[Bug web/55954] Bugzilla breaks mail threading

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55954 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2013-01-12 05:06:43 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > I think it is really a bug in the mail clients if they don't just use > In-Reply-To instead. The reason why I say that is because some mail clients

[Bug web/55954] Bugzilla breaks mail threading

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55954 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2013-01-12 04:59:12 UTC --- I think it is really a bug in the mail clients if they don't just use In-Reply-To instead.

[Bug web/55954] New: Bugzilla breaks mail threading

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55954 Bug #: 55954 Summary: Bugzilla breaks mail threading Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priori

[Bug libitm/55693] [4.8 Regression] libitm.c++/eh-1.C execution test fails on darwin from r193271

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55693 --- Comment #8 from Jack Howarth 2013-01-12 03:24:55 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) > The gdb trace looks alright to me. My guess is that this is a bug in the > uninstrumented code path, not in libitm. > > Could you try again after a

[Bug target/55953] hand loop faster then builtin memset

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55953 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com --- Commen

[Bug middle-end/55921] [4.6/4.7 Regression] Crash in verify_ssa for asm to side-steps complex pessimization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55921 John David Anglin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/55949] __builtin_object_size size passed to memcpy_chk is incorrect

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55949 Ryan Mansfield changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/55949] __builtin_object_size size passed to memcpy_chk is incorrect

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55949 --- Comment #3 from Ryan Mansfield 2013-01-12 01:03:03 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Looks like a bug in whatever headers you are using. > The second parameter for __builtin_object_size for memcpy should be always 0, > not __USE_FOR

[Bug target/55953] hand loop faster then builtin memset

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55953 --- Comment #3 from Evgeniy Dushistov 2013-01-12 00:13:09 UTC --- Cross compiling for arm, g++ have almost the same version: arm-angstrom-linux-gnueabi-g++ (Linaro GCC 4.7-2012.10) 4.7.3 20121001: variant one (for): movwr3, #2280

[Bug target/55953] hand loop faster then builtin memset

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55953 --- Comment #2 from Evgeniy Dushistov 2013-01-12 00:05:15 UTC --- Actually it is not only CPU 64bit related issue, for example the same CPU (i7), 32 bit mode: variant one: push %ebp vmovdqa 0x80488e0,%ymm0 mov%esp,%ebp pop%

[Bug tree-optimization/55890] [4.7 Regression] calling a builtin func through a cast triggers an ICE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55890 --- Comment #8 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11 23:39:30 UTC --- Author: vries Date: Fri Jan 11 23:39:18 2013 New Revision: 195119 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195119 Log: 2013-01-12 Tom de Vries

[Bug target/55953] hand loop faster then builtin memset

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55953 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-*-* Component|c

[Bug c/55953] New: hand loop faster then builtin memset

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55953 Bug #: 55953 Summary: hand loop faster then builtin memset Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libitm/55693] [4.8 Regression] libitm.c++/eh-1.C execution test fails on darwin from r193271

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55693 torvald at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||torvald at gcc dot gnu

[Bug rtl-optimization/55952] New: x86 FPU, unnecessary fxch instruction

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55952 Bug #: 55952 Summary: x86 FPU, unnecessary fxch instruction Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal P

[Bug c++/55951] New: ICE in check_array_designated_initializer, at cp/decl.c:4785

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55951 Bug #: 55951 Summary: ICE in check_array_designated_initializer, at cp/decl.c:4785 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONF

[Bug tree-optimization/55949] __builtin_object_size size passed to memcpy_chk is incorrect

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55949 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug rtl-optimization/55950] New: Invalid sqrt constant propagation with -frounding-mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55950 Bug #: 55950 Summary: Invalid sqrt constant propagation with -frounding-mode Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: no

[Bug target/55947] non constant memory models lose HLE qualifiers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55947 --- Comment #2 from Andi Kleen 2013-01-11 22:01:49 UTC --- I would probably add at least a warning. The whole concept of a runtime switched memory barrier is imho ill-defined.

