http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49433
Vasiliy changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vash at vasiliyshlykov dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48698
--- Comment #2 from Benjamin Kosnik 2011-09-23
03:47:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 25346
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25346
patch
You are correct Here's a patch that fixes it.
The real issue is that now, linking libstdc+
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50491
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50491
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-09-23 00:55:20 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Sep 23 00:55:16 2011
New Revision: 179110
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179110
Log:
/cp
2011-09-22 Paolo Carlini
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50491
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-09-23 00:54:38 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Sep 23 00:54:32 2011
New Revision: 179109
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179109
Log:
/cp
2011-09-22 Paolo Carlini
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #56 from Jack Howarth 2011-09-22
23:59:25 UTC ---
Regtest results for darwin11 at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-09/msg02262.html.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50491
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-09-22
23:52:15 UTC ---
This fixes the ICE but I don't know if it's correct and haven't run the
testsuite:
Index: semantics.c
===
--- semanti
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50491
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50491
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50491
--- Comment #1 from Jeffrey Yasskin 2011-09-22
23:14:35 UTC ---
Both g++ versions also succeed when passed -std=c++98.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50491
Bug #: 50491
Summary: [C++0x] "unexpected ast of kind using_decl" on call to
using'ed grandparent member function
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50443
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47436
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45483
--- Comment #11 from Pacho Ramos
2011-09-22 22:39:58 UTC ---
If I use "mtune=native" instead of "march", final gcc command is different:
/usr/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.1/cc1 -quiet - -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
--param l1-cache-size=32 --param l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50485
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2011-09-22 22:37:41
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> H.J.,
>
> > I think it is wrong to convert memcpy to push/pop here.
>
> Just to be clear here. It's the assignment 'tmp[1] = src2[1]' that gets
> translated into
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49804
--- Comment #4 from Anton Shterenlikht 2011-09-22
22:36:16 UTC ---
/usr/ports/lang/gcc47/work/build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/usr/ports/lang/gcc47/work/build/./gcc/
-B/usr/local/sparc64-portbld-freebsd9.0/bin/
-B/usr/local/sparc64-portbld-freebsd9.0/lib/ -is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50477
--- Comment #2 from miles at gnu dot org 2011-09-22 22:34:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Having a name vs having correct documentation is the best way. Also you can
> use the attribute unused in C++ now.
Sorry, I'm not sure I understand yo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45483
--- Comment #10 from Pacho Ramos
2011-09-22 22:33:20 UTC ---
New output:
\_ /usr/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.1/cc1 -quiet - -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
-march=pentium-m -mno-cx16 -mno-sahf -mno-movbe -mno-aes -mno-pclmul
-mno-popcnt -mno-abm -mno-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50490
Bug #: 50490
Summary: ICE when compiling libglib2.0 with LTO
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50485
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-22 22:11:37 UTC ---
H.J.,
> I think it is wrong to convert memcpy to push/pop here.
Just to be clear here. It's the assignment 'tmp[1] = src2[1]' that gets
translated into the push/pop. The cal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47436
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill 2011-09-22
22:05:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> I'm reading 14.6/8 and I tend to agree with Jon that not mentioning A would
> be probably less misleading. However, I'm afraid we have the recurring problem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49804
Gerald Pfeifer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50460
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50477
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-09-22
21:14:56 UTC ---
Having a name vs having correct documentation is the best way. Also you can
use the attribute unused in C++ now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45483
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu 2011-09-22 21:08:09
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Should I try with gcc-4.6 to see if it uses something different than "generic"
> for mtune (or march has changed again)?
Yes.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47436
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50485
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2011-09-22 20:47:01
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
>
> The assignment is translated as a push/pop on the float stack:
> ...
...
>
> So after the push/pop tmp[1] contains a quiet Nan, while the corresponding
> par
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45483
--- Comment #8 from Pacho Ramos
2011-09-22 20:47:04 UTC ---
It's still using generic in gcc-4.5, -march has moved from prescott to
pentium-m:
gcc-4.4: \_ /usr/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.5/cc1 -quiet -
-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -march=prescott --
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50485
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2011-09-22
20:41:07 UTC ---
I get this failure also. At first I thought it was my patch and then I noticed
no code changes with my change.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50394
--- Comment #23 from Jan Hubicka 2011-09-22 20:29:38
UTC ---
> > is altogether more hairy - we create at run-time C++ vtables packed with
> > trampolines so we can intercept / model native C++ objects and interact with
> > them via python etc. th
> > is altogether more hairy - we create at run-time C++ vtables packed with
> > trampolines so we can intercept / model native C++ objects and interact with
> > them via python etc. that would need some more intense debugging love I
> > guess.
