[Bug pch/19540] New: document pch directory feature

Please document that it is possible to store a pch of foo.h in a directory named foo.h.gch/ such that subsequent compiles will search all files in that directory for a good precompiled header candidate. (See also http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-01/msg01087.html) -- Summary: documen

[Bug pch/19541] New: deprecation of -I- makes precompiled headers less usable

As noted in this thread: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-01/msg01087.html there is no way to make use of a precompiled header without -I- in a VPATH build in case the header source and the C or C++ source file including it reside in the same source directory. Please consider adding a flag (-icwd?)

[Bug middle-end/19515] [4.0 Regression] Violation of C99 6.7.8 §21

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 09:04 --- This is odd. For a struct { char a[8]; } count_type_elements returns 8. For a union { char a[8]; } count_type_elements returns 1. This confuses the following code in gimplify_init_constructor:

[Bug middle-end/19515] [4.0 Regression] Violation of C99 6.7.8 §21

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 09:10 --- >From expr.c:count_type_elements: case UNION_TYPE: case QUAL_UNION_TYPE: { /* Ho hum. How in the world do we guess here? Clearly it isn't right to count the fields.

[Bug middle-end/19515] [4.0 Regression] Violation of C99 6.7.8 §21 for unions

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 09:15 --- > From expr.c:count_type_elements: > > case UNION_TYPE: > case QUAL_UNION_TYPE: > { > /* Ho hum. How in the world do we guess here? Clearly it isn't >right to cou

[Bug middle-end/19515] [4.0 Regression] Violation of C99 6.7.8 §21 for unions

--- Additional Comments From stevenb at suse dot de 2005-01-20 09:26 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] Violation of C99 6.7.8 =?utf-8?q?=A721_for?= unions > Can't we compute the result for unions based on the type of the first > member? Ehm?? "union { int i; char c[256]; }" However

[Bug middle-end/19515] [4.0 Regression] Violation of C99 6.7.8 §21 for unions

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 09:31 --- > Ehm?? "union { int i; char c[256]; }" Doesn't look much buggier than what we currently have... maybe take the max on all the fields then? That said, I don't know what count_type_elements is for, it is

[Bug target/16533] ICE on va-arg-25.c testcase when -Os and -msse are given

-- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org | Status|NEW

[Bug c++/19542] New: attribute(sentinel) has problems with C++ __null

when using __attribute__((__sentinel__)) with the C++ NULL defined as __null, a sentinel warning is still triggered. Attached testcase gives: g++ -c xx.cc -Wall xx.cc: In function ‘void g()’: xx.cc:5: warning: missing sentinel in function call -- Summary: attribute(sentinel) h

[Bug bootstrap/19364] [4.0 Regression] embedded sparc does not bootstrap

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 09:51 --- > This patch is a rework of the sparc-rtems* target based upon the ELF > NetBSD/SPARC target. As a reqork, I was able to also fix > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14537 (unix is predefined).

[Bug c++/19542] attribute(sentinel) has problems with C++ __null

--- Additional Comments From marcus at jet dot franken dot de 2005-01-20 09:52 --- Created an attachment (id=8003) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8003&action=view) xx.cc testcse, compile with -Wall -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19542

[Bug target/19350] Compilation with -O1 -ftree-vectorize gives unrecognizable insn on x86.

-- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org | Status|NEW

[Bug bootstrap/19364] [4.0 Regression] embedded sparc does not bootstrap

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 09:54 --- Sort of fixing. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |eb

[Bug target/19350] Compilation with -O1 -ftree-vectorize gives unrecognizable insn on x86.

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 10:16 --- Subject: Bug 19350 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-20 10:15:15 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/config/i386: i

[Bug target/19350] Compilation with -O1 -ftree-vectorize gives unrecognizable insn on x86.

--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 10:17 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug target/19350] Compilation with -O1 -ftree-vectorize gives unrecognizable insn on x86.

-- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19350

[Bug target/19418] _mm_cast*, icc8.1 new intrinsics

-- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org | Status|NEW

[Bug fortran/19543] New: formated output for logical(8) variables fails

When outputing a logical(8) variable, the output can be 'T' even if the variable is set to .FALSE.! Here is a testcase! program test implicit none logical(4), parameter :: l4 = .FALSE. logical(8), parameter :: l8 = .FALSE. print *, l4, l8 print *, 'foo', l8 if (l8) print *, 'l8 is tru

[Bug c++/19208] [3.4/4.0 Regression] Spurious error about variably modified type

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-01-20 10:43 --- Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg01305.html -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/18902] Naive (default) complex division algorithm

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 10:45 --- For gfortran, this is a regression against g77. See this test program: $ cat complex-scale.f program main implicit none complex ca,cb,cc data ca /(+2.3955909e+19,-1.2258349e-38)/

[Bug fortran/19292] [meta-bug] g77 features lacking in gfortran

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 10:47 --- Added PR 18902 because complex division isn't scaled at the moment (it is in g77). -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/18754] unrolling happens too late/SRA does not happen late enough

--- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de 2005-01-20 10:57 --- This is also somewhat related to PR19401 as we do not unroll loops completely with just -O2 at the moment, which is important for the second testcase. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s

[Bug fortran/5900] [g77 & gfortran] Lapack regressions since g77 2.95.2

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 10:58 --- The Lapack installation hints under http://www.netlib.org/lapack/html/installation.hints show that some adjustment was necessary for Crays because # 1. The Cray compilers implement a complex divide with

[Bug fortran/5900] [g77 & gfortran] Lapack regressions since g77 2.95.2

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 11:01 --- PR 18902 *sigh* -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5900

[Bug target/19506] [4.0 Regression] PovRay produces wrong pictures with -mfpmath=sse -ffast-math.

-- What|Removed |Added CC||martin at mpa-garching dot ||mpg dot de http://gcc.gnu.org/bugz

[Bug middle-end/19515] [4.0 Regression] Violation of C99 6.7.8 §21 for unions

--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 11:28 --- (In reply to comment #7) > So we cannot use count_type_elements in gimplify_init_constructor. Well, not for unions anyway. > I think we should somehow compute the size of the CONSTRUCTOR and compare > it wit

[Bug middle-end/19515] [4.0 Regression] Violation of C99 6.7.8 §21 for unions

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 11:49 --- > For structures, this would mean that any structure with holes would get > cleared. Which would clearly pessimize a very common case. I considered that too. But, what about structures that contain a union

[Bug middle-end/18902] Naive (default) complex division algorithm

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-20 11:50 --- Hi Thomas, can you possibly figure out from the ChangeLog the author of the algorithm with scaling, which currently seems broken, and add him in CC? We want to fix it, in the first place. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/

[Bug c++/19508] [4.0 regression] dwarf2, ICE on __attribute__(aligned) in class template

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-01-20 12:09 --- The problem here is that tsubst does not know about attributes, and we knew this already. So it won't look into DECL_ORIGINAL_TYPE because it assumes it is always NULL for template parameters. You may want

[Bug middle-end/18902] Naive (default) complex division algorithm

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-20 12:10 --- A first implementation of the algorithm was already in 3_4, under the name expand_cmplxdiv_wide (in optabs.cc), then Rth rewrote it in the tree-ssa branch as part of the new tree-complex.cc (It would be mildly inte

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

-- What|Removed |Added CC||rth at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19486

[Bug ada/19409] ACATS c460010 - valgrind detects wrong code

--- Additional Comments From baldrick at free dot fr 2005-01-20 12:15 --- Here is a simpler example: with Ada.Text_IO; use Ada.Text_IO; procedure T is type Index_Type is range 0 .. 4; -- does not fail if lower bound is 1 type Unconstrained_Array_Type is array (Index_Typ

[Bug c++/19508] [4.0 regression] dwarf2, ICE on __attribute__(aligned) in class template

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-01-20 12:19 --- Paolo, I think I'm going to have a warning like this: 19508.cc:7: warning: cannot apply attributes to template parameter 'T' for the time being, to warn the user that the attribute is being ignored. I hope

