http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52195
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52195
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52146
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52195
Bug #: 52195
Summary: doesn't put stdio, stderr and stdin in the
std namespace
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51835
--- Comment #7 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-10 03:14:45 UTC ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Feb 10 03:14:40 2012
New Revision: 184082
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184082
Log:
Backport from mainline.
2012-01-30
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52146
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2012-02-10 00:21:18
UTC ---
Created attachment 26636
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26636
A patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51798
--- Comment #29 from Benjamin Kosnik 2012-02-09
23:21:51 UTC ---
Created attachment 26635
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26635
complete transition to __atomic, v3
All bits in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52146
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52168
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wake
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52168
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #26633|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52194
--- Comment #1 from Magnus Granberg 2012-02-09
21:54:41 UTC ---
Fail on older gcc versions to (4.6 4.5 4.4 4.3)
With a simpel pch test code i got this bt
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
linemap_location_from_macro_expansion_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52139
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40778
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51767
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51768
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52194
Bug #: 52194
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/pch/common-1.c -O0 -g -I. (internal
compiler error) on PaX enable kernels (RANDMMAP)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknow
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40778
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
21:38:16 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 21:38:13 2012
New Revision: 184073
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184073
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-01-19 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52139
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
21:39:23 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 21:39:20 2012
New Revision: 184074
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184074
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-02-08 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52193
Bug #: 52193
Summary: Bad translatable string: failed to reclaim unneeded
functionin same comdat group
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48483
--- Comment #20 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-02-09
21:37:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48483#c2
> shows that function calling of object before constructor is bad idea and
> must
> be strong
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51767
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
21:36:59 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 21:36:54 2012
New Revision: 184072
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184072
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-01-05 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51768
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
21:35:40 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 21:35:36 2012
New Revision: 184071
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184071
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-01-05 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44777
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
21:34:25 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 21:34:21 2012
New Revision: 184070
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184070
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-01-05 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48306
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
21:33:15 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 21:33:11 2012
New Revision: 184069
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184069
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-01-26 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52168
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-09
21:31:48 UTC ---
Created attachment 26633
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26633
replace 'c' command with 'i' and 'd'
this passes the tests on gnu/linux and netbsd
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52190
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51798
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #26620|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50942
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52192
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-09
20:01:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> needs to link with -lthread for __tls_get_addr. -pthread knows about this
> and the necessary contortions, and I do have a patch to try the test with
> -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52192
Bug #: 52192
Summary: GCC_CHECK_TLS doesn't detect native TLS on Solaris 8/9
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52191
Bug #: 52191
Summary: abi_check should flag additions to released versions
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52190
Bug #: 52190
Summary: question about atomic intrinsics -- test and
documentation vary -- please clarify
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Statu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52189
Bug #: 52189
Summary: [4.7 regression] Relaxed gthreads check breaks Solaris
8/9 symbol versioning
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51929
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
18:43:01 UTC ---
Reduced testcase:
// { dg-do compile }
// { dg-options "-O -fno-guess-branch-probability -fipa-cp -fipa-cp-clone
--param=max-inline-insns-single=25" }
struct A
{
A (A, unsigned);
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51752
--- Comment #6 from torvald at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-09 18:40:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> But isn't with
>
> __transaction_atomic
> {
> for (i = 0; i < 10; i++)
> if (x[i])
> x[i] += data;
> }
>
> and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52188
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth 2012-02-09 18:33:03 UTC
---
Created attachment 26630
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26630
asembler output before patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52188
--- Comment #3 from Rainer Orth 2012-02-09 18:33:54 UTC
---
Created attachment 26631
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26631
assembler output after patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52181
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52188
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52188
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth 2012-02-09 18:31:18 UTC
---
Created attachment 26629
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26629
preprocesed source
compile with
cc1plus -fpreprocessed locale-inst.ii -quiet -O2 -fPIC -o locale-inst
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52185
--- Comment #4 from xfg 2012-02-09 18:30:34 UTC
---
Ok, I understood. Pointers are also quite good examples, to explain that.
