http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56847
Vladimir Makarov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at redhat dot com
-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56853
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-apple-darwin12.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56853
Bug #: 56853
Summary: GNU Fortran is not working
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56792
cynt6007 at vandals dot uidaho.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cynt6007 at va
fortran --version
GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.9.0 20130405 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
GNU Fortran comes with NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.
You may redistribute copies of GNU Fortran
under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
For more informati
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56848
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou 2013-04-05
22:27:22 UTC ---
Apparently the automatic xref didn't work, here is the commit:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2013-04/msg00244.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52952
--- Comment #25 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2013-04-05
22:02:26 UTC ---
I am currently stuck on the three problems I described above and I cannot
figure out a way to fix any of them:
* How to reprocess tokens that need to be translated/have prefix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56077
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56848
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56851
Bug #: 56851
Summary: Segmentation Error using -O3 optimization
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56849
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2013-04-05
20:38:05 UTC ---
Seems as if someone missed the purpose of ORDER=, which doesn't affect the
shape:
print *, shape (reshape([1,2,3,4,5,6], [2,3], order=[1,2]))
print *, shape (reshape([1,2,3,4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56850
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56850
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56850
Bug #: 56850
Summary: Diagnostic of REAL*8 is odd: Accepted with -std=f95,
-pedantic prints warning only with -std=gnu
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56849
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56849
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56849
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2013-04-05
20:02:31 UTC ---
On x86_64-apple-darwin10, I get
pr56849.f90:3:
x(:,1:1) = reshape(y(::2), [1,2])
1
Error: Different shape for array assignment at (1) on dimension 1 (2 and 1)
f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56843
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56849
Bug #: 56849
Summary: Missing compile-time shape check for RESHAPE
assignments
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51239
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mustrumr97 at gmail dot com
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53786
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51582
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2013-04-05
15:18:10 UTC ---
This was fixed on the trunk by
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177073
I put a simpler variant on the 4.6 branch to fix 49924, but that didn't fix
this i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56843
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt 2013-04-05
15:03:26 UTC ---
Looks like we can improve performance for three cases on P6 and later machines:
- 32-bit reciprocal square root: remove two instructions
- 32-bit reciprocal: remove three instr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56838
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2013-04-05
14:37:52 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> The candidate in /usr/include/boost/bind/bind.hpp:1478 a.cpp:92092 fails.
> SFINAE so this candidate is skipped.
Actually, it doesn't fail SFINAE.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56827
--- Comment #2 from Markus 2013-04-05 14:37:11
UTC ---
Created attachment 29809
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29809
crude workaround for a DIFFERENT PROBLEM: ustat missing
while trying to build gcc 4.8.0 on SLES 9.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56848
--- Comment #8 from Matthias Klose 2013-04-05
14:22:24 UTC ---
the backport of r190733 doesn't show any regressions on x86_64-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50686
--- Comment #37 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2013-04-05 14:16:12 UTC ---
I forgot to mention that for the build to succeed you also need r184239:
r184239
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56848
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56848
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de
2013-04-05 12:46:17 UTC ---
"doko at gcc dot gnu.org" wrote:
>
>http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56848
>
>--- Comment #5 from Matthias Klose 2013-04-05
>12:30:38 UTC ---
>back
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56848
--- Comment #5 from Matthias Klose 2013-04-05
12:30:38 UTC ---
backporting r190733 fixes the issue too, testsuite still running
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54618
--- Comment #21 from Salvatore Filippone
2013-04-05 12:29:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> (In reply to comment #18)
> > I am seeing intermittent issues with CLASS,ALLOCATABLE,INTENT(OUT) variables
> > that have a CLASS,ALLOCATABLE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54618
--- Comment #20 from Tobias Burnus 2013-04-05
11:35:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> I am seeing intermittent issues with CLASS,ALLOCATABLE,INTENT(OUT) variables
> that have a CLASS,ALLOCATABLE component; however when I tried to redu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56848
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56848
--- Comment #3 from Matthias Klose 2013-04-05
10:47:05 UTC ---
Reverting the backport for 56077 lets the file compile
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50686
--- Comment #36 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2013-04-05 10:41:42 UTC ---
With the new reduced testcase I'm now also able to reproduce the failure
on an x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu x mips-sgi-irix6.5 cross, configured with
configur
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56848
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56841
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-04-05
10:14:42 UTC ---
Dave, does it work after rev 197512 ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56841
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
--- Comment #3 from Jon
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43620
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-04-05
10:11:29 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Apr 5 09:57:53 2013
New Revision: 197511
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=197511&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR other/43620
* Makefile.am
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56848
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose 2013-04-05
09:51:33 UTC ---
seen on x86_64-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56848
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Known to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56848
Bug #: 56848
Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE (segfault) with the 4.7.3 release
candidate
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54618
--- Comment #19 from Salvatore Filippone
2013-04-05 09:33:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
Hi,
I am seeing intermittent issues with CLASS,ALLOCATABLE,INTENT(OUT) variables
that have a CLASS,ALLOCATABLE component; however when I tried
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54618
Salvatore Filippone changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sfilippone at uniroma2 dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56845
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48182
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48308
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resoluti
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38644
--- Comment #70 from Sebastian Huber
2013-04-05 07:15:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #69)
> (In reply to comment #68)
> > Is this problem resolved? The status is still set to "NEW" but "known to
> > work"
> > shows that it either has be
48 matches
Mail list logo
