[Bug c++/26085] missing warning on non-void function with no return statement where parameter is UDT with destructor

2006-02-02 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 00:53 --- Just to clearify I get a warning for f for those versions of GCC. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26085

[Bug testsuite/26086] FAIL: gcc.dg/gomp/pr25990.c (test for excess errors)

2006-02-02 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 00:55 --- Confirmed, I don't understand why Diego committed the full testcase and not the reduced one. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/26085] missing warning on non-void function with no return statement where parameter is UDT with destructor

2006-02-02 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 00:59 --- Also the options I used to find the warning was "-W -Wall" which is the standard warnings options I use. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26085

[Bug c++/26085] missing warning on non-void function with no return statement where parameter is UDT with destructor

2006-02-02 Thread jwray at google dot com
--- Comment #4 from jwray at google dot com 2006-02-03 01:30 --- Sorry, my build environment had -Wno-return-type set, because of bug 20624. This bug does apply to 2.95.3 though, but I imagine that won't be fixed. When I tried with 4.0.1, -Wno-return-type disabled the warning. So neve

[Bug c++/23372] [4.0/4.1 Regression] Temporary aggregate copy not elided when passing parameters by value

2006-02-02 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #25 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 01:49 --- Also fails for mmix-knuth-mmixware. This is an ABI thing; callee copies if it needs to modify (for MMIX, it's f() that does the memcpy). Add testsuite framework or run only on specific targets, please. -- hp at gcc

[Bug testsuite/26086] FAIL: gcc.dg/gomp/pr25990.c (test for excess errors)

2006-02-02 Thread dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 02:48 --- (In reply to comment #1) > Confirmed, I don't understand why Diego committed the full testcase and not > the > reduced one. > none of the reduced testcases were failing on my machine. -- dnovillo at gcc dot g

[Bug rtl-optimization/26087] New: [4.2 Regression] ICE in df_find_use

2006-02-02 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
I was going to do a --enable-checking=release buil to test some compile time preformance but I ran into an ICE. This does not happen on a enable-checking=yes build because the source is different but the testcase is reproduce there. The last time the reduced testcase (and full source, ifcvt.c

[Bug rtl-optimization/26087] [4.2 Regression] ICE in df_find_use

2006-02-02 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot |

[Bug rtl-optimization/26087] [4.2 Regression] ICE in df_find_use

2006-02-02 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 03:48 --- Here is the backtrace: #0 0x00664238 in df_find_use (df=0x41a06a70, insn=0x4281c4b0, reg=0x428a9780) at /Users/pinskia/src/gcc/local/gcc/gcc/df-core.c:1030 #1 0x004a0418 in iv_analyze (insn=0x4281c4b0, val=0x428a97

[Bug target/25377] [4.2 Regression] weakref sibcalled with -fPIC

2006-02-02 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 03:56 --- Subject: Bug 25377 Author: pinskia Date: Fri Feb 3 03:56:55 2006 New Revision: 110537 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110537 Log: 2006-02-02 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR ta

[Bug target/25377] [4.2 Regression] weakref sibcalled with -fPIC

2006-02-02 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 03:57 --- Fixed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug java/26042] ICE in mark_reference_fields, at java/boehm.c:105

2006-02-02 Thread bje at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from bje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 04:06 --- (gdb) p offset $1 = 16 (gdb) p *last_view_index $2 = 16 (gdb) p field $3 = 0xf7ef9850 (gdb) pt unit size align 32 symtab 0 alias set -1 fields pointer_to_this chain > uns

[Bug target/25864] Enable IBM long double format in 32-bit PowerPC Linux

2006-02-02 Thread krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 07:44 --- Subject: Bug 25864 Author: krebbel Date: Fri Feb 3 07:44:12 2006 New Revision: 110538 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110538 Log: 2006-02-03 Andreas Krebbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

[Bug target/25864] Enable IBM long double format in 32-bit PowerPC Linux

2006-02-02 Thread krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 07:53 --- Subject: Bug 25864 Author: krebbel Date: Fri Feb 3 07:52:57 2006 New Revision: 110539 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110539 Log: 2006-02-03 Andreas Krebbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

<    1   2