Thanks Jonathan.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52188
Bug #: 52188
Summary: [4.7 regression] IPA-CP change broke libstdc++ symbol
versioning on Solaris
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52187
--- Comment #2 from Dan Egnor 2012-02-09 18:06:36 UTC ---
This is sort of the opposite of 49448.
In 49448, the _Linux_ rule is recognizing a _little endian_ target as _big
endian_ because its big-endian glob is too generous.
In this bug, a _non-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52187
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|other |target
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52184
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16350
Dan Egnor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egnor at ofb dot net
--- Comment #27 from Dan
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52187
Bug #: 52187
Summary: armeb-unknown-eabi not recognized as big-endian
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43366
--- Comment #15 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-09
17:48:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 26628
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26628
Small patch for the resolve.c. It misses all the real work (trans*.c).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52060
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48071
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52129
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52182
Jan Kratochvil changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51360
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51752
--- Comment #5 from Richard Henderson 2012-02-09
17:39:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> But isn't with
>
> __transaction_atomic
> {
> for (i = 0; i < 10; i++)
> if (x[i])
> x[i] += data;
> }
>
> and
>
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52139
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:30:51 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:30:39 2012
New Revision: 184062
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184062
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-02-08 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52074
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:28:30 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:28:22 2012
New Revision: 184060
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184060
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-02-07 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52060
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:29:52 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:29:38 2012
New Revision: 184061
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184061
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-02-07 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48071
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:26:41 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:26:29 2012
New Revision: 184058
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184058
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-02-02 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52006
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:26:01 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:25:47 2012
New Revision: 184057
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184057
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-01-28 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52129
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:27:34 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:27:25 2012
New Revision: 184059
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184059
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-02-06 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52162
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-09
17:27:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> As expr2->value.function.isym is set (expr2->value.function.isym->id ==
> GFC_ISYM_CONVERSION), the is_alloc_lhs is not set. Hence, the bound checking
> code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40778
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:24:57 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:24:47 2012
New Revision: 184056
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184056
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-01-19 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52182
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2012-02-09 17:23:59 UTC ---
On Thu, 9 Feb 2012, jan.kratochvil at redhat dot com wrote:
> But ISO C99 says:
> A structure type describes a sequentially allocated nonempty set of member
> obje
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52186
--- Comment #4 from Alex Tomlinson 2012-02-09 17:23:37
UTC ---
Reported to work with gcc 4.6.1:
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.6.1/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-li
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51767
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:23:23 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:23:13 2012
New Revision: 184055
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184055
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-01-05 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51768
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:21:45 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:21:15 2012
New Revision: 184054
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184054
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-01-05 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51517
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:13:57 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:13:50 2012
New Revision: 184048
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184048
Log:
Backported from mainline
2011-12-15 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44777
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:20:31 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:20:09 2012
New Revision: 184053
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184053
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-01-05 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52162
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-09
17:17:03 UTC ---
a = b
The problem is that the LHS is REAL(4) while the RHS is REAL(8). Thus, the
expression is not = but
= __convert_i8_i4 ()
But trans-array's gfc_trans_assignment_1 conta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51695
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:18:51 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:18:42 2012
New Revision: 184052
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184052
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-01-04 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51669
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:17:48 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:17:36 2012
New Revision: 184051
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184051
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-01-03 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48306
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:16:27 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:16:19 2012
New Revision: 184050
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184050
Log:
Backported from mainline
2012-01-26 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51360
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-09
17:15:39 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 9 17:15:29 2012
New Revision: 184049
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184049
Log:
Backported from mainline
2011-12-15 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52186
--- Comment #3 from Alex Tomlinson 2012-02-09 17:12:39
UTC ---
Created attachment 26627
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26627
stdout/stderr of gcc with -v -save-temps
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52185
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-09
17:11:40 UTC ---
[class.this] says, "In a const member function, the object for which the
function is called is accessed through a const access path;"
That doesn't mean the object is immutable.
