--- Comment #2 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-06 06:41 ---
Subject: Bug number PR c++/29573
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-10/msg01746.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
--- Comment #5 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-06 04:10 ---
patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2006-11/msg00148.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28974
--- Comment #3 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-06 01:17 ---
Manually moving the
lw $4,%got($L2406)($28)
to be just before the
addiu $4,$4,%lo($L2406)
and reassembling fixes the problem.
So I think that my analysis about the problem being splitting them up with
Latest CVS, builds fine. Attempt to "make check" yields:
gmake[1]: Entering directory `/usr/home/mckelvey/software/gcc-obj'
gmake[2]: Entering directory `/usr/home/mckelvey/software/gcc-obj/fixincludes'
autogen -T ../../gcc/fixincludes/check.tpl ../../gcc/fixincludes/inclhack.def
/bin/sh ./check.s
--- Comment #9 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-11-06
00:43 ---
Subject: Re: jc1: out of memory allocating 4072 bytes after a total of
708630224 bytes
> So this ends up being what i thought. The variables aren't being
> collapsed, but i can't figure out why (IE it can
--- Comment #2 from mckelvey at maskull dot com 2006-11-06 00:35 ---
OK, that fixed the problem. But shouldn't configuration have caught it?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29720
--- Comment #49 from chuck at vertica dot com 2006-11-05 23:39 ---
Sorry.
But maybe it is a FAQ because even with "-Wall" or "-Wstrict-aliasing=2" g++
4.0.2 generates invalid code for this without so much as a peep. I here 4.1 is
better about giving a warning.
I guess it was too much
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29736
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 4.0.2:
=
int __attribute__((vector_size(8),vector_size(8))) v;
void foo()
{
v = v + v;
}
=
bug.c: In function 'foo':
bug.c:5: internal
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29735
--- Comment #33 from vincent at vinc17 dot org 2006-11-05 23:27 ---
(In reply to comment #32)
> (In reply to comment #31)
> > (In reply to comment #30)
> > So, I don't think a mpfr_signgam alone would really be useful. So, I think
> > that
> > choice 2 would be better.
>
> Okay, sounds
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 4.0.0:
=
int __attribute__((vector_size(8))) main()
{
return 0;
}
=
bug.cc:1: internal compiler error: in start_function, at cp/decl.c:107
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29734
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 3.4.5 / 4.0.2:
=
void foo(int __attribute__((vector_size(8))) i)
{
switch (i) {}
}
=
bug.cc: In function 'void foo(int __vector__)':
bug.c
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29733
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29732
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29731
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29730
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29729
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29728
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29727
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 4.1.0:
=
template void foo()
{
T t = 0;
}
void bar()
{
foo();
}
=
bug.cc: In function 'void foo() [with T = int ()()]':
bug.cc:8: ins
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 4.0.0:
=
struct A
{
template template friend void foo(T) {}
void bar() { foo(0); }
};
=
bug.cc: In member function 'void A::bar()':
bug.
--- Comment #48 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 22:26
---
(In reply to comment #46)
> Folks, can anyone please tell me if this is the same problem as I am seeing
> here using gcc 4.0.2 for x86_64:
> inline long long Vgetbytes(double f) {
>return *reinterpret_cast(&f);
--- Comment #47 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 22:25 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] alias bug with cast and call clobbered
On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 10:17:16PM -, chuck at vertica dot com wrote:
> Folks, can anyone please tell me if this is the same problem as I a
--- Comment #21 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 22:18 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.2 - will soon be fixed on 4.1.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #46 from chuck at vertica dot com 2006-11-05 22:17 ---
Folks, can anyone please tell me if this is the same problem as I am seeing
here using gcc 4.0.2 for x86_64:
#include
inline long long Vgetbytes(double f) {
return *reinterpret_cast(&f);
}
int main (int argc, char
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 22:16 ---
I'd better take it, since I submitted a patch for it!