>
> and this one is the only remaining issue.
That
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50394
--- Comment #22 from Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-09-22 19:42:44 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> For:
>
> terminate called after throwing an instance of
> 'com::sun::star::container::NoSuchElementException'
> It throws an exception in: xmlreader
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50482
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50464
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50489
--- Comment #2 from Gary Funck 2011-09-22 19:31:04
UTC ---
Created attachment 25344
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25344
zipped tar file with build script, readme, test case and test artifacts
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48803
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- Comment #3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50464
--- Comment #5 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-22 19:28:03 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Sep 22 19:27:59 2011
New Revision: 179100
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179100
Log:
PR target/50464
* config/i386/sse.md
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50489
--- Comment #1 from Gary Funck 2011-09-22 19:21:54
UTC ---
Created attachment 25343
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25343
UPC test case that demonstrates instruction mis-schedule
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47436
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-09-22
19:19:21 UTC ---
I'd go for "error: variadic template A is invalid because every valid
specialization requires an empty template parameter pack"
but I'm not sure that would be needed if the original
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50489
Bug #: 50489
Summary: [UPC/IA64] mis-schedule of MEM ref with
-ftree-vectorize and -fschedule-insns2
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47436
--- Comment #4 from Johannes Schaub
2011-09-22 19:01:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > Suggestions about a better error message? (should be easy to change)
>
> What about:
>
> "error: every valid template specia
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50488
--- Comment #5 from karman 2011-09-22 18:43:30
UTC ---
ha, ok, thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50488
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-09-22
18:41:41 UTC ---
GCC is open source so you can attempt to fix it yourself or pay someone to do
it for you, but it will never be fixed in the official GCC 3.4 because that
release series is discontinu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50487
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl
2011-09-22 18:35:09 UTC ---
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 06:22:25PM +, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50487
>
> --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2011-09-22 18:22:25
> U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50487
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50487
--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-22 18:30:42 UTC ---
Author: kargl
Date: Thu Sep 22 18:30:36 2011
New Revision: 179098
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179098
Log:
011-09-22 Steven G. Kargl
PR tests
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50487
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-22 18:28:18 UTC ---
Author: kargl
Date: Thu Sep 22 18:28:14 2011
New Revision: 179097
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179097
Log:
2011-09-22 Steven G. Kargl
PR test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50487
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2011-09-22 18:22:25
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> >
> > It works for me. Can you check it in?
> >
>
> Sure, do you want me to apply it to 4.5 and 4.6 as well.
Yes, please.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50371
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50371
--- Comment #1 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-09-22 18:20:58 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Sep 22 18:20:53 2011
New Revision: 179096
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179096
Log:
/cp
2011-09-22 Paolo Carlini
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50487
--- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl
2011-09-22 18:19:07 UTC ---
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 06:16:35PM +, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50487
>
> H.J. Lu changed:
>
>What|Removed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50487
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libfortran |testsuite
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50488
--- Comment #3 from karman 2011-09-22 18:12:18
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> you have two problems, one is that the code won't compile because you're
> missing a header, the second is that GCC 3.4.5 is ancient, so although this
> does appear
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47436
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler
2011-09-22 18:11:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Suggestions about a better error message? (should be easy to change)
What about:
"error: every valid template specialization requires an empty template
pa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50488
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2011-09-22
18:11:03 UTC ---
Also I think he forgot about copy constructor happening.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47436
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Variadic|[C++0x] Variadic
|base-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47627
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50487
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50488
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50488
Bug #: 50488
Summary: Destructor problem in struct
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 3.4.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49447
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50464
--- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-22 17:41:30 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Sep 22 17:41:25 2011
New Revision: 179095
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179095
Log:
PR target/50464
* config/i386/sse.md
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49527
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50482
--- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-22 17:35:06 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Sep 22 17:35:00 2011
New Revision: 179094
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179094
Log:
PR target/50482
* config/i386/i386.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50055
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50487
Bug #: 50487
Summary: FAIL: gfortran.dg/bessel_6.f90
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50371
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50437
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50473
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50482
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-09-22
17:02:14 UTC ---
Created attachment 25342
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25342
gcc47-all-ones-cst.patch
Patch to optimize vector x < y ? -1 : z and vector and/ior/xor with -1 oper
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50482
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-09-22
16:33:27 UTC ---
unsigned short a[1024], b[1024];
void
foo (void)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 1024; i++)
a[i] = b[i] > 10 ? b[i] : 0x;
}
ICEs too with -O3 -msse4.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50482
--- Comment #3 from Uros Bizjak 2011-09-22 16:27:01
UTC ---
Shorter testcase:
void
test (int code, unsigned int * image, int * colors)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < code; ++i)
image[i] = (colors[i] < 0 ? ~(unsigned int) 0 : colors[i]);
}
gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50482
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-09-22
16:24:34 UTC ---
Sorry for that, yeah, the patch looks right.