[Bug c++/19508] [4.0 regression] dwarf2, ICE on __attribute__(aligned) in class template

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-20 12:26 --- > Paolo, I think I'm going to have a warning like this: Well, if I understand well the current status, we *must* warn the user about that. And, of course, I believe the current (for 4.0, that is) usage in tr1/ typ

[Bug c++/19508] [4.0 regression] dwarf2, ICE on __attribute__(aligned) in class template

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-20 12:32 --- Anyway, just regtest libstdc++-v3, as I already said: by now we have plenty of the above usage and plenty of tests. Either at compile time or at run time something will show up, in case. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/b

[Bug bootstrap/19364] [4.0 Regression] embedded sparc does not bootstrap

--- Additional Comments From joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 12:42 --- (In reply to comment #10) > I'm not very fond of the patch because it trades an explicit dependency on > Solaris for an implicit dependency on NetBSD, bringing the bugs in the > process. In general, I don't

[Bug c++/19544] New: Difference in behaviour if default constructor added

While looking at PR 19510, I noticed the following strangeness. Consider: -- #include struct ptr { int* a; ptr() {} }; std::vector v(1); -- At -O3 -Wall This code produces the error message: ./include/c++/4.0.0/bits/stl_construct.h: In function 'void __static_initialization_and_destruction_0(i

[Bug c++/19542] attribute(sentinel) has problems with C++ __null

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-01-20 13:11 --- __null is 0 of integer type, while attribute sentinel checks for 0 of pointer type. Remember this is not the same because it depends on the ABI: on some platforms, pushing a 0 of integer type into the stack

[Bug libstdc++/19265] problem with _S_destroy_thread_key when using dynamic libraries

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-20 13:18 --- > You would have to tell me how should I configure gcc-3.4.3 makefiles to > compile > it with mt_allocator.cc. Unfortunately, that will not suffice, I'm afraid. In order to actually use the current mt_allocator w

[Bug target/19506] [4.0 Regression] PovRay produces wrong pictures with -mfpmath=sse -ffast-math.

--- Additional Comments From uros at kss-loka dot si 2005-01-20 13:25 --- Adding ssemmx keyword, because this problem is triggered by -mfpmath=sse. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/19545] New: static libstdc++.a does not link against shared objects

i usually compile c++ code using static libstdc++, which is no problem on: i386-pc-solaris2.9, sparc-sun-solaris2.8, sparc-sun-solaris2.9 and i686-pc- linux-gnu using gcc-3.4.3 and binutils-2.15.94.0.2. only on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu i get (not always, but very often) sthg like === /misc/x86_64-

[Bug bootstrap/19364] [4.0 Regression] embedded sparc does not bootstrap

--- Additional Comments From corsepiu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 13:33 --- (In reply to comment #12) > > FYI Ralf tracked down one warning we got linking sparc apps to this: > > >>>I think the cause is sparc/sparc.h's LINK_GCC_C_SEQUENCE_SPEC: > >>> > >>>#define LINK_GCC_C_SEQUEN

[Bug c++/19542] attribute(sentinel) has problems with C++ __null

--- Additional Comments From marcus at jet dot franken dot de 2005-01-20 13:44 --- well, i am not specifying the NULL, the code actually has "NULL". However it gets defined by the gcc stdef.h file: #if defined (_STDDEF_H) || defined (__need_NULL) #undef NULL /* in case

[Bug target/19530] MMX load intrinsic produces SSE superfluous instructions (movlps)

-- What|Removed |Added Summary|MMX load intrinsic produces |MMX load intrinsic produces |SSE superflus instructions |SSE superfluous instructions

[Bug c++/19508] [4.0 regression] dwarf2, ICE on __attribute__(aligned) in class template

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-01-20 14:05 --- Patch posted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg01325.html -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug bootstrap/19364] [4.0 Regression] embedded sparc does not bootstrap

--- Additional Comments From joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 14:17 --- (In reply to comment #13) > (In reply to comment #12) > > > > FYI Ralf tracked down one warning we got linking sparc apps to this: > > > > >>>I think the cause is sparc/sparc.h's LINK_GCC_C_SEQUENCE_SPEC: > >