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 22:15 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.2 - soon to be fixed on 4.1.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 22:14 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.2 - soo to be fixed on 4.1.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 22:11 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.2 - soon to be fixed on 4.1
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 22:07 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.2 - will do 4.1 in the next 48hours.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 22:03 ---
We can move into different territory by referring to vocab_swap:
PROGRAM vocabulary_word_count
IMPLICIT NONE
TYPE VARYING_STRING
CHARACTER,DIMENSION(:),ALLOCATABLE :: chars
ENDTYPE VARYING_STRING
INTEGER
--- Comment #10 from jens dot maurer at gmx dot net 2006-11-05 21:54
---
Here is a shorter test case.
namespace N {
template struct B { int m; };
struct C : B { };
}
void g() {
N::C().B::m;
}
--
jens dot maurer at gmx dot net changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #5 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 21:48 ---
Created an attachment (id=12550)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12550&action=view)
Patch for reading only
This is a partial patch, for reading only.
I have taken the approach that we should all
--- Comment #8 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 21:48 ---
Subject: Re: jc1: out of memory allocating 4072 bytes after a total of
708630224 bytes
On 5 Nov 2006 21:22:24 -, dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #7 from d
On 5 Nov 2006 21:22:24 -, dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- Comment #7 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-11-05
21:22 ---
Subject: Re: jc1: out of memory allocating 4072 bytes after a total of
708630224 bytes
> Can you bzip2 comp
--- Comment #2 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 21:44 ---
It looks like the problem here is that a %lo relocation is getting seperated
from its corresponding %got. Here is a little of the assembly, note how there
is an intervening %got/%lo between the %got($L2406) and the %l
--- Comment #5 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-05 21:40 ---
Subject: Bug number PR29539
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg00271.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
--- Comment #27 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 21:32
---
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/gnu/gcc-4.3/objdir/gcc/testsuite/g++$ ld --version
> GNU ld version 2.17.50 20061031
OK, thanks. I'll try harder to reproduce on x86/Linux.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi
--- Comment #6 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 21:31 ---
I don't know why I assigned this to myself. Brooks has
already fixed this.
Unassigning myself.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 21:27
---
Fixed on 4.2 and 4.3
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-11-05
21:22 ---
Subject: Re: jc1: out of memory allocating 4072 bytes after a total of
708630224 bytes
> Can you bzip2 compress -fdump-tree-alias-vops-details-blocks-stats (it's going
> to be very large) and put it somewh
--- Comment #6 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-05 20:55 ---
Subject: Bug number PR29719
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg00269.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
--- Comment #2 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-05 20:40 ---
Subject: Bug number PR c++/29475
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg00266.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
--- Comment #9 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-05 20:40 ---
Subject: Bug number PR middle-end/26306
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg00251.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-05 20:39 ---
Subject: Bug number PR25545
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg00236.html
--- Comment #7 from patchapp at
--- Comment #6 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-05 20:39 ---
Subject: Bug number PR25545
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg00236.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 4.0.0:
=
template struct A {};
A<({})> a;
=
bug.cc:3: error: statement-expressions are allowed only inside functions
bug.cc:3: internal com
--- Comment #12 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-05 20:39 ---
Subject: Bug number PR25620
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg00216.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--- Comment #4 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-05 20:36 ---
Subject: Bug number PR target/27405
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg00053.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bug
--- Comment #9 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-05 20:36 ---
Subject: Bug number PR29565
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg00038.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 4.0.0:
=
struct A
{
template void foo()(0);
};
=
bug.cc:3: internal compiler error: in grokfield, at cp/decl2.c:846
Please submit a full b
--- Comment #6 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-05 20:35 ---
Subject: Bug number PR29610
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg00015.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 3.0:
=
template void foo(T)
{
struct A
{
template struct B
{
typedef B<0> C;
};
};
}
=
bug.cc: In function 'void foo
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 3.4.0:
=
template void foo()
{
int a[] = { X: 0 };
}
=
bug.cc: In function 'void foo()':
bug.cc:3: internal compiler error: Segmentation f
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 3.3:
=
template struct A
{
static int a[1];
};
template int A::a[1] = { X: 0 };
void foo()
{
A<0>::a;
}
=
bug.cc: In instantiation of
--- Comment #26 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-11-05
20:15 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] ext/bitmap_allocator/check_allocate_max_size.cc
execution test
> With some exotic version of binutils too? :-)
When I first hit the problem, I was using a build from last Ju
--- Comment #25 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 20:03
---
> I'm seeing similar problems on hppa-linux. See PR 29661 for mor details.
