--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-15 19:06
---
Err, fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UN
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-13 09:34
---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 14:30
---
Subject: Bug 35469
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Mar 12 14:29:35 2008
New Revision: 133143
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133143
Log:
2008-03-12 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 14:26 ---
Subject: Bug 35469
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Mar 12 14:25:48 2008
New Revision: 133142
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133142
Log:
2008-03-12 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-03-11 10:03 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression] Rejects JArray
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, aph at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #7 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 09:58 ---
> Okay, but I don't quite understand
--- Comment #7 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 09:58 ---
Okay, but I don't quite understand this final sentence:
"Still with C++ now reducing operations on bit-precision types
you get different answers for the above case now."
What exactly do you mean by this?
--
http:/
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-03-11 09:28 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression] Rejects JArray
On Mon, 10 Mar 2008, aph at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-10 19:06 ---
> No, it will not generate the wrong
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-10 19:06 ---
No, it will not generate the wrong code for
jboolean i = 1;
i += 2;
You are wrong to assume that jboolean must behave in the same way as boolean.
It's a Java type, not a C++ type.
Having exact conformance with C+
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-03-08 21:17 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression] Rejects JArray
On Sat, 8 Mar 2008, jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-08 20:55 ---
> jboolean is lost in convert_tem
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-08 20:55 ---
jboolean is lost in convert_template_argument:
/* We only form one instance of each template specialization.
Therefore, if we use a non-canonical variant (i.e., a
typedef), any future messages r
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-05 10:47 ---
Works with 4.2.3 and 4.1.3. Worked with 4.3.0 somewhen in January.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-05 10:40 ---
Created an attachment (id=15261)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15261&action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35469
12 matches
Mail list logo
