--- Comment #15 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-03 04:03
---
(In reply to comment #14)
> I would like to see if Stroustrup could suggest a better solution? Have
> you tried contacting some of that caliber in compiler design for
> suggestions?
Why don't you write to comp
--- Comment #23 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-03 03:19
---
Subject: Bug 26626
Author: dberlin
Date: Wed May 3 03:19:22 2006
New Revision: 113493
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113493
Log:
2006-05-02 Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Fix
--- Comment #14 from mronell at alumni dot upenn dot edu 2006-05-03 02:39
---
It seems to me an approach using thunks, or pass by name, or a similar
approach should work. Each process can evaluate the object in shared
memory with reference to the local virtual table to gain access to
--- Comment #23 from RNMcLean at yahoo dot com 2006-05-03 01:51 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Let me stress the importance of fixing this bug: it occurs in Basic Linear
> Algebra Subprograms (BLAS), in program dcabs1.f:
>
> double precision function dcabs1(z)
> double comp
--- Comment #2 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-03 01:45 ---
omp_is_private is supposed to prevent extra PRIVATE clauses from being added
when they're not needed -- since each PRIVATE clause results in a new decl
being created.
I believe your patch is correct.
--
rth at gcc
gcc.c-torture/execute/built-in-setjmp.c fails at -O2 with the ICE:
built-in-setjmp.c:39: error: call edges for non-call insn in bb 6
built-in-setjmp.c:39: error: in basic block 6:
built-in-setjmp.c:39: error: flow control insn inside a basic block
(call_insn/u:HI 58 147 172 6 (parallel [
gcc.c-torture/execute/960209-1.c fails at -O3 with the ICE:
960209-1.c:36: error: unrecognizable insn:
(insn:HI 206 103 184 17 (set (subreg:DI (reg:SI 205) 0)
(reg:DI 215)) -1 (nil)
(nil))
It seems that this move insn is generated at loop-invariant.c:
move_invariant_reg().
--
--- Comment #18 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-03 00:48
---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-03 00:44 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #14 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-03 00:19
---
Subject: Bug 27102
Author: mmitchel
Date: Wed May 3 00:19:40 2006
New Revision: 113492
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113492
Log:
PR c++/27102
* decl.c (grokdeclarator): R
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2006-05-03 00:12 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] gcc.dg/20021014-1.c (test
for excess errors) fails
On Tue, 2 May 2006, sje at cup dot hp dot com wrote:
> I am not seeing this failure in my recent builds, should I go ahead and clos
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-05-03 00:08 ---
Hi Doug. I'm afraid that, everything considered - in particular the status of
the rope extension - we have to go with the ugly approach: things like
_Rope_iterator::_M_check() actively do change the object...
--
pcarlin
--- Comment #3 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2006-05-02 23:34 ---
I am not seeing this failure in my recent builds, should I go ahead and close
this defect?
--
sje at cup dot hp dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 23:04 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the test from comment #0 identified
this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=111608
r111608 | dberlin | 2006-03-01 17:46:56 + (Wed, 01 Mar 2006)
--
--
rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from sje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 22:16 ---
Subject: Bug 27032
Author: sje
Date: Tue May 2 22:16:13 2006
New Revision: 113484
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113484
Log:
PR testsuite/27032
* gcc.c-torture/compile/pr23237.c:
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 22:05 ---
Confirmed, not a regression. I found another bug when looking into this one
though, PR 27403.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27396
Rope iterators (both const and mutable) do not meet the requirements of an
Input Iterator, because their dereference operator only operates on non-const
objects. Table 72 of the C++98 Standard requires the valid expression *a, where
a is a const iterator, but this valid expression does not work wit
Testcase:
template struct A { typedef int I; };
template
typename A::I foo (T) { return 0; }
-
I found this while looking at PR 27402. This is not a regression as it did not
work in 2.95 on wards.
--
Summary: T() can be an integer constant but is rejected as not
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27398
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
http://
--- Comment #27 from simon_baldwin at yahoo dot com 2006-05-02 21:01
---
Here's a relatively simple test case, in case anyone wants one, that reproduces
either this problem, or a very similar one. It requires a mix of compilers,
and of optimization selections, to reproduce, though. On
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 21:00 ---
I bet $100 this is already fixed in SVN for 4.1.1.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27401
I believe the program below is well-formed (the latest EDG eccp 3.7 concurs),
but gcc 4.1.0 rejects it.