[Bug tree-optimization/18754] unrolling happens too late/SRA does not happen late enough

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 14:49 --- Note PR 18755 blocks this if we go the SRA after loop optimization which seems like a better idea. -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 14:52 --- cdivide.c: In function 'main': cdivide.c:9: internal compiler error: in purge_dead_edges, at cfgrtl.c:2460 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bug

[Bug libstdc++/8246] Cast increases alignment in __default_alloc_template on Sparcs

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-20 14:51 --- The original problem has been fixed and the HP/SGI pool_allocator is in deep bug fix only mode now. -- What|Removed |Added --

[Bug libstdc++/19544] Difference in behaviour if default constructor added

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 14:56 --- This is a library bug. -- What|Removed |Added Component|c++

[Bug tree-optimization/18754] unrolling happens too late/SRA does not happen late enough

--- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de 2005-01-20 14:57 --- Subject: Re: unrolling happens too late/SRA does not happen late enough > Note PR 18755 blocks this if we go the SRA after loop optimization which > seems like a better idea. I do not

[Bug libstdc++/19545] static libstdc++.a does not link against shared objects

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 14:59 --- --with-pic try to use only PIC/non-PIC objects default=use both -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c++/19542] attribute(sentinel) has problems with C++ __null

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 15:00 --- C++ is differrent from C. NULL in C++ is defined special in that it is defined as an int but C is different. You should always use a cast when you passing to a varargs otherwise you might get a problem on

[Bug c/18946] [4.0 regression] ICE in pushdecl

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 15:02 --- Patch here: . -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/19542] attribute(sentinel) has problems with C++ __null

--- Additional Comments From marcus at jet dot franken dot de 2005-01-20 15:05 --- thanks! -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19542

[Bug tree-optimization/18754] unrolling happens too late/SRA does not happen late enough

--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 15:06 --- Subject: Re: unrolling happens too late/SRA does not happen late enough On Thu, 20 Jan 2005, rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de wrote: > > --- Additional Comments From rguenth at ta

[Bug tree-optimization/18754] unrolling happens too late/SRA does not happen late enough

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 15:07 --- (In reply to comment #9) > Subject: Re: unrolling happens too late/SRA > does not happen late enough > > which is what we want? Or do we now just paper over another problem here? Yes you are paper over

[Bug pch/19540] document pch directory feature

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 15:13 --- http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Precompiled-Headers.html#Precompiled-Headers If you need to precompile the same header file for different languages, targets, or compiler options, you can instead make a

[Bug libstdc++/19544] Difference in behaviour if default constructor added

--- Additional Comments From chris at bubblescope dot net 2005-01-20 15:14 --- Heres another test-case... #include struct ptr { int* a; ptr() {} }; struct foo { ptr array[1]; foo() { std::uninitalized_fill_n(array,1,ptr()); } }; foo f; Which shows it isn't limited to libstdc++ (assu

[Bug tree-optimization/18754] unrolling happens too late/SRA does not happen late enough

--- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de 2005-01-20 15:15 --- Subject: Re: unrolling happens too late/SRA does not happen late enough On 20 Jan 2005, dberlin at dberlin dot org wrote: > Wiat, why are we running SRA twice again at all? > I can't

[Bug libstdc++/19544] Difference in behaviour if default constructor added

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 15:21 --- Invalid, as you default constructor is not doing its job of initializing: ptr() {} -- What|Removed |Added --

[Bug bootstrap/19364] [4.0 Regression] embedded sparc does not bootstrap

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 15:24 --- > The bug repport was posted or a fix? This PR covered both sparc-elf and > sparc-rtems* since I verified when I reported it that both were broken. Bug report and fix, but the fix was to link sol2-c.c in

[Bug pch/19541] deprecation of -I- makes precompiled headers less usable

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 15:29 --- Actually I don't understand the problem, using a PCH directory file makes this work without any trouble really and without any thinking (and I already showed that it was documented). -- http://gcc.gnu.

