https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64517
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Fanning ---
There is a bigger problem that I didn't immediately recognize with the empty
file: Using `-M` results in gfortran trying to compile the source. I.e., it
does *not* stop after preprocessing, which it should i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62250
--- Comment #7 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2015-01-06, at 10:10 PM, hp at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Easier said than done, unfortunately. Doing a simpler fix.
Thanks
--
John David Anglindave.ang...@bell.net
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64517
Bug ID: 64517
Summary: Inconsistent behavior when mixing -E and -M
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64239
--- Comment #7 from Mitsuru Kariya ---
When I used the match_results::swap on r218710, I got a compilation error.
== sample code
==
#include
int main()
{
std::cm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62250
--- Comment #6 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2015-01-06, at 9:06 PM, hp at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> But instead causing these tests to fail for all targets that don't have
> -latomic.
> I.e. -latomic should only be added when there is o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62250
--- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #4)
> Also, the patch should have used
> atomic-dg.exp instead of manually adding the search paths.
Easier said than done, unfortunately. Doing a simpler fi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64516
Bug ID: 64516
Summary: arm: wrong unaligned load generated
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62250
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57928
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64467
--- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3)
> Almost certainly r217066.
>
> Is this a newlib target? I would expect to see the same failure for all
> newlib targets,
I verified that this is the case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56126
--- Comment #10 from Olaf van der Spek ---
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:22 PM, bruck.michael at googlemail dot com
wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56126
>
> --- Comment #9 from Michael Bruck ---
>> Jonathan: Using -fno-excepti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47857
Paul "TBBle" Hampson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||p_hampson at wargaming dot net
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64489
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64515
--- Comment #1 from Karol ---
Problem doesn't occurs in gcc 4.9 version
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64496
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64487
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64455
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |debug
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64479
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo ---
The *cbranch_t splitter is done like 4 times, because there are 4 split passes.
The last split pass is split5, which is done right after the delayed-branch
pass. Before delayed-branch handling the call insn loo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64515
Bug ID: 64515
Summary: Segmentation fault during linker operation in gcc for
arm-none-eabi
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64455
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Jan 6 20:44:51 2015
New Revision: 219268
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219268&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/64455
* pt.c (type_dependent_expression_p): Handle variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64487
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Jan 6 20:44:46 2015
New Revision: 219267
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219267&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/64487
* semantics.c (finish_offsetof): Handle templates her
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64489
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Jan 6 20:44:32 2015
New Revision: 219265
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219265&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/64489
* class.c (check_field_decls): Make copy assignment o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64496
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Jan 6 20:44:39 2015
New Revision: 219266
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219266&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/64496
* semantics.c (process_outer_var_ref): Diagnose lambd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64514
Bug ID: 64514
Summary: Error in template instantiation in GCC 4.9, works fine
in GCC 4.8
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64505
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Tue Jan 6 20:29:54 2015
New Revision: 219264
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219264&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2015-01-06 Michael Meissner
PR target/64505
* conf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64513
Bug ID: 64513
Summary: [4.8/4.9/5 Regression] ICE: in
maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2231 with
-mstack-arg-probe
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55901
--- Comment #10 from Harald Anlauf ---
(In reply to paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com from comment #9)
> By the way, the patch of comment 8 bootstraps and regtests OK
>
> Paul
Hi Paul,
any news on that patch?
Harald
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64512
Bug ID: 64512
Summary: ICE: in sched_analyze_reg, at sched-deps.c:2360 with
-O2 -mmemcpy-strategy=vector_loop:-1:align
-mno-push-args
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 5.0.0 20150106 (experimental) [trunk revision 219217] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O3 -c small.c
$ gcc-4.9 -O3 -g -c small.c
$
$ time gcc-trunk -O3 -g -c small.c
gcc-trunk: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault (program cc1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63596
Jiong Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64304
Jiong Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64509
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
_Generic is intended for cases like , where calls to all
functions are still valid for all argument types. This is a case where
the expression __f(S) violates a constraint, and that constr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56025
--- Comment #4 from Tejas Belagod ---
The ABI does not define an internal type name for scalar poly types -
http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.ihi0042e/IHI0042E_aapcs.pdf.
This will need an ABI update.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56025
Tejas Belagod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56025
Tejas Belagod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64440
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64149
mshawcroft at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mshawcroft at gcc dot gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64509
--- Comment #2 from Martien de Jong ---
That's just rephrasing my bugreport. The question is, should it type check
while parsing an expression that may not be realized? The entire idea of
switching on a type is to prevent and fix type errors, no?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64440
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64509
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64494
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64510
Bug ID: 64510
Summary: FAIL: go.test/test/nilptr2.go execution on
non-split-stack targets
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61244
Chris Manghane changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61246
Chris Manghane changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61248
Chris Manghane changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61253
Chris Manghane changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61254
Chris Manghane changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61255
Chris Manghane changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61258
Chris Manghane changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61264
Chris Manghane changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61265
Chris Manghane changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64504
--- Comment #2 from Andrey Vihrov ---
Thanks for a fast reply!
My use case for these two (amongst several others) options together is
competitive programming, in which a contestant is required a write a
one-source-file solution, test it locally
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61273
Chris Manghane changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64507
chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56126
--- Comment #9 from Michael Bruck ---
> Jonathan: Using -fno-exceptions says "I do not want ISO C++" so quoting the
> standard isn't very relevant.
> Olaf: No, as you could (should?) abort/terminate instead of returning NULL.
I quoted it to ill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64508
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64507
--- Comment #2 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: chrbr
Date: Tue Jan 6 12:22:51 2015
New Revision: 219258
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219258&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/64507
* config/sh/sh-mem.cc (sh_expand_cmpnstr): Check
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64507
--- Comment #1 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: chrbr
Date: Tue Jan 6 11:59:09 2015
New Revision: 219257
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219257&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/64507
* config/sh/sh-mem.cc (sh_expand_cmpnstr): Check
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63259
--- Comment #21 from thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: thopre01
Date: Tue Jan 6 11:51:16 2015
New Revision: 219256
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219256&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-06 Thomas Preud'homme
gcc/
PR tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64503
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64504
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Andrey Vihrov from comment #0)
> -fwhole-program is that it can be used with one source file that includes
> standard library headers and links with the standard library. If this is
> wrong, th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64469
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64479
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|sh3 |sh*-*-*
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64509
Bug ID: 64509
Summary: _Generic throws error in unselected generic
association
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64508
Bug ID: 64508
Summary: [F03] interface check missing for procedure pointer
component as actual argument
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64497
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64507
Bug ID: 64507
Summary: SH inlined builtin strncmp doesn't return 0 for 0
length
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64287
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63949
--- Comment #8 from vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This is complete patch for the first approach that I took (comment 6). This
patch fixes issues I faced while testing. But I have added extra patterns to
cater the sign extended operands with left
71 matches
Mail list logo
