http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50584
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
The point of this language feature is for optimization, not diagnostics -
but there is no requirement for either; GCC does all the checks required
by C99 on the contexts in which [static] ma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58143
--- Comment #9 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> That patch looks wrong, and would very likely penalize tons of code, this
> predicate is used in many places in the compiler and the operations don't
> trap.
yes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58072
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56130
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58206
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57305
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58143
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58143
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Version|unknown
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56979
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58211
--- Comment #6 from Reuven ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #2)
> This is not a gcc bug, it is the assembler that is crashing. Report that to
> whoever provided you the assembler.
You mean open bug for IBM provider.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57305
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #7)
> Here is a preliminary patch to make SIZEOF return the size of the dynamic
> type for polymorphic variables, which at the same time fixes the ICE on
> CLASS(*) va
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58211
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini ---
*** Bug 58214 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58214
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58211
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini ---
*** Bug 58212 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58212
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58211
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini ---
*** Bug 58213 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58213
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58214
Bug ID: 58214
Summary: gcc: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
(program as)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58213
Bug ID: 58213
Summary: gcc: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
(program as)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58211
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58212
Bug ID: 58212
Summary: gcc: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
(program as)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58211
Reuven changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |critical
--- Comment #1 from Reuven ---
the pro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58166
Jay Foad changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.8.0
--- Comment #2 from Jay Foad ---
I've j
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58211
Bug ID: 58211
Summary: gcc: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
(program as)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53801
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56378
--- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Joost VandeVondele from comment #10)
> Fixed on trunk (4.9.0):
... by r197053, apparently. Since this looks way too large for backporting, I
guess it will not be fixed on the 4.7 and 4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57432
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48786
--- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #12)
> I still get the errors
>
> pr48786_2.f90:132.46:
>
> generic, public :: operator(+) => add_vector
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48786
--- Comment #13 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #11)
> Apparently it is due to r201329 (for PR 57530), in particular the
> interface.c part.
However, reverting this via
Index: gcc/fortran/interface.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57862
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57305
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 30682
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30682&action=edit
patch
Here is a preliminary patch to make SIZEOF return the size of the dynamic type
for polymorphic va
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58166
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58206
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc-ibm-aix*
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57798
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57305
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #5)
> The ICE on comment 1 seems to be due to the SIZEOF call.
... which is basically because SIZEOF is supposed to return the size of the
declared type, and a CLASS(
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53477
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53477
--- Comment #14 from Phil Muldoon ---
It should be fixed for all cases in the PR. I think we can close it, and if
any of the people commenting on this bug have issues, they can reopen it.
My pmuld...@redhat.com account does not have sufficient p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57305
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #190 from Jan Hubicka ---
> /ssd/firefox/js/src/gc/Marking.cpp: In function
> ???js::gc::IsAboutToBeFinalized(JSAtom**)bool [clone .isra.65]???:
> /ssd/firefox/js/src/gc/Marking.cpp:1713:1: error: corrupted profile info:
> profile data
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58175
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58172
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57697
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57696
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48786
--- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I still get the errors
pr48786_2.f90:132.46:
generic, public :: operator(+) => add_vector
1
Error: 'add_vector_3d' and 'add_vector_2d' for G
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57957
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58209
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milesto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56130
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2013-08-21 00
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53950
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58209
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
And perhaps even better, use __INTPTR_TYPE__ instead of long...
typedef __INTPTR_TYPE__ T;
T *
foo (T n)
{
if (n)
return (T *) 1;
T s = (T) foo (1);
return (T *) (s + 1);
}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56130
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56134
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58209
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Actually this one's better, the TC in #c2 ICEs only with trunk, the following
ICEs with 4.[678]/trunk:
long *
foo (long n)
{
if (n)
return (long *) 1;
long s = (long) foo (1);
return (long *) (s + 1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56152
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56134
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58209
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Reduced:
long *
foo (long n)
{
if (n)
return 0;
long l = (long) foo (0);
return (long *) (l + 1);
}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58209
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48786
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #9)
> If we still believe that the error is
> correct, then this is a regression (would be interesting to know which
> revision caused it).
Apparently it is due to r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54310
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini ---
Current ICC also accepts this.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58210
Bug ID: 58210
Summary: 400.perlbench fails with ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54278
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58209
Bug ID: 58209
Summary: ICE in extract_range_from_binary_expr, at
tree-vrp.c:2294
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29143
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|paolo.carlini at o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53477
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Phil Muldoon from comment #12)
> I checked in a patch to fix this yesterday. Not sure why the bug did not
> auto-update.
Unfortunately after the sourceware.org hardware upgrade the script to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48786
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #9)
> After this interpretation has been established here, it is a bit unfortunate
> to see that current trunk (4.9.0 20130820, r201883) does not show the error
> any
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin.liska at gmail dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53477
Phil Muldoon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pmuldoon at redhat dot com
--- Comment #12
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58143
--- Comment #7 from Bernd Edlinger ---
How can I set the status of this tracker to CONFIRMED ?
Should'nt the component be "tree-optimization" instead of "middle-end" ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48786
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #9 from janus a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
--- Comment #20 from Marek Polacek ---
Yes, the patch maybe fixes the debuginfo issue, but there's something else that
is wrong. E.g., on the testcase from PR58018, we have in reassociate_bb
*after*
(and that is important) optimize_range_tests th
69 matches
Mail list logo
