; }; template struct B { int x[A::i]

[Bug c/19988] New: [4.0 Regression] pessimizes fp multiply-add/subtract combo

When I compile the following code with 'gcc -O3 --save-temps -c': double foo(double x, double y) { return ((x + 0.1234 * y) * (x - 0.1234 * y)); } gcc 3.x gives one load of the constant 0.1234, one multiplication 0.1234 * y, one addition, one subtraction, and the final multiplication: total

[Bug middle-end/19987] [meta-bug] fold missing optimizations in general

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 22:31 --- Confirmed, added the most I know of. -- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|

[Bug middle-end/19987] New: [meta-bug] fold missing optimizations in general

Just a meta-bug for missing fold optimizations. -- Summary: [meta-bug] fold missing optimizations in general Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization, meta-bug Severity: enhancement Pri

[Bug middle-end/19986] [meta-bug] fold missing optimizations (compared to RTL)

-- What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||19987 nThis|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19986

[Bug tree-optimization/15255] [tree-ssa] a * 2 + a * 2 is not converted to a * 4

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 22:22 --- As I said before I was not going to fix a fold problem (for the first testcase). -- What|Removed |Added --

[Bug middle-end/19986] [meta-bug] fold missing optimizations (compared to RTL)

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 22:14 --- Confirmed, there might be others which I had forgot. -- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDepends

[Bug middle-end/19986] New: [meta-bug] fold missing optimizations (compared to RTL)

Just a meta-bug for all the missing fold which are missing which are in the RTL version of simplify_*. -- Summary: [meta-bug] fold missing optimizations (compared to RTL) Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optim

[Bug tree-optimization/15785] fold misses unary transformation

--- Additional Comments From phython at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 21:58 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug middle-end/19985] executables created with -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage segfault in gcov_exit ()

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 21:55 --- Hmm, this looks like we don't deal with dlclose correctly. Honza could you comment on this if there is a way to deal with dlclose? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19985

[Bug middle-end/19985] executables created with -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage segfault in gcov_exit ()

--- Additional Comments From lothar at xcerla dot com 2005-02-15 21:46 --- Created an attachment (id=8201) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8201&action=view) test case to reproduce the segfault This is a project of a small test case that reproduces the segmentation fa

[Bug middle-end/19985] executables created with -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage segfault in gcov_exit ()

-- What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Component|c++

[Bug c++/19985] New: executables created with -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage segfault in gcov_exit ()

I created a small test I will attach to this bug report that shows that executables created with -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage crash in gcov_exit () if they dynamically load functions from libraries. I tested with gcc 3.4.1 and 4.0-20050213. Both show the same problem. Here's the gdb stac

[Bug middle-end/19983] __builtin_nan should allow 0X as well as 0x

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 21:28 --- The bug is very obvious from the code: if (*str == '0') { if (*++str == 'x') str++, base = 16; else base = 8; } Note no check for the uperca

[Bug c/19978] overflow in expression of constants should not cause multiple warnings

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 21:20 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW E

[Bug c/19977] overflow in non-static initializer should not be pedwarn

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 21:20 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW E

[Bug c/19976] integer division by zero in subexpression should be overflow

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 21:18 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW E

[Bug rtl-optimization/18513] unrar 3.4.3 build fails with bus error

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 21:15 --- Can you try with 3.4.3? Also can you provide the output of "gcc -v"? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18513

[Bug middle-end/19983] __builtin_nan should allow 0X as well as 0x

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 21:14 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW E

[Bug middle-end/19984] nan should be C99 built-in

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 21:13 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW E

[Bug c++/19982] [3.3/3.4 Regression] The left side of the "=" operator must be an lvalue.

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 21:10 --- Confirmed but this is minor as this is an ICE after an error. Also note on the mainline we get one error message and no ICE (or "confused by earlier errors, bailing out"). -- What|Removed

Re: Problem building 3.4.3 on solaris 8

> I am trying to build gcc-3.4.3 on solaris 8. I get to the make install > point and then there is a problem. It appears the INSTALL variable is not > getting set right for the install step in the various directories. > > I have the source in /gcc-3.4.3 and the build dir is > /gcc-3.4.3_sun

[Bug middle-end/19984] New: nan should be C99 built-in

The functions nan, nanf, nanl should be C99 built-in functions rather than just being built-in in the __builtin_ form. They were wrongly C90 built-ins, changed to be __builtin_ only to fix bug 14635. At that time bug 14649 meant they shouldn't be C99 built-ins, but bug 14649 has been fixed so the

[Bug middle-end/19983] New: __builtin_nan should allow 0X as well as 0x

The __builtin_nan functions should allow 0X as well as 0x in their arguments. real.c:real_nan only allows 0x at present. In double n1 = __builtin_nan("0x1"); double n2 = __builtin_nan("0X1"); only the first initializer is accepted, but both should be. -- Summary: __builtin_nan shoul

[Bug c++/19982] New: The left side of the "=" operator must be an lvalue.

Sourc code for t.cpp: int mymain() { int i = 1; int j = 2; const volatile int &ri = i; const_cast(&ri) = &j; // error - lvalue required for = return 0; } Expe

[Bug target/19300] [4.0 Regression] PCH failures on sparc-linux

-- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19300

[Bug target/19300] [4.0 Regression] PCH failures on sparc-linux

--- Additional Comments From phython at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-15 20:56 --- Fixed with the previous commit -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

Re: Problem building 3.4.3 on solaris 8

This is PR 13993 which only effects if you configure with a relative patch and only 3.4.x, it is fixed on the mainline already. -- Pinski

  1   2   >