--- Comment #116 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-06-22 05:56 ---
There is currently a new ICE
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/scratch/vondele/gcc_test/gfortran/test/src> gfortran -Os
all.f90
all.f90: In function compute_screening_matrices:
all.f90:305498: internal compiler error: in build2_st
--- Comment #4 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-22 04:55 ---
Fixed by this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&revision=125941
Unfortunately I botched the PR number in the ChangeLog with my first commit, so
the magic patch description did not show up here.
--
daney
--- Comment #11 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-22 04:46 ---
Subject: Bug 32046
Author: daney
Date: Fri Jun 22 04:46:08 2007
New Revision: 125941
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125941
Log:
PR target/32046
* config/mips/mips.md (define_co
--- Comment #8 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-06-22 02:05 ---
Subject: Bug number PR31726
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/2007-06/msg01583.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-22 02:01
---
Fixed on trunk. closing
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-22 01:54
---
Subject: Bug 31162
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Jun 22 01:54:27 2007
New Revision: 125939
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125939
Log:
2007-06-21 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-22 01:50
---
Subject: Bug 31162
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Jun 22 01:50:09 2007
New Revision: 125938
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125938
Log:
2007-06-21 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-22 00:36 ---
Here is the patch which fixes this testcase (note IV-OPTS is still messed up
but I will work on that later):
Index: tree-affine.c
===
--- tree-affine.c
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-22 00:22 ---
Reduced testcase:
SUBROUTINE ONEINTS()
COMMON /INFOA / NAT,NUM
DIMENSION TINT(NUM*NUM,NAT,3,3,3),TINTM(NUM,NUM,NAT,3,3,3)
CALL TINTS(IC)
DO ID=1,3
DO IC=1,NAT
TIN
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-22 00:01 ---
Patch which fixes the ICE:
Index: tree-vect-transform.c
===
--- tree-vect-transform.c (revision 125927)
+++ tree-vect-transform.c (working c
./include-fixed xxx.c -dumpbase xxx.c -auxbase-strip xxx.s
-version -o xxx.s
Breakpoint 3 at 0xc000b310
Breakpoint 4 at 0x8001bbf0
Breakpoint 3 at 0x83fffef4f620
Breakpoint 4 at 0x83fffefa7a78
GNU C version 4.3.0 20070621 (experimental) (hppa64-hp-hpux11.11)
compiled by
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfi
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 23:26 ---
After PR 32075 was fixed, this was also fixed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32376
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 23:11 ---
Mine.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #3 from lionelb dot nospam at gmail dot com 2007-06-21 22:43
---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
>
> BTW what are the implications for exceptions of linking with -static-libgcc?
Ok, that was a RTFM, got it now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 22:41 ---
This issue has already been worked around in 4.3 (and IIRC 4.2.1.) so closing
as fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #5 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2007-06-21 22:38 ---
The non-optimized infinite loop problem looks like some kind of memory
corruption problem. At the end of bitmap_element_allocate I put a line
"gcc_assert (element != head);" which should never trigger because head exists
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #9 from John dot Harper at mcs dot vuw dot ac dot nz
2007-06-21 22:07 ---
Subject: Re: F0.n output format fails with large numbers
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> Date: 21 Jun 2007 06:16:53 -
> From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org <[EMAIL PR
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 22:04 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> this one seems to work now.
>
I agree - it works on amd64 and x86_ia64.
Closing it.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Add
--- Comment #5 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 21:38 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Complete program optimized away (i686,
-ftree-vectorize)
Thanks for pointing me to this bug. I'll have a look.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32457
--- Comment #8 from John dot Harper at mcs dot vuw dot ac dot nz
2007-06-21 21:37 ---
Subject: Re: F0.n output format fails with large numbers
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> Date: 21 Jun 2007 04:22:47 -
> From: jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org <[EM
--- Comment #30 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 21:25 ---
Subject: Bug 20623
Author: spop
Date: Thu Jun 21 21:25:27 2007
New Revision: 125929
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125929
Log:
PR middle-end/20623
* tree.h (debug_fold_checksum)
--- Comment #11 from malitzke at metronets dot com 2007-06-21 21:13 ---
After you solve that there is that little matter of udivdi3.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31541
--- Comment #6 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-06-21 21:05 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Author: spop
> Date: Wed Jun 20 23:42:28 2007
> New Revision: 125900
This commit causes PR32457.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-06-21 20:58 ---
Bisection points to:
Author: spop
Date: Wed Jun 20 23:42:28 2007
New Revision: 125900
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125900
Log:
PR tree-optimization/32075
* tree-data-ref.c (subscr
--- Comment #29 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 20:55 ---
Subject: Re: ICE: fold check: original tree changed by fold with
--enable-checking=fold
So,
the last patch bootstrapped, and tests passed with exactly the same fails
as on trunk. I'm going to commit that patch to tr
--- Comment #3 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 20:52 ---
I haven't yet looked in detail at the RTL dumps, but in the assembly output the
store of the new return value was missing. It didn't seem to be in the wrong
place, but missing entirely. I just hacked up the patch to
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 20:48 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> the original testcase fails (again/still?)