[Bug tree-optimization/55949] __builtin_object_size size passed to memcpy_chk is incorrect

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55949 --- Comment #1 from Ryan Mansfield 2013-01-11 21:30:21 UTC --- Created attachment 29152 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29152 reduced testcase Attached testcase using: gcc version 4.6.4 20130111 (prerelease) [

[Bug target/55947] non constant memory models lose HLE qualifiers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55947 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug tree-optimization/55949] New: __builtin_object_size size passed to memcpy_chk is incorrect

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55949 Bug #: 55949 Summary: __builtin_object_size size passed to memcpy_chk is incorrect Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.4 Status: UNCONFIR

[Bug target/55948] New: __atomic_clear / __atomic_store_n ignore HLE_RELEASE flags

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55948 Bug #: 55948 Summary: __atomic_clear / __atomic_store_n ignore HLE_RELEASE flags Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRME

[Bug target/55947] New: non constant memory models lose HLE qualifiers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55947 Bug #: 55947 Summary: non constant memory models lose HLE qualifiers Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/55939] [4.6/4.7/4.8 regression] gcc miscompiles gmp-5.0.5 on m68k-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55939 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-01-11 20:06:03 UTC --- I cut out one line too many in the build log, it's tests/mpq/t-get_d that fails. On the surface the problem started with Jan Hubicka's "Inline heuristic 4/4" patch in r16

[Bug ada/55946] New: Wrong GNAT tools used on build of gnattools [native-cross]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55946 Bug #: 55946 Summary: Wrong GNAT tools used on build of gnattools [native-cross] Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRME

[Bug sanitizer/55488] Implement cold calls in tsan run-time

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55488 Dmitry Vyukov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dvyukov at google dot com --- C

[Bug target/55945] New: alloca aligns aligned pointers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55945 Bug #: 55945 Summary: alloca aligns aligned pointers Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority

[Bug libstdc++/54392] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] std::string::assign() fails to update length

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54392 --- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-01-11 18:58:53 UTC --- Agreed. I don't think we'll ever fix this in the current std::string code TBH

[Bug c++/55931] [C++11] Constexpr member function inside a static member is not working

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55931 --- Comment #5 from Daniel Krügler 2013-01-11 18:32:13 UTC --- The ICE bug of 4.8.0 has been submitted as bug 55944

[Bug c++/55944] New: [C++11] static local member with constexpr c'tor causes ICE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55944 Bug #: 55944 Summary: [C++11] static local member with constexpr c'tor causes ICE Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRM

[Bug gcov-profile/55674] [4.8 Regression] >20% size increase of lto/pgo binaries since r193747

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55674 --- Comment #22 from Teresa Johnson 2013-01-11 18:18:48 UTC --- Hi Honza, I ran a number of experiments at different thresholds, and found that performance starts dropping pretty quickly as the working set threshold is dropped, even to

[Bug testsuite/54139] [4.8 regression] some ARM Thumb-2 tests appear to be run on ARMv5TE hardware causing unhandled exceptions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54139 --- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez 2013-01-11 18:01:57 UTC --- I have built a cross cc1/cc1plus with: blah/configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --target=armv5tel-unknown-linux-gnueabi but I get a totally different error on testsuite/gcc.

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #37 from Eric Botcazou 2013-01-11 17:55:38 UTC --- > So tls DID exist and was being used. I think I can assume that tls support > didn't go away for sparc64 in later gcc releases. (I also threw the binary > against readelf -S

[Bug bootstrap/55792] [4.8 Regression] Bad memory access with profiledbootstrap and LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792 --- Comment #33 from Jan Hubicka 2013-01-11 17:36:48 UTC --- > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792 > > --- Comment #32 from H.J. Lu 2013-01-10 19:36:08 > UTC --- > (In reply to comment #30) > > LTO profiled-bootstrap

[Bug middle-end/55943] New: ICE in gen_reg_rtx

Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: sch...@linux-m68k.org Target: ia64-*-* Created attachment 29150 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29150 Testcase $ gcc-20130111/Build/gcc/xgcc -B gcc-20130111/Build/gcc/ -S gcc/

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #36 from philip.copeland at oracle dot com 2013-01-11 17:20:35 UTC --- Created attachment 29149 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29149 g++/gcc testsuite results g++/gcc testsuite results