In
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52186
--- Comment #2 from Alex Tomlinson 2012-02-09 17:11:03
UTC ---
Created attachment 26626
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26626
output of -save-temps
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52186
--- Comment #1 from Alex Tomlinson 2012-02-09 17:10:31
UTC ---
Created attachment 26625
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26625
output of -save-temps
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52186
Bug #: 52186
Summary: array out of bounds error when accessing last byte of
a struct via char ptr
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48483
--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-09
17:04:06 UTC ---
Everyone knows it's a bad idea, and everyone agrees there should be a warning.
Stop going on about it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52176
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-09
17:02:36 UTC ---
gfortran generates the following code (original dump). I think, it's
if ((real(kind=4)[0:] * restrict) __result->data == 0B) goto L.17;
L.17:;
D.2061 = __resu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52185
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48483
--- Comment #18 from Lisp2D 2012-02-09 16:59:19 UTC
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48483#c2
shows that function calling of object before constructor is bad idea and must
be strongly forbidden.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51929
--- Comment #4 from Zdenek Sojka 2012-02-09 16:55:28
UTC ---
Yes, I marked this PR as a regression after adding the second testcase, along
with modifying the summary.
The way it behaves in 4.6 is described in the "Tested revisions" paragraph, but
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52184
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-09
16:55:12 UTC ---
4.7 prints 8, agreeing with other compilers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51929
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=52184
--- Comment #2 from Kamil 2012-02-09
16:46:55 UTC ---
Base virtual class object is corrupted when explicitly called auto generated
constructor from derived class inititalization list.
Attached file demonstrates problem.
The only difference betw
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52185
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-02-09
16:44:20 UTC ---
Comeau C++ does not error out either.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51752
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-09
16:43:40 UTC ---
But isn't with
__transaction_atomic
{
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++)
if (x[i])
x[i] += data;
}
and
__transaction_atomic { x[9] = 1; }
occuring conc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52184
--- Comment #1 from Kamil 2012-02-09
16:44:01 UTC ---
Created attachment 26623
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26623
Short example demonstrating problem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52185
Bug #: 52185
Summary: Const member function may change the object for which
the function is called.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52184
Bug #: 52184
Summary: Wrong object initialization in
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51752
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez 2012-02-09
16:23:57 UTC ---
Created attachment 26622
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26622
proposed (untested) patch
This is a first stab at the problem. It is untested, and there are defin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52140
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #10 from Peter Bergner
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52140
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179
--- Comment #6 from Jack Howarth 2012-02-09
15:05:50 UTC ---
All of these crashes appear in the section in the GC_mark_from subroutine of
mark.c commented as...
/* Try to prefetch the next pointer to be examined asap.*/
/*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52140
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52140
--- Comment #8 from Peter Bergner 2012-02-09
14:59:51 UTC ---
Author: bergner
Date: Thu Feb 9 14:59:46 2012
New Revision: 184047
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184047
Log:
Backport from mainline
2012-02-09 Peter
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52140
--- Comment #7 from Peter Bergner 2012-02-09
14:56:03 UTC ---
Author: bergner
Date: Thu Feb 9 14:55:57 2012
New Revision: 184046
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184046
Log:
Backport from mainline
2012-02-09 Peter
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52140
--- Comment #6 from Peter Bergner 2012-02-09
14:46:07 UTC ---
Author: bergner
Date: Thu Feb 9 14:46:02 2012
New Revision: 184045
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184045
Log:
gcc/
PR middle-end/52140
* dojump.c (do_c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48814
--- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-09
13:03:25 UTC ---
For
extern void abort (void);
struct S { int i; };
struct S arr[32];
volatile int count = 0;
struct S __attribute__((noinline))
incr (void)
{
++count;
}
int main()
{
arr[cou
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
