http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49817
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49806
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49793
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-23
00:14:53 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Sat Jul 23 00:14:46 2011
New Revision: 176665
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176665
Log:
PR c++/49793
* typeck2.c (check_narrowing):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49819
Summary: gcc/ada/gcc-interface/Makefile.in refers to
g-trasym-dwarf.adb which does not exist
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49040
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48648
--- Comment #10 from Sebastian Pop 2011-07-22
23:11:14 UTC ---
*** Bug 49040 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48648
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49817
Gerald Pfeifer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49818
Summary: libsupc++ does not export __cxa_get_globals or related
functions
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49817
--- Comment #1 from gerald at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-07-22 22:52:57 UTC ---
Author: gerald
Date: Fri Jul 22 22:52:55 2011
New Revision: 176662
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176662
Log:
PR target/49817
* stack-limit.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49791
--- Comment #12 from Tobias Burnus 2011-07-22
22:44:24 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Jul 22 22:44:20 2011
New Revision: 176661
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176661
Log:
2011-07-23 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49708
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-22 22:24:22 UTC ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri Jul 22 22:24:19 2011
New Revision: 176659
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176659
Log:
2011-07-23 Janus Weil
PR fortran/4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49817
Summary: libiberty/stack-limit.c causes a bootstrap failure on
all FreeBSD targets
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1773
--- Comment #87 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-22
21:49:49 UTC ---
Now the pragma issue is solved. Good. I don't know Rainer if that means we can
do something, I'm afraid it surfaced only as one of the last stumbling blocks
in your analysis...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49793
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49793
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-22
21:30:40 UTC ---
The compiler is, unfortunately, following the standard. 8.5.4/7:
A narrowing conversion is an implicit conversion
...
* from an integer type or unscoped enumeration type to a floati
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6709
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30112
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32998
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-22
20:03:35 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jul 22 20:03:33 2011
New Revision: 176652
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176652
Log:
PR other/32998
* common.opt (grecord-gcc-s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30112
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-22
19:59:51 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jul 22 19:59:49 2011
New Revision: 176650
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176650
Log:
PR c++/30112
gcc/c-family/
* c-common.h: De
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-22
18:47:21 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Jul 22 18:47:17 2011
New Revision: 176647
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176647
Log:
PR debug/49815
* var-tracking.c (vt_fi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29383
Bill Long changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||longb at cray dot com
--- Comment #6 from Bil
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49786
--- Comment #17 from H.J. Lu 2011-07-22 17:39:59
UTC ---
It isn't fixed by 176630:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2011-07/msg00897.html
See:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2011-07/msg00403.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #24 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-22
17:16:43 UTC ---
As far as I can see, Vincenzo, in that case the problem is a bit different,
because those functions aren't ISO: should Intel issue an updated document
describing the builtins and ackn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45351
--- Comment #12 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-07-22 17:04:33 UTC ---
To make completely sure that this isn't a gcc problem of some sort, I've
derived a testcase from libgomp. If built with cc -c99 or gcc, it shows
the same unaligne
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47393
--- Comment #9 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-07-22 17:02:11 UTC ---
> --- Comment #8 from Cary Coutant 2011-07-22
> 16:49:11 UTC ---
> Why not just remove the test entirely instead of XFAIL it? The functionality
> that it was test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33255
--- Comment #14 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-22
17:00:57 UTC ---
Somebody should add a "Thumb Up" button to Bugzilla.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47393
Cary Coutant changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ccoutant at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33255
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #23 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-07-22 16:48:35 UTC ---
would http://lwg.github.com/issues/lwg-active.html#2013 allow gcc to declare
constexpr the x86 builtins (and corresponding wrapper functions)?
I would be interested to have cons
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49293
--- Comment #8 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-22 16:47:24 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Fri Jul 22 16:47:20 2011
New Revision: 176643
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176643
Log:
Backport from mainline
2011-06-07 P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-22
16:41:22 UTC ---
> I meant registers. Especially with the planned shrink wrapping, say if code
> before the prologue stores some argument into %o5 register that doesn't hold
> any parameter and then
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47393
--- Comment #7 from Rainer Orth 2011-07-22 16:31:56 UTC
---
Author: ro
Date: Fri Jul 22 16:31:52 2011
New Revision: 176640
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176640
Log:
PR debug/47393
* g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/icf.C: XFAI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47393
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #22 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-22
16:06:13 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jul 22 16:06:08 2011
New Revision: 176635
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176635
Log:
PR c++/49813
* c-opts.c (set_std_cxx0x): S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47393
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Orth 2011-07-22 16:02:30 UTC
---
Author: ro
Date: Fri Jul 22 16:02:25 2011
New Revision: 176633
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176633
Log:
PR debug/47393
* g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/icf.C: XFAI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31827
--- Comment #18 from Uros Bizjak 2011-07-22 15:50:58
UTC ---
The patch that increased RLIMIT_STACK in the driver as well as compiler (PR
c++/49756) [1] fixed this on linux targets.