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #35 from philip.copeland at oracle dot com 2013-01-11 17:19:06 UTC --- (Sorry for the delay in getting back to you) I've multipass recompiled all the affected packages associated with gcc/glibc over the last day which has taken

[Bug tree-optimization/55920] [4.8 Regression] ICE in expand_debug_locations, at cfgexpand.c:3753

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55920 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-01-11 17:04:45 UTC --- I'd very much prefer to keep PR54971 fix in. As for #c3, I believe it would be enough to test the mode, so perhaps tree repl = get_access_replacement (lacc);

[Bug tree-optimization/55920] [4.8 Regression] ICE in expand_debug_locations, at cfgexpand.c:3753

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55920 --- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor 2013-01-11 16:55:54 UTC --- The debug statements for non-DCEable variables can be easily disabled by the following (also, yet untested) patch: 2013-01-11 Martin Jambor * tree-sra.c (analyze_a

[Bug tree-optimization/55920] [4.8 Regression] ICE in expand_debug_locations, at cfgexpand.c:3753

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55920 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug rtl-optimization/55719] [4.8 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55719 Andreas Krebbel changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug rtl-optimization/55719] [4.8 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55719 --- Comment #8 from Andreas Krebbel 2013-01-11 16:43:56 UTC --- Author: krebbel Date: Fri Jan 11 16:43:49 2013 New Revision: 195109 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195109 Log: 2013-01-11 Andreas Krebbel

[Bug inline-asm/55934] [4.8 Regression] LRA inline asm error recovery

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55934 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski 2013-01-11 16:09:46 UTC --- I should mention that Investigated this a little before and found the instruction which was causing the ICE was not the inline-asm but a clobber of the pseduregister which was i

[Bug libstdc++/54392] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] std::string::assign() fails to update length

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54392 --- Comment #18 from Paolo Carlini 2013-01-11 16:03:23 UTC --- PS: for 4.9, I think we essentially agree that we want to roll in anyway __versa_string, break the ABI, etc. We also exchanged some ideas about that with Jason, off lists.

[Bug middle-end/50199] [4.7/4.8 Regression] wrong code with -flto -fno-merge-constants

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50199 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug libstdc++/54392] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] std::string::assign() fails to update length

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54392 --- Comment #17 from Paolo Carlini 2013-01-11 16:01:28 UTC --- In my opinion, this isn't really fixable in a generic and decently neat way in the current implementation, that is in std::string. I still mean to fix it in __versa_string for

[Bug libstdc++/54392] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] std::string::assign() fails to update length

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54392 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug debug/55608] [4.6/4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Debug info quality regressions with file scope vars

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55608 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Target Milestone|4.6.

[Bug target/55941] [4.8 Regression] Strange copy of double (in struct) to stack

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55941 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comm

[Bug fortran/55935] [OOP] Fortran fronted has ADDR_EXPRs of FUNCTION_DECLs with bogus BLOCK

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935 --- Comment #15 from Richard Biener 2013-01-11 14:55:55 UTC --- Index: tree-ssa-pre.c === --- tree-ssa-pre.c (revision 195103) +++ tree-ssa-pre.c (working copy) @@

[Bug c/52381] asm goto output operands diagnostics

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52381 --- Comment #5 from Timo Kreuzer 2013-01-11 14:55:15 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > Like __atomic_compare_exchange_n? Oh, didn't know of this one, thanks. But I'm sure there are other similar things you could solve with the output o

[Bug fortran/55935] [OOP] Fortran fronted has ADDR_EXPRs of FUNCTION_DECLs with bogus BLOCK

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935 --- Comment #14 from Richard Biener 2013-01-11 14:53:20 UTC --- (In reply to comment #13) > Created attachment 29148 [details] > gimple-fold > > Alternative to alternative canonicalize_constructor_val fix which I'm afraid > could somet

[Bug middle-end/37722] destructors not called on computed goto

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722 Timo Kreuzer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||timo.kreuzer at reactos dot