>
Hmmm - it no longer ICEs but gives an error.
I'll have a look.
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31214
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 20:34 ---
You forgot to mark the variables as being used.
You mark the variable used with the attribute used.
Once you do that, the variables are emitted.
This is not a bug but by design that GCC can optimize out unused variab
--- Comment #22 from dir at lanl dot gov 2007-06-21 20:11 ---
This version has all the variables that are actually used intialized. I will
have to try the windows version later, but g95 has switched the way that it is
wrong again -
[dranta:~/tests] dir% g95 -Wall -O3 -o g95Test03 g95Te
--- Comment #21 from dir at lanl dot gov 2007-06-21 20:06 ---
Created an attachment (id=13761)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13761&action=view)
All Used Variables intialized
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32393
--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-06-21 19:52 ---
Confirmed, for some reason we hit STOP in line 544 (subroutine KEEL). I'm not
familiar with Fortran, so perhaps someone who knows it should step through KEEL
to find what went wrong.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed
--- Comment #28 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-06-21 19:33 ---
Subject: Re: ICE: fold check: original tree changed
by fold with --enable-checking=fold
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, spop at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #26 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 18:21
--- Comment #2 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 19:05 ---
> * An INTEGER SELECT construct has a CASE that can never be matched as its
>lower value is greater than its upper value.
In these cases, no error is shown (integer(kind=1) :: i):
select case (i)
case (300)
--- Comment #15 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 18:31 ---
Doesn't fail on powerpc-darwin (nor apparently on powerpc-aix).
--
geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #26 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 18:21 ---
Subject: Re: ICE: fold check: original tree changed by fold with
--enable-checking=fold
Just to sum it up, and for asking for advice,
attached is the patch that I'm bootstrapping and testing now.
> Another thing wou
--- Comment #11 from rask at sygehus dot dk 2007-06-21 18:19 ---
Disregard the comment about the code label use count. They have
LABEL_PRESERVE_P (/s) set.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32418
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 18:14 ---
This fixes Tobias' testcase of comment #4. Note that it is a diff relative to
the patch for 32298. I'll resubmit the latter in this new form.
Paul
Index: gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c
==
--- Comment #19 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 18:12 ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> Due to huge time constraints, I won't be able to
> do anything with this for the next few weeks. Unassigning
> myself for the time.
> If anybody wants to look over my partial patch and fly
--- Comment #1 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 17:49 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/Error-and-Warning-Options.html
-Wsurprising
[...] This currently produces a warning under the following circumstances:
* An INTEGER SELECT construct has a CASE that can neve
* the exact version of GCC;
gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: powerpc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,objc,obj-c++,treelang --prefix=/usr
--enable-shared --with-system-zlib --libexecdir=/usr/lib
--without-included-gettext --enable-threads=posix
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 17:22 ---
Further note:
-march=pentium2 works
-march=pentium3 fails
-march=pentium2 -msse fails
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32457
--- Comment #20 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 17:14 ---
> as far as I can tell none of them are initialized.
This is why I'm eagerly waiting for Asher fixing PR20441 and why g95 has
-fzero.
> Tracing what is wrong with this code explains why so many people don't like
> f
--- Comment #4 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2007-06-21 17:13 ---
With optimization, it looks like we die because df_insn_change_bb can handle
insn_info being NULL but it can't handle insn_info->defs (or uses or eq_uses)
being NULL and that is what is happening with -O2. When no optimi
--- Comment #3 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2007-06-21 17:10 ---
Slightly shorter test case:
unsigned char inb_local(unsigned long port)
{
unsigned char value;
__asm__ __volatile__("in" "b" " %w1, %" "b" "0" : "=a"(value) :
"Nd"(port));
return value;
}
void
x_
--- Comment #16 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 17:06 ---
Subject: Bug 19590
Author: spop
Date: Thu Jun 21 17:06:05 2007
New Revision: 125925
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125925
Log:
PR tree-optimization/19590
* tree-vrp.c (adjust_ra
--- Comment #19 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-06-21 17:04 ---
> Subscript 1 of IA (value 2) is out of range (1:1)
I don't think it really matter as
dimension ia(1),a(20)
is the old style for passing arrays. However there are many uninitialized
variables:
ca
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 16:58 ---
Dump a valid program which contains equivalence to show a harder case for the
checks (NAG f95 chokes on it).