> There are some others as well that are probably dups.
With some exotic version of binutils too? :-)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
--- Comment #3 from sick_soul at yahoo dot it 2006-11-05 19:40 ---
I was not sure whether to report this or not,
but looking at the bug report form I found the 3.3.x series there,
so I went ahead.
Both gcc-4.1.1 and gcc-3.4.6 do not show this bug.
I will close this, sorry for wasting y
--- Comment #24 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 19:34
---
I'm seeing similar problems on hppa-linux. See PR 29661 for mor details.
There are some others as well that are probably dups.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #6 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 19:16 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Subject: Re: jc1: out of memory allocating 4072 bytes after a total of
> 708630224 bytes
>
> > Except that all of these were fixed in the followup patch and a later
> > typo fix, *includi
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-11-05
18:49 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: g++.dg/compat/eh/unexpected1
cp_compat_x_tst.o-cp_compat_y_tst.o execute
> I think these all are caused by bugs in binutils after the following patch:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/200
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 18:47
---
Subject: Bug 25545
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Nov 5 18:46:59 2006
New Revision: 118510
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118510
Log:
2006-11-05 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 18:44
---
Subject: Bug 25545
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Nov 5 18:43:51 2006
New Revision: 118509
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118509
Log:
2006-11-05 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
fix for bug 21137 causes a regression:
/* { dg-do run } */
void abort (void);
int main (void)
{
int k = -1;
if (((unsigned int) k >> 3) & 134217728)
return 0;
abort ();
}
This bug is also known as miscompilation of emacs' keymap.c at -O0:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 17:40
---
Subject: Bug 25545
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Nov 5 17:40:42 2006
New Revision: 118507
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118507
Log:
2006-11-05 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 17:35
---
Subject: Bug 25545
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Nov 5 17:35:30 2006
New Revision: 118506
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118506
Log:
2006-11-04 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #10 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 17:16 ---
> IIRC, the use of $ is a Digital extension on VMS. It's
> been more than 15 years since I used VMS, but I vaguely
> remmeber seeing Fortran with the $ only in the 2nd position.
>
> But, if Intel (a Digital descente
--- Comment #9 from sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu
2006-11-05 17:00 ---
Subject: Re: subroutine _foo draws "unclassifiable statement" instead of a
useful error.
On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 04:37:42PM -, aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> > How does Intel's iand
--- Comment #2 from stian at nixia dot no 2006-11-05 16:51 ---
But no releases that fixes this issue has been released in the 4.1.x serie as
far as I can see atleast.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29725
--- Comment #7 from djg at cray dot com 2006-11-05 16:50 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
"based on" basically means copied from, and possibly incremented or
decremented, though not necessarily in obvious ways. Your example is
legal; q is based on p.
BTW, I made a mistake in my earlier sug
--- Comment #8 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 16:37 ---
> How does Intel's iand other commercial compilers handle
> a leading dollar? The standard is quite clear that the
> first character in a name is an alphabetic character.
>
ifort-9.1.xx accept it without any notice.
--- Comment #7 from sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu
2006-11-05 16:27 ---
Subject: Re: subroutine _foo draws "unclassifiable statement" instead of a
useful error.
On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 04:19:08PM -, aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #6 from
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #6 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 16:19 ---
Updating the testsuite to account for the new error message now.
Note that i think that we should take -fdollar-ok into account, i.e.:
if (!ISALPHA (c) && !(gfc_option.flag_dollar_ok && c == '$'))
{
bail;
}
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 16:16 ---
The testcase explicitly calls __builtin_lceil which we then cannot expand at
all.