[Bug target/55941] [4.8 Regression] Strange copy of double (in struct) to stack

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55941 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/55942] New: [C++11] sorry, unimplemented: calling a member function of the object being constructed in a constant expression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55942 Bug #: 55942 Summary: [C++11] sorry, unimplemented: calling a member function of the object being constructed in a constant expression Classification: Unclassified

[Bug fortran/55935] [OOP] Fortran fronted has ADDR_EXPRs of FUNCTION_DECLs with bogus BLOCK

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935 --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-01-11 14:40:45 UTC --- Created attachment 29148 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29148 gimple-fold Alternative to alternative canonicalize_constructor_val fix which I'm afraid

[Bug c++/55931] [C++11] Constexpr member function inside a static member is not working

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55931 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/55889] [4.8 Regression] ICE: in move_op_ascend, at sel-sched.c:6153 with -fschedule-insns -fselective-scheduling

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55889 --- Comment #7 from David Edelsohn 2013-01-11 14:37:21 UTC --- Created attachment 29147 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29147 sched-verbose=6 dump output for failing testcase

[Bug fortran/55935] [OOP] Fortran fronted has ADDR_EXPRs of FUNCTION_DECLs with bogus BLOCK

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935 --- Comment #12 from Richard Biener 2013-01-11 14:30:29 UTC --- Index: gcc/tree-cfgcleanup.c === --- gcc/tree-cfgcleanup.c (revision 195103) +++ gcc/tree-cfgcleanup.c

[Bug fortran/54195] [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195 --- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11 14:29:41 UTC --- (In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #10) > > For comment #8, resolve_typebound_intrinsic_op is called twice: Once for the > > base type 'nc', and once fo

[Bug middle-end/55889] [4.8 Regression] ICE: in move_op_ascend, at sel-sched.c:6153 with -fschedule-insns -fselective-scheduling

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55889 Andrey Belevantsev changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo

[Bug fortran/54195] [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195 Mikael Morin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug fortran/55935] [OOP] Fortran fronted has ADDR_EXPRs of FUNCTION_DECLs with bogus BLOCK

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935 --- Comment #11 from Richard Biener 2013-01-11 14:05:14 UTC --- Created attachment 29145 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29145 alternative canonicalize_constructor_val fix Should be less expensive.

[Bug bootstrap/55556] gcc/exec-tool.in isn't parallel build safe in combined tree

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/55935] [OOP] Fortran fronted has ADDR_EXPRs of FUNCTION_DECLs with bogus BLOCK

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935 --- Comment #10 from Richard Biener 2013-01-11 13:43:50 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) > Created attachment 29142 [details] > gcc48-pr55935.patch > > Untested fix. Although the FE perhaps could unshare_expr_without_location so > tha

[Bug tree-optimization/55936] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Missed VRP optimization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55936 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener 2013-01-11 13:36:29 UTC --- Patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg00592.html even though it produces way more useful ranges regresses FAIL: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr18178.C -std=gnu++98 scan-t

[Bug fortran/55935] [OOP] Fortran fronted has ADDR_EXPRs of FUNCTION_DECLs with bogus BLOCK

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935 --- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres 2013-01-11 13:35:30 UTC --- Apparently Ada does not like the patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29142 When applied on top of r195103 bootstrap (last successful bootstrap was

[Bug c++/55931] [C++11] Constexpr member function inside a static member is not working

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55931 --- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler 2013-01-11 13:26:46 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > Most likely because Test is not complete at the time of parsing. But this should be considered as a compiler defect, right?