program main
implicit none
integer :: i, it, jt
real:: tt
equivalence
hich finds directly one
problem:
Subscript 1 of IA (value 2) is out of range (1:1)
In PRMX, line 134 of test.f
I changed ia(1) to ia(20) - then it works. Actually, it works on my system
(x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, 4.3.0 20070621) up to the option
-O3 -ffast-math -ftree-vectorize -funroll-all-loops
--- Comment #5 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 16:44 ---
Without combine, the attribute is ignored:
$ gcc-4.3.orig-HEAD -c pr.c -o /dev/null
pr.c: In function 'f1':
pr.c:3: warning: '__weakref__' attribute ignored
pr.c: In function 'f2':
pr.c:7: warning: '__weakref__' att
--- Comment #2 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2007-06-21 16:30 ---
Here is a preprocessed test case"
typedef __builtin_va_list __gnuc_va_list;
typedef __gnuc_va_list va_list;
unsigned char inb_local(unsigned long port) { unsigned char value; __asm__
__vol
atile__("in" "b" " %w1, %" "b"
--- Comment #17 from dir at lanl dot gov 2007-06-21 16:29 ---
I have attached version that generates no warnings with gfortran or g95. As I
reduced, it the bug changed - that is the problem with optmization bugs - they
are hard to trap. Anyway there is still a bug for some compilers. gfo
I used the simple program provided in the gcc help pages.
i am using gcc-4.2.0 cross compiler for ARM (I think the problem
should persist in native compilers as well)
a.c
#include
int main(void) {
static int a __attribute__ ((section (".offsets"))) = 0;
static int myname __at
--- Comment #16 from dir at lanl dot gov 2007-06-21 16:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=13759)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13759&action=view)
Warning free version
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32393
--- Comment #10 from rask at sygehus dot dk 2007-06-21 16:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=13758)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13758&action=view)
Preprocessed source code for the problem in comment 9.
$ ./xgcc -B./ -S -dp -o /dev/null ~/complex_io.cc
/home/rask/bu
--- Comment #9 from rask at sygehus dot dk 2007-06-21 15:59 ---
I tried this on top of the patch in comment 3 of bug 32441:
Index: gcc/config/m32c/m32c.c
===
--- gcc/config/m32c/m32c.c (revision 125892)
+++ gcc/config/
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 15:58 ---
Missed to say that yesterday's version (r125874) was ok.
Occurs here with 125909 (bootstrapped) and 125922 (only build). svn status
shows no changes in my tree.
However, it could not be reproduced by Uros with 125920
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 14:56 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 14:56 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 14:54 ---
Subject: Bug 32453
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jun 21 14:54:47 2007
New Revision: 125922
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125922
Log:
2007-06-21 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-06-21 14:52 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] cannot take address of
bit field
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #9 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2007-06-21 14:39 ---
> Subject: Re: [4.3 Reg
This is with the polyhedron test gas_dyn.f90
http://www.polyhedron.co.uk/pb05/polyhedron_benchmark_suite.html
It only occurs for gas_dyn.f90 and only with -m32 (-m64 is ok).
This is with gcc-Version 4.3.0 20070621 on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
gfortran -m32 -march=opteron -ftree-vectorize -O1
--- Comment #1 from frederic dot schuh at neuf dot fr 2007-06-21 14:49
---
Created an attachment (id=13757)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13757&action=view)
preprocessed file in attachment
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32455
--- Comment #9 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2007-06-21 14:39 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] cannot take address of bit field
>
>
> --- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 11:19
> ---
> Ping?
I tought the bug is long fixed by moving the folding from f
--- Comment #3 from malitzke at metronets dot com 2007-06-21 14:33 ---
Thanks for helping out again. Enjoy Japan. I was there quite often, dealing
with NEC and Mitsubishi, but as a buyer representative for for multi-million $
projects. At that level it was pleasure to do business, even e
--- Comment #3 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-06-21 14:28 ---
this is the list of options I have tested, the comment indicates if this yields
a failure or not, basically, you need -O2 and -march=native to trigger the bug
using '-O1 -march=native -pg' or '-O2 -pg' are not sufficient
! echo "z" > foo.dat
program test
implicit none
integer :: i
open(99,file="foo.dat")
read(99,*) i
print *, i
end program
gfortran:
At line 5 of file x.f90
Fortran runtime error: Bad integer for item 1 in list input
Expected: gfortran prints out the filename and/or unit as other compiler
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|blocker |normal
Component|c |target
GCC ta
HARDWARE:
-
System: HP-UX B.11.00
Machine: 9000/785
COMPILATION:
/usr/local/bin/gcc -v -save-temps -c TP.c -o TP_c.o
Using built-in specs.