$ cat t.cpp && gcc --version && gcc t.cpp
template struct A { typedef int I; };
struct X { };
template struct B { typedef typename T::J J; };
template struct B { typedef X J; };
template
t
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 20:56 ---
That does in dead means the port is not done. I would talk to Marc Espie
(hopefully I spelled his name correctly).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27396
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 20:03 ---
Subject: Bug 26943
Author: jakub
Date: Tue May 2 20:03:38 2006
New Revision: 113483
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113483
Log:
PR c++/26943
* omp-low.c (maybe_lookup_decl_in_ou
--- Comment #17 from law at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 19:54 ---
Subject: Bug 27364
Author: law
Date: Tue May 2 19:54:20 2006
New Revision: 113481
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113481
Log:
PR tree-optimization/27364
* tree-vrp.c (vrp_int_co
I think I found a bug related to operator overloading in gfortran-4.1.0 (as
you can see below gfortran-4.2.0 doesn't seem to have the problem).
The problem arises when trying to perform an operation which takes
a multidimensional array and two operators are defined:
- One with two multidimens
--- Comment #16 from law at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 19:44 ---
Subject: Bug 27364
Author: law
Date: Tue May 2 19:44:46 2006
New Revision: 113480
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113480
Log:
PR tree-optimization/27364
* tree-vrp.c (vrp_int_co
--- Comment #14 from law at redhat dot com 2006-05-02 19:44 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] Gcc 4.2
miscompiles binutils
On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 18:21 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-30 18:21
>
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
$ cat EnumClass.java
class EnumClass
{
static public final EnumClass x = new EnumClass ();
}
$ cat ClassSwitch.java
class ClassSwitch
{
public static void main (String[] args)
{
switch (args.length) {
case EnumClass.x: return;
}
System.out.println ("Switc
This compiles:
public class ClassIndex
implements Comparable
{
static final ClassIndex x = new ClassIndex ();
public int compareTo (Object o)
{
return 0;
}
public static void main (String[] args)
{
System.out.println (ClassIndex.x);
byte[] b = ne
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 19:30 ---
Add openmp to keywords.
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywo
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 19:28 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Index: parse.c
> ===
> --- parse.c (revision 113473)
> +++ parse.c (working copy)
> @@ -624,6 +624,7 @@ next_statement
The following code snippet causes an ICE since GCC 3.4.0:
==
struct A
{
template void* foo(;
};
==
bug.cc:3: error: expected primary-expression before ';' token
bug.cc:3: error: ISO C++ forbids initialization of member 'foo'
bug.
The following invalid code snippet causes an ICE on mainline:
=
template struct A;
=
bugA.cc:1: error: expected `)' before '>' token
bugA.cc:1: internal compiler error: tree check: accessed elt 1 of tree_vec with
0 elts in get_innermost_temp
Hello,
while trying to compile recent trunk (20060502) on AMD64/OpenBSD platform I've
found that compilation fails quickly with:
checking for .preinit_array/.init_array/.fini_array support... no
checking if mkdir takes one argument... no
*** Configuration x86_64-unknown-openbsd3.9 not supp
Below are 2 programs which test the REDUCTION clause for arrays in OpenMP.
gfortran ICE's when trying to compile them.
gfortran information:
Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-linux
Configured with: ../gcc/configure
--prefix=/cosmic/coudert/tmp/gfortran-20060502/irun
--enable-languages=c,fo
--- Comment #5 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 18:21 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > In 3.x, double -> char/int conversion was done consistently with the
> > documented
> > behaviour of integer -> signed integer type conversion.
> > http://gcc.
183 yampa /king/staff/raman/ gcc bad.c
184 yampa /king/staff/raman/ a.out
4 4 byte ( 0 < -439 ) 4 4 byte
185 yampa /king/staff/raman/ cat bad.c
#include /* standard I/O functions etc., also stdin, stdout, stderr
*/
main(argc,argv,envp)
{ int I=-439;
size_t ist=0;
if (ist < I) printf("%d %d
--- Comment #8 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 18:18 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the test from comment #4 identified
this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=101295
r101295 | hubicka | 2005-06-24 15:14:04 + (Fri, 24 Jun 2005)
--
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 18:00 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> In 3.x, double -> char/int conversion was done consistently with the
> documented
> behaviour of integer -> signed integer type conversion.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.1.0/gcc/In
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 17:58 ---
See PR 9325 and PR 6391.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27394
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 17:54 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> In 3.x, double -> char/int conversion was done consistently with the
> documented
And there is a dup of this bug some where which has been closed and I cannot
find it right now.
--
h
--- Comment #1 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 17:53 ---
In 3.x, double -> char/int conversion was done consistently with the documented
behaviour of integer -> signed integer type conversion.