[Bug c++/55931] [C++11] Constexpr member function inside a static member is not working

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55931 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler at |

[Bug target/55941] New: [4.8 Regression] Strange copy of double (in struct) to stack

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55941 Bug #: 55941 Summary: [4.8 Regression] Strange copy of double (in struct) to stack Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIR

[Bug inline-asm/55934] [4.8 Regression] LRA inline asm error recovery

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55934 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-01-11 12:59:33 UTC --- Please also consider asm goto like: void bar (int); void foo (_Complex float x) { asm volatile goto ("" : : "x" (x) : : foo); /* { dg-error "impossible constraint" } */

[Bug inline-asm/55934] [4.8 Regression] LRA inline asm error recovery

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55934 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug inline-asm/55934] [4.8 Regression] LRA inline asm error recovery

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55934 --- Comment #2 from Steven Bosscher 2013-01-11 12:49:16 UTC --- This is trivially fixed with the following patch: Index: lra-assigns.c === --- lra-assigns.c (revision

[Bug fortran/49213] [OOP] gfortran rejects structure constructor expression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49213 --- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11 12:04:26 UTC --- Note: Neither of the patches in comment 8 and 10 shows any testsuite regressions.

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-01-11 11:52:59 UTC --- Created attachment 29144 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29144 hackish attempt

[Bug fortran/55932] DDT's default structure constructor does not work with having allocatable member variables

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55932 --- Comment #2 from stefan.mauerberger at gmail dot com 2013-01-11 11:50:19 UTC --- Indeed, it is a F2003 feature. Does that matter? I searched for duplicates without finding a similar one. Anyways ... Thanks for the suggested workar

[Bug target/55940] Incorrect code for accessing parameters with 32-bit Intel hosts

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55940 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target||i?86-*-* --- Comment #3 from R

[Bug target/55940] Incorrect code for accessing parameters with 32-bit Intel hosts

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55940 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/55940] Incorrect code for accessing parameters with 32-bit Intel hosts

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55940 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener 2013-01-11 11:23:02 UTC --- Your assumptions are wrong according to documentation: @item cdecl @cindex functions that do pop the argument stack on the 386 @opindex mrtd On the Intel 386, the @code{cde

[Bug target/55940] New: Incorrect code for accessing parameters with 32-bit Intel hosts

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55940 Bug #: 55940 Summary: Incorrect code for accessing parameters with 32-bit Intel hosts Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status: UNCON

[Bug target/55939] [4.6/4.7/4.8 regression] gcc miscompiles gmp-5.0.5 on m68k-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55939 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.4

[Bug target/55939] New: [4.6/4.7/4.8 regression] gcc miscompiles gmp-5.0.5 on m68k-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55939 Bug #: 55939 Summary: [4.6/4.7/4.8 regression] gcc miscompiles gmp-5.0.5 on m68k-linux Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCO

[Bug tree-optimization/55936] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Missed VRP optimization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55936 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Known

[Bug tree-optimization/55936] Missed VRP optimization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55936 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/55672] [4.8 Regression] -fstack-check=generic ICEs in print_reg, at config/i386/i386.c:13868

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55672 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/54300] [4.7 Regression] Erroneous optimization causes wrong Neon data management

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54300 --- Comment #6 from Eric Batut 2013-01-11 10:42:04 UTC --- The patch by Christophe Lyon in the linked email was applied on trunk by Ramana at rev 188951 (June 25th 2012), but gcc-trunk still fails as of today (rev 195102). The vswp instruc

[Bug lto/55937] lto hides possible link issues

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55937 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/44061] [4.6/4.7 Regression] Warns about out-of-bounds array access inside __builtin_constant_p guarded section

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44061 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.8.0 Summary|[4.6/4

[Bug c++/55898] Can't obtain stack trace

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55898 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Liu 2013-01-11 10:20:15 UTC --- It works if I compile the test case with -fno-exceptions.

[Bug tree-optimization/44061] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Warns about out-of-bounds array access inside __builtin_constant_p guarded section

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44061 --- Comment #8 from Richard Biener 2013-01-11 10:20:13 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Jan 11 10:20:02 2013 New Revision: 195103 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195103 Log: 2012-01-11 Richard Guenther

[Bug fortran/55935] [OOP] Fortran fronted has ADDR_EXPRs of FUNCTION_DECLs with bogus BLOCK

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-01-11 10:03:09 UTC --- Created attachment 29143 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29143 gcc48-pr55935.patch Or alternative patch that ensures in the FE there are no locations in t

[Bug fortran/55935] [OOP] Fortran fronted has ADDR_EXPRs of FUNCTION_DECLs with bogus BLOCK

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unas