Target: hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11
Configured with: ../gcc/configure
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.1.2
/usr/local/libexec/gcc/hppa2.0w-hp
--- Comment #2 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-06-21 13:50 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Can you run the compile inside gdb and check periodically where it wastes its
> time?
>
I have a few gdb backtraces, but it looks like it is just writing the .s file.
At the point where f951
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2007-06-21 13:47 ---
Subject: Re: ICE in expand_expr_real_1, at expr.c:7109
> You shouldn't introduce calls to langhooks. Why not use mode_for_size?
I was just copying code from fold-const.c. I have the mode already, I
need an integer tree
--- Comment #1 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-21 13:37
---
What is the configure string that i use to recreate this?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32423
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 13:32 ---
Yes this is the same issue, we have POINTER_PLUS_EXPR and we are trying to
create it with a vector type.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 32421 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 13:32 ---
*** Bug 32435 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #15 from dir at lanl dot gov 2007-06-21 13:23 ---
>BTW I do not see (beside obfuscation) the interest of the constructs:
It is the construct:
jt=t(j2)
tt=tt+tt
t(j2)=jt
that is being optmized away or done incorrectly when the second matrix stays
the same
--- Comment #7 from bardeau at iram dot fr 2007-06-21 13:08 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Fixed on mainline and 4.2. Unless you really want to backport it to 4.1.3, I'm
> closing this bug.
>
The bug still appears under cygwin with gcc 4.3:
program test
integer*4 a
a=1
print
--- Comment #14 from dir at lanl dot gov 2007-06-21 12:57 ---
>What is actually the expected result? Depending on the compiler and compiler
>setting, I get completely different results for the second triangular matrix.
>(The first matrix remains always the same.)
What the program does i
--- Comment #5 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-21 12:49
---
this was fixed with the commit.
--
zadeck at naturalbridge dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 12:33 ---
I forgot to mention: I think this file is valid Fortran 2003 and only invalid
Fortran 95. Maybe using:
integer, dimension(4) :: y
is a better test case.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32454
Should give with -fbounds-check something like the following (NAG f95 -C=all):
Rank 1 of array operand has extent 8 instead of 4
Program terminated by fatal error
In BOUNDSERROR, line 7 of test.f90
I think it might a duplicate of some PR, though I couldn't find it.
program boundsError
implicit
--- Comment #2 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-21 12:29
---
Subject: Re: ICE in df_refs_verify, at df-scan.c:4066
rask at sygehus dot dk wrote:
> --- Comment #1 from rask at sygehus dot dk 2007-06-20 16:58 ---
> Created an attachment (id=13747)
--> (http://gcc.g
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 12:24 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 12:23 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 12:21 ---
Subject: Bug 31866
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jun 21 12:20:42 2007
New Revision: 125919
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125919
Log:
PR tree-optimization/31866
* tree-ssa-coalesce.c
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 12:16 ---
Subject: Bug 32362
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jun 21 12:15:53 2007
New Revision: 125918
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125918
Log:
PR middle-end/32362
* omp-low.c (lookup_decl_in_o
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 12:11 ---
Subject: Bug 32362
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jun 21 12:11:00 2007
New Revision: 125917
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125917
Log:
PR middle-end/32362
* omp-low.c (lookup_decl_in_o
L PROTECTED]>
PR tree-optimization/32451
* tree-ssa-threadupdate.c (thread_single_edge): Fixup edge flags.
* g++.dg/torture/20070621-1.C: New testcase.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/torture/20070621-1.C
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 11:38 ---
I have a patch.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|
--- Comment #6 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2007-06-21 11:30 ---
Thanks for everyones input.
The only issues related to this 'bug' are:
1): printf _sometimes_ prints "-0.000" and sometimes prints "+0.000" - the
reason it is even showing the "+" or "-" is because I enabled them using "
--- Comment #5 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-06-21 11:27 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> GCC printed no warning about disliking a conversion.
It just happens that gcc is not like microwave oven that has to include
warnings about not drying animals in it.
> Sometimes the answer is _
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 11:26 ---
Created an attachment (id=13756)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13756&action=view)
testcase
testcase from glibc, build with -O2
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32453
1 - 100 of 144 matches
Mail list logo
