--- Comment #20 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-27 05:46 ---
Actually, no. It seems that T being invalid doesn't result in a SFINAE
situation.
14.9.2/8:
Only invalid types and expressions in the immediate context of the function
type and its template parameter types can res
gcc version: 4.4.1 with gcc-4.4.1-branch_update-1.patch
host system: Ubuntu 9.04 x86_64
configured by:
./configure --prefix=/usr --build=x86_64-linux-gnu \
--host=x86_64-linux-gnu \
--target=arm-none-linux-gnueabi --with-sysroot=$TOOLCHAIN_DIR \
--with-gmp=$STATIC_LIB_
--- Comment #19 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-27 01:08 ---
That does seem like a SFINAE bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40497
Executing on host:
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa-linux/libjava/testsuite/../libtool --silent
--tag=GCJ --mode=link /home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc/gcj
-B/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa-linux/libjava/
-B/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc/ -B/ho
me/dave/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.5.0/hppa-linux/bin/
-B/home/dave
--- Comment #1 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 22:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=18257)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18257&action=view)
Preprocessed sources of failing testcase.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40866
The code below used to compile fine. I'll also attach a preprocessed version as
it depends on Qt4.
$> cat ice.cpp
#include
class myDialog : public QDialog {
public:
myDialog();
};
myDialog::myDialog() {
foreach (QAction *action, actions()) {
}
}
$> g++-svn -g -Wall -I. -I/usr/include/qt4
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-07-26 21:43 ---
Subject: Re: New: Designated initializers for multi-dimensional
arrays fail in Objective-C
On Sun, 26 Jul 2009, sergei dot yakovlev at gmail dot com wrote:
> Designated initializers for multi-dimensional arrays
--- Comment #9 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-07-26
21:37 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] Build failure in libgfortran
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > (In reply to comment #6)
> > > Can you try whether the following works (place somewhere in
> > > intrinsics/c99_fun
--- Comment #41 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 21:23
---
3323 gcc_assert (TYPE_CONTEXT (decl) == NULL_TREE
3324 || TYPE_CONTEXT (decl) ==
sym->ns->proc_name->backend_decl);
3325 gcc_assert (DECL_CONTEXT (TYPE_STUB_DECL (decl)) == NU
--- Comment #8 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 21:22 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > Can you try whether the following works (place somewhere in
> > intrinsics/c99_functions.c):
>
> Enhanced version with yet another version for I:
>
> #ifndef
Designated initializers for multi-dimensional arrays work great in C (C99), but
fail in Objective-C (see example below). Given that Objective-C is proclaimed a
strict superset of C, I consider this a bug.
$ gcc -x c - <<<"int main(){ int a[3][4] = {[1][2] = 5}; }"
$ gcc -x objective-c - <<<"int ma
--- Comment #19 from davek at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 20:57 ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> No, the support that was implemented is that the suffix of gnatmake
> is the one that gcc gets suffixed with.
Ah ok, I see. Then it's working as designed. Sorry for the noise in your
in
--- Comment #18 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-07-26 20:44 ---
Subject: Re: --program-suffix is ignored (for ada)
On Sun, 26 Jul 2009, davek at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #17 from davek at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 20:39
> ---
> (In reply to comment #1
--- Comment #17 from davek at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 20:39 ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> Right, my change fixed gnatmake so that it would call the proper gcc (based on
> the
> previous comments on this PR), but Makefiles have never supported
> --program-suffix, so that's not e
--- Comment #16 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 20:37
---
Created an attachment (id=18256)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18256&action=view)
patch
FYI this is what SUSE carries along.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=864
--- Comment #29 from giffordj at la dot twcbc dot com 2009-07-26 20:28
---
STAGE1_CFLAGS="-g -O2" is a workaround, -O1 gave failure later in the build.
-O2 built GCC all the way through, with only one unexpected testsuite failure.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3773
--- Comment #15 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 20:33
---
Right, my change fixed gnatmake so that it would call the proper gcc (based on
the
previous comments on this PR), but Makefiles have never supported
--program-suffix, so that's not even a regression.