Jakub, you have a patch pending in Comment #17. Do you plan to c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49816
Summary: arm.c:3999:12: error: converting 'false' to pointer
type 'rtx'
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49796
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49796
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor 2011-07-22
15:35:54 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Jul 22 15:35:48 2011
New Revision: 176630
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176630
Log:
2011-07-22 Martin Jambor
PR lto/49796
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #21 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-22
15:31:15 UTC ---
Hum (Jason and Daniel, in particular) I'm wondering if the issue could fall
under http://lwg.github.com/issues/lwg-active.html#2013 but then, we would be
able to assume / do it only f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-07-22 15:14:13 UTC ---
> If you still have the build tree around, would you mind checking that it fixes
> the problem? For example, apply it to the tree, run 'make quickstrap' from
> wi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #20 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-22
15:07:53 UTC ---
I see, everything makes sense now. And OK, I'll raise the issue (in fact, we
have Daniel in CC, in this bug... ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-22
14:46:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> > BTW, wouldn't it be better to model the insn completely rather than
> > partially?
> > In particular, in addition to the arguments being copied have also
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-22
14:37:50 UTC ---
> Ah, I see. adjust_insn call isn't guarded by MAY_HAVE_DEBUG_STMTS, therefore
> if -fvar-tracking-assignments gives up due to insanely large hash tables, it
> won't be reset during v
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-22
14:17:14 UTC ---
That tentative fix is obviously correct and preapproved. But please think
about the rest of sets/clobbers and especially keeping the sp = sp -
constant/reg
explicit - var-tracking is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-22
14:14:07 UTC ---
Ah, I see. adjust_insn call isn't guarded by MAY_HAVE_DEBUG_STMTS, therefore
if -fvar-tracking-assignments gives up due to insanely large hash tables, it
won't be reset during vt_fina
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-22
14:09:15 UTC ---
> (insn/f:TI 129 100 9 2 (parallel [
> (set (reg:DI 24 %i0 [ this ])
> (reg:DI 8 %o0 [ this ]))
> (clobber:DI (reg:DI 8 %o0))
> (set
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49545
--- Comment #11 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-07-22
14:01:50 UTC ---
Looks like this got "unfixed" on trunk?
It worked on r176507, had reappeared on r176524.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49791
--- Comment #11 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-07-22
13:49:59 UTC ---
After reviewing the listread.c and the test case I see that the touched should
have nothing to do with this test case since the case has nothing to do with
derived types.
I think the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-07-22 13:14:39 UTC ---
> --- Comment #2 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-22
> 13:07:18 UTC ---
>> Solaris/SPARC bootstrap is currently broken:
>
> Java though, which is pretty much useless on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
--- Comment #2 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-22
13:07:18 UTC ---
> Solaris/SPARC bootstrap is currently broken:
Java though, which is pretty much useless on this platform.
> Here's a reduced command line:
>
> $ jc1 ccd.list -fuse-divide-subroutin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth 2011-07-22 12:55:48 UTC
---
Created attachment 24810
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24810
jc1 input file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
cal/gcc/toplev.c:564
#19 do_compile (argc=19, argv=0xffbff3ec) at
/vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/toplev.c:1886
#20 toplev_main (argc=19, argv=0xffbff3ec) at
/vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/toplev.c:1962
#21 0x00166ef4 in _start ()
The last working bootstrap was on 20110715 (r176317), 20110720 (unknown rev)
was already broken, 20110722 (r176317) still is.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #18 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-22
12:31:05 UTC ---
Before any other discussion (I believe we want to hear Jason now) I only want
to add this: I think the whole discussion about -std=c++0x vs -std=gnu++0x can
only possibly be useful in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45819
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45819
--- Comment #14 from Richard Guenther 2011-07-22
12:21:30 UTC ---
Oh, the initial testcase was invalid anyway.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45819
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
AssignedTo|rguenth at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45819
--- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther 2011-07-22
12:19:25 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jul 22 12:19:21 2011
New Revision: 176624
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176624
Log:
2011-07-22 Richard Guenther
PR tree-o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43366
--- Comment #13 from Tobias Burnus 2011-07-22
12:08:28 UTC ---
Regarding the LHS (in addition to comment 6):
- It may not be coindexed ("!gfc_is_conindexed(e)")
- It may not be a coarray ("!gfc_expr_attr (e).codimension")
- It may not have a coa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45819
--- Comment #11 from Richard Guenther 2011-07-22
11:55:33 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jul 22 11:55:30 2011
New Revision: 176623
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176623
Log:
2011-07-22 Richard Guenther
PR tree-o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49798
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse dot de
2011-07-22 11:43:57 UTC ---
On Fri, 22 Jul 2011, paolo.carlini at oracle dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
>
> --- Comment #16 from Paolo Carlini
> 2011-07-22 11:4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #16 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-22
11:40:07 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> There is also a using ::asinhf but still std:: provides an overload.