BTW, for CONST_VECTOR containing all bits set we could do better,
for VEC_COND_EXPR x < y ? -1 : z we can do mask = x < y; z | mask;
and fo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-09-22
15:52:11 UTC ---
The reason why many of the loops in *-12.c aren't vectorized is that for
idxtype other than unsigned int which is the type of i there is a cast from i
to the type of pos.
OT, one big
-4.7
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/sw/lib/gcc4.7/libexec/gcc/x86_64-apple-darwin11.2.0/4.7.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-apple-darwin11.2.0
Configured with: ../gcc-4.7-20110922/configure --prefix=/sw
--prefix=/sw/lib/gcc4.7 --mandir=/sw/share/man --infodir=/sw/lib/gcc4.7/info
--with-build-config=bootstrap-lto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45810
--- Comment #26 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-09-22 15:25:48 UTC ---
AFAICT this pr has been fixed since some time. Here are the results I get on
x86_64-apple-darwin10 (Core2Duo 2.53Ghz, 3Mb cache, 4Gb RAM) at revision
179079:
Compile options :
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #25333|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50486
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50481
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36022
--- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini 2011-09-22
14:42:38 UTC ---
*** Bug 50348 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50348
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50486
Bug #: 50486
Summary: No warning at signed -> unsigned casting
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50430
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka 2011-09-22
14:20:07 UTC ---
Created attachment 25340
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25340
reduced testcase
This is somewhat reduced testcase. The problem can be a bit illustrated on C.
We ha
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50344
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50344
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-09-22 14:16:33 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Sep 22 14:16:27 2011
New Revision: 179088
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179088
Log:
/cp
2011-09-22 Jonathan Wakely
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50348
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-09-22
13:45:10 UTC ---
I think before the default visibility was added everywhere it was pretty easy
to cause segfaults by using -fvisibility=hidden
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #30 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé 2011-09-22
13:39:22 UTC ---
Sorry, thank you for creating the feature-request.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50348
--- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini 2011-09-22
13:23:41 UTC ---
Seems so, thanks Jon. The older one also includes some rationale from Benjamin.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50061
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-09-22 12:26:48 UTC ---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Thu Sep 22 12:26:41 2011
New Revision: 179085
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179085
Log:
gcc/
PR middle-end/50113
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50348
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-09-22
12:26:56 UTC ---
dup of PR 36022 ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50113
--- Comment #7 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-09-22 12:26:48 UTC ---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Thu Sep 22 12:26:41 2011
New Revision: 179085
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179085
Log:
gcc/
PR middle-end/50113
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50485
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-22 12:25:23 UTC ---
Created attachment 25339
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25339
proprocessed sse4_1-blendps.c with patch applied to make failure reproducible
To reproduce:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50482
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50485
Bug #: 50485
Summary: gcc.target/i386/sse4_1-blendps.c fails spuriously on
i686
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50348
--- Comment #5 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-09-22 11:49:29 UTC ---
indeed
and in "exception" header-file is a place where visibility is correctly handled
#pragma GCC visibility push(default)
extern "C++" {
namespace std
{
}
#pragma GCC visibilit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50484
--- Comment #1 from Anton Shterenlikht 2011-09-22
11:27:26 UTC ---
Created attachment 25338
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25338
config.log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50484
Bug #: 50484
Summary: [4.6 regression] ia64-portbld-freebsd9.0,
conftest.c:16:1: internal compiler error: Segmentation
fault: 11
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50348
--- Comment #4 from Pawel Sikora 2011-09-22 11:23:14
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I think that, unless not imposed by the standard (why??) the visibility of
> "namespace std" SHALL NOT BE forced to default
part of the std:: (exceptions ty
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50483
Bug #: 50483
Summary: lto turns visibility from HIDDEN to DEFAULT
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: lto
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50348
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincenzo.innocente at cern
1 - 100 of 126 matches
Mail list logo