Feel free to
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 20:32 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Can you try whether the following works (place somewhere in
> intrinsics/c99_functions.c):
Enhanced version with yet another version for I:
#ifndef I
# if defined(_Imaginary_I)
# define
--- Comment #2 from regehr at cs dot utah dot edu 2009-07-26 20:30 ---
Argh sorry... a search on "simplify_subreg" appeared to return no matches but
perhaps I had a typo.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40862
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 20:28 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> The prototype warnings have been there foreever.
They should be fixed with the patch ... Do they still appear?
> On hpux, the error
> appears as a result of your change:
> ../../../gcc/li
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-07-26
20:11 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] Build failure in
libgfortran
On Sun, 26 Jul 2009, John David Anglin wrote:
> > Patch. As I cannot test all the combinations, I would be happy if someone
> > could
>
--- Comment #14 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 19:53
---
> None of the newly built gnat* executables had the --program-suffix appended.
that never happened. Distros carry patches for this since ages.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=864
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 19:15 ---
*** Bug 40862 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40861
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 19:15 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 40861 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-07-26
19:09 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] Build failure in libgfortran
> Patch. As I cannot test all the combinations, I would be happy if someone
> could
> test it or read the patch. (I will reread it and also do so
--- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 18:50 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Still fails for me on Cygwin with
libtool: compile: /home/Thomas/trunk-bin/./gcc/xgcc
-B/home/Thomas/trunk-bin/./
gcc/ -B/usr/local/i686-pc-cygwin/bin/ -B/usr/local/i686-pc-cygwin/lib/ -is
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 18:42 ---
Created an attachment (id=18255)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18255&action=view)
Draft patch
Patch. As I cannot test all the combinations, I would be happy if someone could
test it or read the
--- Comment #1 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 17:40 ---
On hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11,
libtool: compile: /test/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc/xgcc
-B/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc/
-B/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.5.0/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11/bin/
-B/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.5.0/hp
pa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11/lib/ -i
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-07-26 17:32 ---
Subject: Re: complex folding inexact
The example in this bug deals with excess overflow for division. For
infinities computing as NaN + iNaN, an example is (NaN + iInf) * (NaN
+iInf) (where NaN +iInf is obtained
--- Comment #31 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 17:26 ---
Subject: Bug 33197
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Jul 26 17:25:56 2009
New Revision: 150100
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=150100
Log:
2009-07-26 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/33197
Just ran into this.
A forgotten commit, maybe?
../../../trunk/libgfortran/intrinsics/c99_functions.c: At top level:
../../../trunk/libgfortran/intrinsics/c99_functions.c:1520:1: warning: no
previo
us prototype for 'casinhf'
../../../trunk/libgfortran/intrinsics/c99_functions.c:1530:1: warning: n
--- Comment #6 from simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 16:11
---
Fixed in 4.5 and 4.4. I don't plan to commit this to 4.3.
--
simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 16:05
---
Subject: Bug 40749
Author: simartin
Date: Sun Jul 26 16:05:22 2009
New Revision: 150099
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=150099
Log:
gcc/cp/
2009-07-26 Simon Martin
PR c++/40749
--- Comment #18 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-07-26 15:45
---
Never mind the draft next, of course doesn't work, grunt (_Distance?)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40497
150096- --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.5.0 20090726 (experimental) (GCC)
reg...@john-home:~/volatile/tmp179$ cat small.c
int foo (int _left, int _right)
{
return 1 >= 1 * 8 || 9223372036854775807LL >> _right ? : 0;
}
signed char bar (signed char _ui1, signed char _
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |rtl-optimization
Keywords||ice-
150096- --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.5.0 20090726 (experimental) (GCC)
reg...@john-home:~/volatile/tmp179$ cat small.c
int foo (int _left, int _right)
{
return 1 >= 1 * 8 || 9223372036854775807LL >> _right ? : 0;
}
signed char bar (signed char _ui1, signed char _
--- Comment #9 from davek at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 15:13 ---
All done now.
