http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51156
Bug #: 51156
Summary: build glibc-2.11
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51154
--- Comment #2 from Craig Schroeder 2011-11-16
07:30:12 UTC ---
Created attachment 25835
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25835
Another file variant causing a third diagnostic on ICE.
This variant on the file produces the foll
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51154
--- Comment #1 from Craig Schroeder 2011-11-16
07:28:29 UTC ---
Created attachment 25834
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25834
Variation on same source causing failure with different message.
This variant on the source file I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51155
Bug #: 51155
Summary: sizeof and sizeof... in template partial
specialization
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51154
Bug #: 51154
Summary: internal compiler error: gimplification failed
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51153
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2011-11-16
06:53:11 UTC ---
http://efytimes.com/e1/fullnews.asp?edid=73401
So from the sound of it, it is being merged with openmp.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51153
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-11-16
06:46:43 UTC ---
Hmm, openacc's pragma look very close to openmp.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51153
Bug #: 51153
Summary: OpenACC implementation
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51152
--- Comment #1 from Craig Schroeder 2011-11-16
06:14:29 UTC ---
Created attachment 25832
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25832
File that fails to compile cleanly.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51152
Bug #: 51152
Summary: error: X has no member named Y on code that seems
valid
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51151
Bug #: 51151
Summary: Invalid -Woverflow warning in C++ frontend
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51150
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey Yasskin 2011-11-16
05:30:12 UTC ---
And here's a similar test case using static_cast instead of ->:
$ cat test.ii
template void Foo(int val) {
const int now = static_cast(val);
}
$ g++ -std=c++0x test.ii -fsyntax-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51150
Jeffrey Yasskin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[C++11][4.6 Regression] ICE |[C++11][4.6/4.7 Regression]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51150
Bug #: 51150
Summary: [C++11][4.6 Regression] ICE when result of ->
initializes const variable of different type
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51149
Bug #: 51149
Summary: Smarter error output in a few template
deduction/substitution failure cases
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu 2011-11-16 01:56:08
UTC ---
On Linux/ia32, If you configure GCC with
--with-arch=core2 --with-cpu=atom
you will get
bin/sh ../../src-trunk/gcc/../move-if-change tmp-check.h tree-check.h
*** glibc detected *** build/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51147
--- Comment #2 from Paul Koning 2011-11-16
01:47:27 UTC ---
Thanks, I'll give that a try for another workaround.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51148
Bug #: 51148
Summary: [C++0x] Unexpanded template param packs wrongly
accepted in friend class declarations
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51144
--- Comment #3 from Steve Ellcey 2011-11-16 00:43:15
UTC ---
I think this is a big-endian bug in fprint_whex, etc. IA64 HP-UX is
big endian and I think s390-ibm-linux is too.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51144
Steve Ellcey changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|s390-ibm-linux |s390-ibm-linux,ia64-hp-hpux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51105
--- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-11-16
00:11:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> > Please fill in (host and) target fields.
> What for? AFAICT the field should be *-*-* with lto enabled.
A *-*-* would certainly be better than empty,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51142
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-15 23:28:54 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Nov 15 23:28:49 2011
New Revision: 181394
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181394
Log:
2011-11-15 Paolo Carlini
PR libs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51146
--- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini 2011-11-15
23:27:43 UTC ---
Jon, I think I understand what you are saying, but then we have one more reason
to not consider this sort of issue as , because linking libm, with a
clog in user code with a different
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51146
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-15
23:10:37 UTC ---
(N.B. we do name clog, but only for std::clog, the standard ostream ;)
If you link dynamically to libm.so then the clog symbol can be replaced by
symbol interposition. If a user doe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51147
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-11-15
23:06:26 UTC ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15224 fixed the ICE ..