[Bug bootstrap/19364] [4.0 Regression] embedded sparc does not bootstrap

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 15:31 --- > FWIW: IMO, all targets implicitly relying on the sparc/sparc.h's > LINK_GCC_C_SEQUENCE_SPEC are broken. I don't think so. I can tell you for sure that Solaris is not broken. > Grep'ing the sources rev

[Bug fortran/19546] New: Internal subroutine setting function return value gives internal compiler error

With gcc 4.0.0 20050119 on powerpc-apple-darwin7.7.0 (Dual G5 mac running Mac OS X 10.3.7) and GCC configured with: /Users/nburrell/Desktop/gcc-4.0-cvs/gcc/configure --with-mpfr=/Users/ nburrell/usr --with-gmp=/Users/nburrell/usr --prefix=/Users/nburrell/usr --enable- languages=c,f95 running t

[Bug fortran/19543] formated output for logical(8) variables fails

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 15:35 --- int4 C.417 = 0; int4 C.416 = 0; _gfortran_transfer_logical (&C.417, 8); -- What|Removed |Added --

[Bug c++/19542] attribute(sentinel) has problems with C++ __null

--- Additional Comments From matz at suse dot de 2005-01-20 15:35 --- I agree that C++ is special, and that NULL in C++ is only a null pointer constant (but not a null pointer). Hence, yes, strictly speaking a cast would be needed even for NULL in va_lists. But, as a matter of fact,

[Bug fortran/19546] Internal subroutine setting function return value gives internal compiler error

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 15:42 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW E

[Bug pch/19541] deprecation of -I- makes precompiled headers less usable

--- Additional Comments From Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de 2005-01-20 15:47 --- mkdir src build echo 'extern int foo;' > src/foo.h echo >src/bar.c '#include "foo.h" int bar(void) { return foo; }' cd build gcc -o foo.h.gch ../src/foo.h gcc -H -c ../src/bar.c This will not use the gch

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 15:56 --- Created an attachment (id=8008) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8008&action=view) C failing source code -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19486

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 15:57 --- Created an attachment (id=8009) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8009&action=view) preprocessed source code -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19486

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 15:58 --- Created an attachment (id=8010) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8010&action=view) 00.expand -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19486

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 15:58 --- Created an attachment (id=8011) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8011&action=view) original -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19486

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 15:59 --- Created an attachment (id=8012) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8012&action=view) generic -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19486

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 15:59 --- Created an attachment (id=8013) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8013&action=view) vcg -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19486

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 16:00 --- Created an attachment (id=8014) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8014&action=view) gimple -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19486

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 16:00 --- Created an attachment (id=8015) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8015&action=view) useless -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19486

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 16:01 --- Created an attachment (id=8016) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8016&action=view) lower -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19486

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 16:01 --- Created an attachment (id=8017) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8017&action=view) eh -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19486

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 16:02 --- Created an attachment (id=8018) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8018&action=view) cfg -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19486

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-20 16:03 --- Created an attachment (id=8019) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8019&action=view) oplower OK, that's it. -- What|Removed |Added -

[Bug target/19491] va_start incorrect, Number of floating point and integer registers counted incorrectly

--- Additional Comments From dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 16:07 --- GCC 3.3 used the magic number of 1000 when initializing the number of arguments. This bug report does not state the exact failure mode of the example, but the slightly greater than 1000 words (256 arguments)

[Bug bootstrap/19364] [4.0 Regression] embedded sparc does not bootstrap

--- Additional Comments From corsepiu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 16:11 --- (In reply to comment #16) > > FWIW: IMO, all targets implicitly relying on the sparc/sparc.h's > > LINK_GCC_C_SEQUENCE_SPEC are broken. > > I don't think so. I can tell you for sure that Solaris is not br

[Bug bootstrap/19461] hidden __eprintf referenced by DSO, gas+gld

--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 16:37 --- With binutils bfd/version.h: #define BFD_VERSION_DATE 20050115 and everything else as in original description, I still get the same error. (Needed to rm -rf gprof to get past a binutils-specific error.) Will now