We can open-code lceil like I did for SSE expansion using
xi = (long)op1;
xi -= (double)xi > op1 ? 1 : 0;
which shou
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 16:11 ---
This is fixed already.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29725
--- Comment #6 from dorit at il dot ibm dot com 2006-11-05 15:48 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> This was something that slipped in, IIRC. I was of Ian's viewpoint, that
> may_alias_p should handle it, and it shouldn't be special to data-references.
yes, it was originally added as a temp
--- Comment #5 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 14:57 ---
Subject: Bug 21061
Author: aldot
Date: Sun Nov 5 14:57:24 2006
New Revision: 118501
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118501
Log:
2006-11-05 Bernhard Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR for
The following code-snippest generate wrong numbers with gcc 4.1.1 using -O, -O1
and -O2.
#include
int main(int arg, char *argv[])
{
int j;
for (j=0; j<256; j++)
{
signed char j2=(signed char)j;
printf("%d\n", (signed int)j2);
}
--- Comment #4 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2006-11-05 14:52 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I had a slightly deeper look. The ceilf builtin is defined only
> for C99 targets in builtins.def:
>
> DEF_C99_C90RES_BUILTIN (BUILT_IN_CEILF, "ceilf", BT_FN_FLOAT_FLOAT,
> ATTR_CONST_NOTHROW_
--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 13:03
---
Testing fix.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
C
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 13:02
---
"included in the description" is not a target.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 12:18 ---
Subject: Bug 29695
Author: jakub
Date: Sun Nov 5 12:18:09 2006
New Revision: 118499
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118499
Log:
PR middle-end/29695
* fold-const.c (fold_ternary)
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 12:18 ---
Subject: Bug 29695
Author: jakub
Date: Sun Nov 5 12:18:03 2006
New Revision: 118498
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118498
Log:
PR middle-end/29695
* fold-const.c (fold_ternary)
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 12:13 ---
Subject: Bug 29695
Author: jakub
Date: Sun Nov 5 12:13:46 2006
New Revision: 118497
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118497
Log:
PR middle-end/29695
* fold-const.c (fold_ternary)
--- Comment #3 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 12:12 ---
Sorry for adding duplicate PRs.
I had a slightly deeper look. The ceilf builtin is defined only
for C99 targets in builtins.def:
DEF_C99_C90RES_BUILTIN (BUILT_IN_CEILF, "ceilf", BT_FN_FLOAT_FLOAT,
ATTR_CONST_NOTHR
--- Comment #5 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 11:01 ---
Fixed.
--
charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #4 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 10:58 ---
Subject: Bug 29707
Author: charlet
Date: Sun Nov 5 10:58:41 2006
New Revision: 118496
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118496
Log:
* s-osinte-linux-alpha.ads, s-osinte-linux-hppa.ads
--- Comment #3 from charlet at adacore dot com 2006-11-05 10:48 ---
Subject: Re: New: s-osinte.adb:86:13: warning: function "To_Target_Priority"
is not referenced
You need to add a spec for To_Target_Priority in s-osinte-linux-hppa.ads
Better in the medium term would be to merge s-os
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-11-05 10:17 ---
Benjamin, can you have a look? I can reproduce, the issue seems confirmed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from lebedev at zhtw dot org dot ru 2006-11-05 09:56
---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Forgot: you may also consider reporting the bug to netbsd, or your favorite
> provider of packages, maybe that would help that community. From our point of
> view, there isn't much more
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 09:39 ---
*** Bug 29723 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29719
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 09:39 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 29719 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 09:39 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 29719 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 09:39 ---
*** Bug 29724 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29719
On newlib targets, the compiler fails to compile
long testlf (float x)
{
return __builtin_lceilf (x);
}
with the error
internal compiler error: in expand_builtin_int_roundingfn, at builtins.c:2298
--
Summary: newlib targets ICEs in expand_builtin_int_roundingfn
Product
On newlib targets, the compiler fails to compile
long testlf (float x)
{
return __builtin_lceilf (x);
}
with the error
internal compiler error: in expand_builtin_int_roundingfn, at builtins.c:2298
--
Summary: newlib targets ICEs in expand_builtin_int_roundingfn
Product
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