Note using attribute packed is more likely what you want to do rather than
using mode.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51146
--- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini 2011-11-15
23:05:17 UTC ---
I just want to reiterate that the c++ library headers never name clog, only
__builtin_clog (and of course only when the underlying libc provides the
corresponding clog, in case runtime
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51147
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51147
Paul Koning changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51147
Bug #: 51147
Summary: attribute((mode(byte))) on an enum generates wrong
code
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51146
--- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-11-15 22:28:38 UTC ---
I think this is really a duplicate of an issue discussed in various places
before: libstdc++ relies on C library symbols that are not necessarily
reserved by the sele
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51086
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51086
--- Comment #7 from Alan Modra 2011-11-15 22:10:51
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Nov 15 22:10:46 2011
New Revision: 181391
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181391
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/51051
PR bootstrap/51086
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51051
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51051
--- Comment #9 from Alan Modra 2011-11-15 22:10:51
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Nov 15 22:10:46 2011
New Revision: 181391
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181391
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/51051
PR bootstrap/51086
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51006
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kristerw at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51113
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48879
davek at 6thstreetradio dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||davek at 6thstreetradio d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51138
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill 2011-11-15
20:58:12 UTC ---
Backporting that patch doesn't fix the testcase in 4.6.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51143
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jason at redhat dot com |dodji at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51145
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jason at redhat dot com |dodji at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51146
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2011-11-15
20:20:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> For sure in the library there is nothing to fix, note in particular that the
> implementation does not include , neither names clog, only
> __builtin_clog.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51146
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini 2011-11-15
20:26:23 UTC ---
I suppose, yes.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51113
--- Comment #8 from Nathan Sidwell 2011-11-15 20:12:33
UTC ---
On 11/15/11 10:03, markus at trippelsdorf dot de wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51113
>
> With your patch:
> % c++ -shared -w -o /dev/null -fPIC -fno-rtti -pt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51146
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libstdc++ |c++
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini 20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
Summary|[4.7 Regression] FAIL:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51146
--- Comment #2 from alpha_lc at hotmail dot com 2011-11-15 19:56:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Well the issue is clog is a C99 name for complex log. I don't have my C++
> standard in front of me but I do know some names are reserved even a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51146
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |libstdc++
Severity|major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51146
Bug #: 51146
Summary: The name clog for a global variable triggers a
segfault inside std::pow
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51145
Bug #: 51145
Summary: [C++11][DR1131] Alias template in
elaborated-type-specifier accepted
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRME
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51144
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Component|bootstrap
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51144
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||s390-ibm-linux
Priority|P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51143
Bug #: 51143
Summary: [C++11][DR1159] Alias template allows class definition
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51144
Bug #: 51144
Summary: r181279
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51138
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
Thank you very much Andrew, your suggestion indeed solved the problem.
And thanks also for your fast answer! :-)
Cheers,
Carlo
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Carlo Pinciroli wrote:
>>
>> Dear forum,
>>
>> I have a problem with linking of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51138
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2011-11-15 18:36:09
UTC ---
It is fixed by revision 175640:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2011-06/msg01131.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39658
Meador Inge changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||meadori at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 fro
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Carlo Pinciroli wrote:
>
> Dear forum,
>
> I have a problem with linking of a program I have wrote. Instead of giving
> you the entire program, which is pretty large, I have prepared a basic
> example that you can find attached to this message. The example uses CMa
This is the gcc-bugs list, for automated mails from our Bugzilla
database. Your email should probably have been sent to the gcc-help
list.
http://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html
Dear forum,
I have a problem with linking of a program I have wrote. Instead of giving
you the entire program, which is pretty large, I have prepared a basic
example that you can find attached to this message. The example uses CMake
to compile.
I have three files:
= LIB2.CPP =
#include
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51142
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|paolo.carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51142
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-15
16:59:32 UTC ---
oh yeah, I forgot about that!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51142
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51142
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-15
16:36:30 UTC ---
reduced:
#include
struct X { X(...); };
bool operator<(X,X);
typedef __gnu_debug::map< X, unsigned > M;
int main()
{
M m;
m.erase( X() );
}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50775
--- Comment #3 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-15 16:35:05 UTC ---
Created attachment 25829
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25829
RA dump
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2011-11-15 16:34:22
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Hi,
> the bug is loopy epilogue not being used because promoted value is not
> availbale. The non-loopy epilogue does not expect alignments
> greater than 16.
>
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50775
denisc at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||denisc at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51142
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51142
Bug #: 51142
Summary: [C++0x] map::erase(key) doesn't compile with
-D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51117
Michael Matz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51119
--- Comment #5 from Janne Blomqvist 2011-11-15 15:47:54
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I believe it would be more important to have actually highly efficient
> (inlined) implementations for very small matrices.
There's already PR 37131 for t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51056
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51086
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-11-15 15:19:45 UTC ---
> --- Comment #5 from Alan Modra 2011-11-14 22:00:20
> UTC ---
> Please try http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg01685.html
Works like a charm: an all,ad
-O2 or -O3 is set. (Are these the only times inline
optimizations are performed?) Unfortunately, I do not have a small test case.
