--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-11 07:55
---
Subject: Bug 30430
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Thu Jan 11 07:55:10 2007
New Revision: 120667
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=120667
Log:
PR fortran/30430
* scanner.c (gfc_releas
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.2.0 4.1.2
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
--- Comment #18 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-11 07:45
---
Well then please accept my humble apology. No intent to disparage. I was
attempting to concur with Kaveh's suggestion in Comment #13 that ""WONTFIX" may
be a more accurate description if that is the group decisi
--- Comment #4 from P dot Schaffnit at access dot rwth-aachen dot de
2007-01-11 07:39 ---
Thanks a lot!
Philippe
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30405
--- Comment #17 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-11 07:27
---
Confirmed on AMD64/Linux .
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-11 07:10
---
> The 4.0 branch should be abandoned. Hundreds of bugs have been fixed since
> 4.1. You should be at least using 4.1 or 4.2.
Huh... Kaveh is a member of the GCC Steering Committee. He not only uses GCC,
but d
--- Comment #15 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-11 06:32
---
The 4.0 branch should be abandoned. Hundreds of bugs have been fixed since
4.1. You should be at least using 4.1 or 4.2. Are you not able to build 4.1
or 4.2 for Solaris 2.10 ia64 ?
Marking as Wontfix because
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-11 05:41
---
Fixed in 4.1.2.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assigned
--- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-11 05:40
---
Subject: Bug 28999
Author: mmitchel
Date: Thu Jan 11 05:40:35 2007
New Revision: 120665
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=120665
Log:
PR c++/28999
* decl.c (make_typename_type)
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-11 04:05
---
The problem here is that we are not skipping artificial arguments (other than
the "this" pointer) when trying to match the specialization. The additional
parameters for constructors for classes with virtual bases
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-11 03:36
---
Subject: Bug 28999
Author: mmitchel
Date: Thu Jan 11 03:36:02 2007
New Revision: 120664
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=120664
Log:
PR c++/28999
* decl.c (make_typename_type)
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-11 03:24
---
Subject: Bug 28999
Author: mmitchel
Date: Thu Jan 11 03:24:33 2007
New Revision: 120663
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=120663
Log:
PR c++/28999
* decl.c (make_typename_type)
--- Comment #2 from jbuck at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-11 01:55 ---
See the proposed patch at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg00947.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15669
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-11 01:44 ---
I have a fix for this.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assi
Testcase:
int f = (_Complex float)(0.5) == 0.5;
This was caused by the patch for PR 22035.
--
Summary: [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] no longer folding
__complex__(0.0, 1.0) == __complex__(1.0, 0.0)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Stat
--- Comment #4 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-01-11 01:26 ---
Subject: Bug number PR preprocessor/15185
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/2007-01/msg00866.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.o
The test tails for both HP-UX and Linux on IA64. It looks like the problem is
with the %VAL function on the f_to_f subroutine call. I believe that the
Fortran front-end is doing something wrong so that the %VAL(a) gets passed in
an integer register instead of a floating point register. Since a i
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 23:55 ---
I think this is the correct error because it is finding class's foo.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30431
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 23:55 ---
Hmm... you make a symlink tree instead of just running
configure from the readonly tree?
I thought we supported readonly trees.
Anyway, is cp -L portable?
that's the only question.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot or
--- Comment #1 from tkapela at poczta dot fm 2007-01-10 23:47 ---
Created an attachment (id=12883)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12883&action=view)
Simple example when compilator fails
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30431
--- Comment #13 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-01-10 23:47 ---
Ok, thanks a lot. I'm going to work on those changes for v3.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
/ There should be no difference where friend declaration is made
// inside class. But in fact at least under GCC 4.1.1 there is.
template
class CTest;
template
T foo(const CTest &test)
{
return test.m_data;
}
template
class CTest{
public:
// In this place we can declare friend funct
--- Comment #2 from tkapela at poczta dot fm 2007-01-10 23:39 ---
Created an attachment (id=12882)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12882&action=view)
Simple example when compilator fails.
I think that one should be able to compile this.