--
davek at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGN
--- Comment #8 from davek at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 15:09 ---
Subject: Bug 40578
Author: davek
Date: Sun Jul 26 15:09:10 2009
New Revision: 150098
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=150098
Log:
PR bootstrap/40578
* adaint.h (FOPEN, STAT, FSTAT
--- Comment #17 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-07-26 14:46
---
Maybe Jason can help confirming that we don't have a C++ issue here?!? In that
case, however, since Concepts are gone, I think we should probably file a
library DR or raise the issue vs the rolled-back Draft.
--- Comment #13 from davek at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 14:26 ---
Broken again on HEAD :-(
Configured with --program-suffix=-4, bootstrapped, and installed into a new
$prefix that I then placed at the front of $PATH.
None of the newly built gnat* executables had the --progra
--- Comment #1 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-07-26 12:54 ---
Looks like fallout from revision 144323. As far as I can tell the "warning" is
informational (ABI change from 4.3) so should be suppressed or ignored in the
test suite.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=
--- Comment #5 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-07-26 11:07 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> With -mieee they indeed pass.
>
> Was the default changed for 4.4?
No, but code generation is different, just use -mieee.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #5 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-07-26 11:01 ---
-fsee was removed some time ago by:
2009-06-18 Sergei Dyshel
* see.c: Remove.
* Makefile.in (OBJS-common): Remove see.o.
(see.o): Remove.
* common.opt (fsee): Mark as preserved for back
seen with 4.4.1 and trunk, 4.4.1 cannot be used anymore to bootstrap OpenJDK:
Matthias
Executing on host:
/home/doko/gcc/4.4/gcj-4.4-4.4.1/build/arm-linux-gnueabi/libjava/testsuite/../libtool
--silent --tag=GCJ --mode=link /home/doko/gcc/4.4/gcj-4.4-4.4.1/build/gcc/gcj
-B/home/doko/gcc/4.4/gcj-
seen with 4.4.1:
Executing on host: /home/doko/gcc/4.4/gcj-4.4-4.4.1/build/gcc/xgcc
-B/home/doko/gcc/4.4/gcj-4.4-4.4.1/build/gcc/ -g -I. -I..
-fdollars-in-identifiers
-I/home/doko/gcc/4.4/gcj-4.4-4.4.1/src/libjava/testsuite/..
-I/home/doko/gcc/4.4/gcj-4.4-4.4.1/src/libjava/testsuite/../include
-I
home/users/arekm/gcc-test
--enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.5.0 20090726 (experimental) (GCC)
[ar...@carme-pld ~]$ ~/gcc-test/bin/g++ -c gcc-pr14912.cxx
/home/users/arekm
--- Comment #2 from doko at ubuntu dot com 2009-07-26 10:37 ---
seen on sparc-linux-gnu as well
Matthias
--
doko at ubuntu dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-07-26 10:11 ---
Created an attachment (id=18254)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18254&action=view)
patch to fix the failure
This patch fixes the failure on x86_64 -> alpha crosscompiler. Since gcc30 of
compile farm f
--- Comment #33 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 09:50 ---
(In reply to comment #32)
> > Regarding the just committed inline version: It would be interesting to know
> > whether it is vectorizable (with/without -ffinite-math-only [i.e.
> > -ffast-math]).
>
> It depends on w
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-07-26 09:26
---
Certainly not a bug, at most an enhancement: in the current and future C++
Standards there is no mention of such types, of course.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Remove
--- Comment #4 from simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 08:16
---
Subject: Bug 40749
Author: simartin
Date: Sun Jul 26 08:16:41 2009
New Revision: 150097
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=150097
Log:
gcc/cp/
2009-07-26 Simon Martin
PR c++/40749
--- Comment #32 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2009-07-26 07:48 ---
(In reply to comment #30)
> Regarding the just committed inline version: It would be interesting to know
> whether it is vectorizable (with/without -ffinite-math-only [i.e.
> -ffast-math]).
It depends on where it is in
--- Comment #5 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2009-07-26 07:04 ---
Fixed.
--
irar at il dot ibm dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from irar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-26 07:00 ---
Subject: Bug 40801
Author: irar
Date: Sun Jul 26 07:00:23 2009
New Revision: 150096
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=150096
Log:
PR tree-optimization/40801
* tree-vect-stmts.c (vec
55 matches
Mail list logo