The includes come out to be about 2M in size.
ohsumit@mothra:~> g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 4.7.0 20111115 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2011 Free Software Foundat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20681
--- Comment #32 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-15
14:53:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #31)
> gcc -Wreturn-type -c r.c
> r.c: In function 'bar':
> r.c:8:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type]
>
> enum foo { e_1 };
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51141
fabien at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |fabien at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51105
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-11-15
14:19:40 UTC ---
> Please fill in (host and) target fields.
What for? AFAICT the field should be *-*-* with lto enabled.
If I fill a bug report, it is because I see it on one of the machines I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17838
--- Comment #10 from Tom St Denis 2011-11-15
14:20:07 UTC ---
Another update ... We've just profiled our crypto library and across the board
[cipher, hashes, PK functions like RSA/ECC] GCC is a complete loser against
ARMcc [r713]. And it's not t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51101
--- Comment #2 from Joel Sherrill 2011-11-15 14:16:04
UTC ---
Still present..
Tue Nov 15 14:08:04 UTC 2011 (revision 181384)
switch(x) {
case e_1:
return 0;
}
}
gcc version 4.7.0 2015 (experimental) [trunk revision 181378] (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51136
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51136
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-15 14:00:44 UTC ---
Created attachment 25827
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25827
tentative patch
The problem is that in update_vuses, we're removing the def of the
def-use-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51141
Bug #: 51141
Summary: [4.7 regression] rev181359 causes Chromium build
failure
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka 2011-11-15 13:28:42 UTC
---
Hi,
the bug is loopy epilogue not being used because promoted value is not
availbale. The non-loopy epilogue does not expect alignments
greater than 16.
I am testing the following patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51140
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-15
13:12:20 UTC ---
That guard should be added to eh_tm.cc but ...
don't build for i386-* because that targets the 80386 processor, which doesn't
have the required atomic operations, and I *really doub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51133
--- Comment #14 from Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd at verizon dot net> 2011-11-15
12:48:06 UTC ---
I'm glad to see renewed interest in this. I wasn't sure if anyone else had
used these routines ;-)
Anyway, one thing I would like us to look at is ISO/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51139
--- Comment #6 from Sven Passig 2011-11-15 12:44:45
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/trunk/gcc/cp/ChangeLog
> (although sometimes fetching that page times out because there are a LOT of
> revisions to that file)
than
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51139
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-15
12:40:22 UTC ---
All commits are sent to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/
Or you can look at http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/ at the ChangeLog files.
e.g. for the C++ front end:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51140
--- Comment #1 from Cesar Strauss 2011-11-15
12:39:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> There is another use of __sync_sub_and_fetch in
> libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_tm.cc,
I meant libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_throw.cc.
> and there it is guarded by
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka 2011-11-15 12:37:07 UTC
---
> gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 is miscompiled.
There are 4 expanded memset calls in the testcase, all ends up being unrolled
loop.
Looks like we misoptmize one of them.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51140
Bug #: 51140
Summary: libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_tm.cc:48: undefined
reference to `___sync_sub_and_fetch_4'
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
St
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51119
--- Comment #4 from Joost VandeVondele
2011-11-15 12:31:10 UTC ---
Created attachment 25826
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25826
comparison in performance for small matrix multiplies (libsmm vs mkl)
added some data showing t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51119
--- Comment #3 from Joost VandeVondele
2011-11-15 12:19:59 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I have a cunning plan.
It is doable to come within a factor of 2 of highly efficient implementations
using a cache-oblivious matrix multiply, which is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51139
--- Comment #4 from Sven Passig 2011-11-15 11:42:45
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> it was only implemented on the 7th, your compiler is too old
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45114#c13
Thanks for this ultrafast answer on th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51139
--- Comment #3 from Sven Passig 2011-11-15 11:36:53
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> and severity is never "critical" for a brand new feature (in the C++11 mode
> still labelled experimental) in an unreleased compiler
ah ok, thanks for clarify
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51139
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wak
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51139
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51139
Bug #: 51139
Summary: c++11 alias-declarations doasn't work contrary to
relase notes
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51133
--- Comment #13 from Paolo Carlini 2011-11-15
11:11:47 UTC ---
If we do this as part of the general testsuite infrastructure we can also
afford having a little more code, separate out-of-line functions, etc. But the
code must be formatted accordi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51133
--- Comment #12 from Jason Dick 2011-11-15 11:08:16
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Thanks, but please, instead of doing this here, for this specific testcase,
> please collaborate with Ed at integrating this code in the testsuite.
Sounds go
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