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.1.0/gcc/Integers-implementation.html#Integer
--- Comment #4 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 17:38 ---
The inner loop in the .cunroll, .ivopts and .final_cleanup with GVN-PRE
disabled look like this:
# Int_Index_37 = PHI ;
:;
(*D.1561_56)[Int_Index_37] = Int_Loc_3;
Int_Index_58 = Int_Index_37 + 1;
if (D.1563_4
--- Comment #13 from mckinlay at redhat dot com 2006-05-02 17:32 ---
*** Bug 27389 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
Bug 26447 depends on bug 27389, which changed state.
Bug 27389 Summary: [4.2 Regression] java: verify_flow_info fails
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show
--- Comment #3 from mckinlay at redhat dot com 2006-05-02 17:32 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26447 ***
--
mckinlay at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #8 from sayle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 17:15 ---
Subject: Bug 25309
Author: sayle
Date: Tue May 2 17:15:25 2006
New Revision: 113476
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113476
Log:
PR c/25309
* c-typeck.c (struct spelling): Make
This testcase:
int
f
()
{
double d = 128.;
return (signed char) d;
}
int
main ()
{
return f () != -128;
}
Succeeds at -O0 and fails at -O1. While the C standard says that the result
of the conversion is unspecified, it is a quality of implementation issue to
give, where reasonably possib
--- Comment #1 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 16:57 ---
Index: parse.c
===
--- parse.c (revision 113473)
+++ parse.c (working copy)
@@ -624,6 +624,7 @@ next_statement (void)
if (gfc_at_eol ())
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-05-02 16:43 ---
Triggered by r113425.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #13 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 16:31
---
Mark, your patch seems to cause some fall-out.
The following testcase now ICEs on mainline:
===
template void T::foo;
===
bug.cc:1: error: variable
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 16:23
---
Fixed in 4.2.0.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assigned
--- Comment #14 from ed at eh3 dot com 2006-05-02 16:20 ---
Hi Jerry, I just re-ran the test case in this bug report and some other
examples from our oceanic/atmospheric model (mitgcm.org) using gfortran
which was checked out at about 12:30am (May 2) with:
svn -q checkout svn://gcc.
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 16:16 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=105682
r105682 | mmitchel | 2005-10-20 18:01:52 + (Thu, 20 Oct 2005)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org c
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 16:14 ---
The warning was issued again with this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=101269
r101269 | jason | 2005-06-23 14:44:21 + (Thu, 23 Jun 2005)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=
--- Comment #2 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 15:59
---
Subject: Bug 27309
Author: mmitchel
Date: Tue May 2 15:59:50 2006
New Revision: 113473
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113473
Log:
PR c++/27309
* class.c (add_method): Call
--- Comment #6 from amacleod at redhat dot com 2006-05-02 15:40 ---
Created an attachment (id=11361)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11361&action=view)
proposed patch
This is the patch undergoing testing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27381
--- Comment #5 from amacleod at redhat dot com 2006-05-02 15:38 ---
The assert condition is not flawed. It has exposed a second bug with the old
immuse iterator scheme that was also hidden by the old algorithm work around
Jeff had implemented.
When iterating over the immediate uses, an
--- Comment #7 from j at uriah dot heep dot sax dot de 2006-05-02 15:37
---
Forwarding this comment on behalf of Bjoern Haase:
Preliminary analysis of the RTL generated without optimization shows that
the problem is present already directly after expand. Maybe the problem
is triggered
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27367
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27371
--- Comment #6 from j at uriah dot heep dot sax dot de 2006-05-02 15:34
---
(Sorry, I hit a bit too fast.)
--
j at uriah dot heep dot sax dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from j at uriah dot heep dot sax dot de 2006-05-02 15:33
---
(In reply to comment #4)
> > Is this one related to PR21834?
> Anyway, my report has a preprocessed source file attached, so it
> might be more useful to non-AVR aware GCC developers.
Perhaps Richard (Cc'ed)
--- Comment #2 from mckinlay at redhat dot com 2006-05-02 15:33 ---
I could not reproduce the bootstrap failure on x86-64 as of revision 113466.
The test case does fail, however, when built with -findirect-dispatch.
Looks like a dupe of bug 26447 ?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27386
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 15:31 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 15:28 ---
Confirmed. this happens everywhere.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 15:26 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--- Comment #5 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 15:26 ---
Just checked in a patch.
--
kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Stat
--- Comment #4 from j at uriah dot heep dot sax dot de 2006-05-02 15:25
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Is this one related to PR21834?
Possible, yes. The symptoms are similar. Sorry for missing that
one at my prior search.