[Bug c/19547] New: floating point registers not preserved during function call

This is a bug report for GCC 2.95.3. The bug also exists in 2.95.2. I am cross-compiling for arm-linux on an i386 Linux system, using the command line: arm-linux-gcc -static -O -g -c au1.c The code fragment below is taken from the mpeg2enc package. When compiled with -O, it does not work corre

[Bug c/19547] floating point registers not preserved during function call

--- Additional Comments From jack at cs dot york dot ac dot uk 2005-01-20 16:40 --- Created an attachment (id=8020) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8020&action=view) Preprocessor output for the code fragment -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19547

[Bug bootstrap/19461] hidden __eprintf referenced by DSO, gas+gld

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 17:01 --- > With binutils bfd/version.h: > #define BFD_VERSION_DATE 20050115 > and everything else as in original > description, I still get the same error. Ouch! Daniel Jacobowitz once said this error can origina

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 17:17 --- Thanks for the dumps, this looks like a middle-end which can be reproduced without changing flags_complex_divide_method, let me try to get a testcase for that. (but first I have to read my other emails)

[Bug c/19547] floating point registers not preserved during function call

--- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 17:18 --- It's the callee's responsibility to save f4...f7 if it wants to use them. So the problem is in glibc. Note that gcc 2.95 isn't supported any more, so the most we'd likely do in this sort of case is fix th

[Bug c/19547] floating point registers not preserved during function call

--- Additional Comments From jack at cs dot york dot ac dot uk 2005-01-20 17:35 --- > It's the callee's responsibility to save f4...f7 if it wants to use them. So > the problem is in glibc. Ah, I see. However, when I recompile the glibc function in question (__kernel_cos), f4...f

[Bug c/19547] floating point registers not preserved during function call

--- Additional Comments From jack at cs dot york dot ac dot uk 2005-01-20 17:37 --- Created an attachment (id=8021) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8021&action=view) glibc function in which floating point registers are not preserved -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla

[Bug c/19547] floating point registers not preserved during function call

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 17:37 --- (In reply to comment #3) > This is glibc-2.1.3, and the file I am recompiling is > sysdeps/libm-ieee754/k_cos.c (which I will attach). Well consider 2.95.3 is old nothing matters unless you try a newer comp

[Bug target/19548] New: RTEMS CPP specs not merged from 3.2/3.2 branches

Somehow, this necessary patch was only applied to the 3.2 and 3.3 release branches. The RTEMS community has skipped the 3.4 branch so never noticed it missing there. Anyway, it never got on the head. http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/rs6000/sysv4.h?rev=1.113.4.1&content-type=t

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 17:54 --- Oh, I know where the problem is, we are missing a goto: :; D.2703 = D.2697; D.2704 = D.2698; Should have a goto associated with it. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19486

[Bug middle-end/19486] flags_complex_divide_method=1 doesn't work

-- What|Removed |Added Severity|enhancement |minor Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1

[Bug c++/19076] Pointer to member function not matched to pointer to member template

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 18:02 --- Patch here: . -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/19515] [4.0 Regression] Violation of C99 6.7.8 §21 for unions

--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 18:03 --- (In reply to comment #12) > But, what about structures that contain a union? We'll need to consider the question "do we need to clear" one nesting level at a time, and propagate it up. -- http://gcc.gnu.or

[Bug target/19491] va_start incorrect, Number of floating point and integer registers counted incorrectly

--- Additional Comments From suriya at cs dot utexas dot edu 2005-01-20 18:05 --- Created an attachment (id=8022) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8022&action=view) Test case, should return success -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19491

[Bug target/19491] va_start incorrect, Number of floating point and integer registers counted incorrectly

--- Additional Comments From suriya at cs dot utexas dot edu 2005-01-20 18:07 --- (In reply to comment #1) > GCC 3.3 used the magic number of 1000 when initializing the number of > arguments. This bug report does not state the exact failure mode of the > example, but the slightly gre

[Bug target/19530] MMX load intrinsic produces SSE superfluous instructions (movlps)

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 18:34 --- Subject: Bug 19530 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-20 18:34:13 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/config/i386: i

  1   2   3   >