But there are bugs, depending
--- Comment #12 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2007-01-10 23:27
---
Subject: Re: SIGSEGV in valarray::cshift(n) on empty array
"pcarlini at suse dot de" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Forgot: assuming we imagine the standard clarified per your proposal
| on LWG (or read as s
--- Comment #22 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 23:20
---
It should be rewritten as:
if ((INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (valtype)
&& GET_MODE_BITSIZE (TYPE_MODE (valtype)) < BITS_PER_WORD)
|| POINTER_TYPE_P (valtype))
mode = TARGET_32BIT ? SImode : DImode;
else
--- Comment #21 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 23:09
---
Happens on all PPC including GNU/Linux.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #20 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 23:04
---
Ignore that last comment (though that is where the problem is).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30406
--- Comment #19 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 23:04
---
if ((INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (valtype)
&& TYPE_PRECISION (valtype) < BITS_PER_WORD)
|| POINTER_TYPE_P (valtype))
mode = TARGET_32BIT ? SImode : DImode;
else
mode = TYPE_MODE (valtype);
--- Comment #18 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 23:02
---
rs6000_function_value looks at TYPE_PRECISION
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #17 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 22:56
---
hard_function_value returns the wrong rtl ...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30406
--- Comment #16 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 22:51
---
The type is correct when the decl is created:
Breakpoint 3, build_decl_stat (code=RESULT_DECL, name=0x0, type=0xb7c55384) at
../../gcc/tree.c:3250
3250 t = make_node_stat (code PASS_MEM_STAT);
(gdb) p debug_ge
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
$ cat a.f90
module truc
end module truc
module bar
use truc
end module bar
use bar
end
$ gfortran a.f90
$ gfortran a.f90 -Jfoo
f951(1968) malloc: *** Deallocation of a pointer not malloced: 0x41304a90; This
could be a double free(), or free() called with the middle of an allocated
block; Try s
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> gcc -g -W -Wall xxq.c
xxq.c: In function `memcheck_posix_memalign':
xxq.c:23: internal compiler error: in emit_move_insn, at expr.c:2809
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #14 from paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr 2007-01-10 22:09 ---
Subject: Re: testsuite failures in actual_array_constructor_2.f90
and actual_array_substr_2.f90
Kaveh
> --- Comment #13 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 21:45
> ---
> Paul - The bug is not "
--- Comment #13 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 21:45 ---
Paul - The bug is not "FIXED" in 4.0, please don't mark it as such yet.
"WONTFIX" may be a more accurate description if that is the group decision.
You can remove yourself from the assigned field if you aren't able
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 21:28 ---
Testing a better patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30297
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 21:00 ---
In fact, I will clear it myself, since I am sure that you will do the deleting!
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 20:57 ---
Kaveh and David,
>
> Well, you need to be using the 4.0 branch, not 4.1. I see that an IA64 report
> occurs here with the current 4.0.4 prerelease:
If you look at the Bugzilla entries for the two PRs, they were onl
Both the C and C++ front-end accept this:
#define vector __attribute__((vector_size(16) ))
vector float a;
vector float b;
int f(void)
{
a = a | b;
}
---
xor and bitwise and is effected too.
--
Summary: vector float | vector float is accepted
Product: g
Testcase:
#define vector __attribute__((vector_size(16) ))
vector float a;
int f(void)
{
a = ~a;
}
---
This is rejected with the C++ front-end:
t.c: In function 'int f()':
t.c:7: error: wrong type argument to bit-complement
--
Summary: ~ vector float is accepted
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 20:38 ---
Not a bug, strndup is a GNU (glibc) extension. You have to use -D_GNU_SOURCE
when compiling.
The warning messages are correct as there is no prototype for strndup.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-01-10 20:37 ---
strndup is a GNU extension and is only declared in when _GNU_SOURCE
is defined.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
The tiny test program below produces a warning (specifics commented in code
below). From my understanding, no warning should appear on compilation.
Current workaround: Warning disappears once line 2 (right after #include) is
uncommented.
Code:
--
--- Comment #4 from pluto at agmk dot net 2007-01-10 19:58 ---
hmm, if i remove this huge amount of pci*info* data structures
hog doesn't present.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30052
--- Comment #25 from amacleod at redhat dot com 2007-01-10 19:47 ---
There were numerous factors in the mainline speedup of SSA->normal, including a
massive rewrite, but there are a couple of big wins that are backportable, and
were in fact considered. It was just that they were too late
--
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=28797
--
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=28427
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27959
--
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=23745
--
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=24959
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.1.2
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
http://
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30180
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30197
--
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=29629
--
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=26899
--
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=29341
--
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=25261
--
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=28790
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 19:20 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30179
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 19:19 ---
I am very sure it was:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg00565.html
And/or the one I indenfy before.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30349
--- Comment #11 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-01-10 19:18 ---
Forgot: assuming we imagine the standard clarified per your proposal on LWG (or
read as such for all practical matters), I understand that not segfaulting when
size == 0 would be a conforming behavior. Then, in v3, we coul
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30172
--
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=29947
--
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=29965
--
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=29802
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29581
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|compiling linux kernels |[4.2/4.3 Regression]
|2.6.16.14/15 2.6.17-rc3 on |
--
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=30263
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||3.3.3 3.4.0 4.0.0 4.1.0
|
--
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=24325
--
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=27900
--
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=23060
--
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=25135
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||EH, wrong-code
Known to work||4.2.0
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-01-10
19:11 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] gcc/libssp/ssp.c:177: ICE: in
cgraph_expand_all_functions, at cgraphunit.c:1220
This is now fixed. Not sure which patch.
Dave
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cg
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||EH, wrong-code
Known to work||4.2.0
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||EH, wrong-code
Summary|FAIL: g++.old- |[4.3 R
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||EH, wrong-code
Known to work||4.2.0
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||EH, wrong-code
Known to work||4.2.0
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||EH, wrong-code
Known to work||4.2.0
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||EH, wrong-code
Known to work||4.2.0
--
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=30034
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Known to fail||4.1.1 4.0.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29624
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30371
--
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=30084
--
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=25818
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build, ice-on-valid-code
Known to work|
--
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=30237
--
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=30238
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24459
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.0.4 3.4.0 3.3.3 3.2 4.1.1
Known to work|
--
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=30236
--
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=30202
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 18:59 ---
Mark as invalid.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 18:59 ---
Reopening to ...
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--
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=30190
--
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=30081
1 - 100 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