So? This is what C++0x says we should have.
As regards a complete testcase, I gave t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #15 from Richard Guenther 2011-07-22
11:30:38 UTC ---
Also works with
namespace std {
constexpr double asinh (double x) { return __builtin_asinh (x); }
}
int main()
{
constexpr double das = std::asinh(1.0);
}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de
2011-07-22 11:29:04 UTC ---
On Fri, 22 Jul 2011, paolo.carlini at oracle dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
>
> --- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini
> 2011-07-22 11:2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #13 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-22
11:24:21 UTC ---
... and let's decide to look at mainline, first at least.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49796
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor 2011-07-22
11:23:42 UTC ---
Patch submitted to the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg01925.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de
2011-07-22 11:20:52 UTC ---
On Fri, 22 Jul 2011, rguenther at suse dot de wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
>
> --- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de
> 2011-07-22
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-22
11:20:36 UTC ---
It does *not* Richi, there is an using ::asinh above. Exactly the same for
sinh.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de
2011-07-22 11:17:38 UTC ---
On Fri, 22 Jul 2011, paolo.carlini at oracle dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
>
> --- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini
> 2011-07-22 11:09
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49810
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-07-22 11:12:01 UTC ---
On 22-Jul-11, at 6:50 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> You probably get different prototypes with C vs. C++ for strsignal.
The prototype has to come from libiberty
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-22
11:09:55 UTC ---
Yes, Vincenzo, all the other C99-only functions should be audited. I suppose a
clean fix will automatically deal with all of them.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #8 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-07-22 11:06:41 UTC ---
what about other "new C99 functions" such as
cexprMath.cpp:16:64: error: 'float std::nextafter(float, float)' is not
'constexpr'
cexprMath.cpp:17:58: error: 'float std::trunc(floa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-22
11:02:01 UTC ---
I just tried. This:
#include
int main()
{
double ds = sinh(1.0);
double das = asinh(1.0);
}
this compiles fine with -std=c++0x for me. On Linux of course, other targets
have s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de
2011-07-22 10:56:51 UTC ---
On Fri, 22 Jul 2011, paolo.carlini at oracle dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
>
> --- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini
> 2011-07-22 10:52:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-22
10:52:03 UTC ---
We don't want this to depend on -std=gnu++0x vs -std=c++0x!!
The function is there, declared and callable, as removing constexpr reveals,
the behavior wrt constexpr data cannot depend
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49809
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49810
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|WORKSFORME
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-07-22
10:41:36 UTC ---
With C++ I get
> ./cc1plus -quiet t.c -fdump-tree-original -std=c++0x
t.c: In function 'int main()':
t.c:6:39: error: 'asinh' was not declared in this scope
without -std=c++0x the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-linux|
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
Summary: sinh vs asinh vs constexpr
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49812
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49310
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45819
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49756
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-22
09:21:52 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jul 22 09:21:49 2011
New Revision: 176622
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176622
Log:
PR c++/49756
* libiberty.h (stack_limit_inc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49794
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
URL|http://gcc.gnu.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49794
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth 2011-07-22 08:58:28 UTC
---
Author: ro
Date: Fri Jul 22 08:58:25 2011
New Revision: 176620
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176620
Log:
2011-07-20 Rainer Orth
Ralf Wildenhues
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49812
--- Comment #1 from Frédéric Bron 2011-07-22
08:58:31 UTC ---
Created attachment 24809
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24809
program that fails
This program should write false but writes true.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49812
Summary: strange return type for built-in operator++(int, int)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49797
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49797
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth 2011-07-22 08:49:27 UTC
---
Author: ro
Date: Fri Jul 22 08:49:23 2011
New Revision: 176618
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176618
Log:
PR bootstrap/49797
* graphite-clast-to-gimple.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49756
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-22
08:33:42 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jul 22 08:33:37 2011
New Revision: 176617
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176617
Log:
PR c++/49756
* libiberty.h (stack_limit_inc
100 matches
Mail list logo