Anyway, my report has a preprocessed source file attached, s
==+
| 4.2.0 20060502 (experimental) (hppa-unknown-linux-gnu) GCC error:|
| in n_of_executions_at_least, at tree-ssa-loop-niter.c:1772 |
| Error detected at errout.adb:2573:1 |
| Please submit a bug report; see
--- Comment #3 from berndtrog at yahoo dot com 2006-05-02 15:19 ---
Is this one related to PR21834?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27386
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 15:19
---
PR 27389 looks like a reduced testcase.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 15:17 ---
Subject: Bug 27387
Author: kazu
Date: Tue May 2 15:17:25 2006
New Revision: 113471
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113471
Log:
Backport:
2006-05-02 Kazu Hirata <[EMAIL PROTECTE
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 15:15 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|norma
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.2.0 |4.0.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27379
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 15:13 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|norma
--- Comment #3 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 15:13 ---
Subject: Bug 27387
Author: kazu
Date: Tue May 2 15:13:02 2006
New Revision: 113470
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113470
Log:
gcc/
PR target/27387
* arm.c (arm_output_mi_thunk):
--- Comment #2 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 15:06 ---
Subject: Bug 27387
Author: kazu
Date: Tue May 2 15:06:35 2006
New Revision: 113468
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113468
Log:
gcc/
PR target/27387
* arm.c (arm_output_mi_thunk):
--- Comment #1 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 15:04 ---
Subject: Bug 27387
Author: kazu
Date: Tue May 2 15:04:52 2006
New Revision: 113467
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113467
Log:
gcc/
PR target/27387
* arm.c (arm_output_mi_thunk):
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 15:02 ---
gcc.target/x86_64/abi/test_complex_returning.c execution fails at -O0
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 15:02 ---
The same:
FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/scalar-return-3 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: gcc.target/x86_64/abi/test_complex_returning.c execution, -O0
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2739
See Summary.
--
Summary: [4.2 Regression]
gcc.target/x86_64/abi/test_complex_returning.c execution
fails at -O0
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code, ABI
Sever
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |blocker
Summary|bootstrap fails building|[4.2 Regressi
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 14:56 ---
Happens at the point PRE calls cleanup_tree_cfg after purging dead eh edges.
Found partial redundancy for expression *VH.52 (VH.57)
Created value VH.86 for *D.934_6
Inserted pretmp.60_42 = D.1001_27 in predecessor 1
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |blocker
Component|c |tree-optimiza
Testcase:
import javax.xml.stream.XMLStreamException;
import javax.xml.stream.XMLStreamWriter;
public class StAXWriter
{
XMLStreamWriter writer;
int indent = 0;
public void writeEnd(boolean wasEmpty)
{
try
{
indent -= 2;
for (int i = 0; i < indent; i++)
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 14:52 ---
void foo()
{
L:
&&L != 0 ;
}
---
Most likely also fails but is done in a different place.
PARM_DECL has the same issue but I already filed/fixed them.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 14:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=11360)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11360&action=view)
pr27388.patch
Something like this cures this but I'm really not sure what exactly is
omp_is_private supposed to d
--- Comment #4 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2006-05-02 14:26 ---
This should now be fixed on mainline by Paul's patch. Thanks.
--
roger at eyesopen dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2006-05-02 14:24 ---
This should now be fixed on mainline, thanks to Paul's patch.
--
roger at eyesopen dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
void
foo (void)
{
int i;
i = 0;
#pragma omp parallel shared (i)
{
#pragma omp master
i++;
#pragma omp parallel for
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++)
;
}
}
results in very weird omplower dump:
1) #pragma omp parallel shared(iD.1922) private(iD.1922)
for the outer parallel
--- Comment #3 from sayle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 14:13 ---
Subject: Bug 27324
Author: sayle
Date: Tue May 2 14:13:17 2006
New Revision: 113465
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113465
Log:
2006-05-02 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/27
--- Comment #4 from sayle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 14:13 ---
Subject: Bug 27269
Author: sayle
Date: Tue May 2 14:13:17 2006
New Revision: 113465
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113465
Log:
2006-05-02 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/27
The thunk for Thumb is not PIC even with -mthumb -fPIC.
struct A {
virtual void f ();
};
struct B {
virtual void g ();
};
struct C : public A, public B {
virtual void g();
};
void
C::g()
{
}
I've got a patch.
--
Summary: Thumb thunk is not PIC
Product: gcc
--- Comment #4 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 14:05 ---
Subject: Bug 27374
Author: kazu
Date: Tue May 2 14:05:14 2006
New Revision: 113464
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113464
Log:
Backport:
2006-05-01 Kazu Hirata <[EMAIL PROTECTE
1 - 100 of 153 matches
Mail list logo
