There are three instances of reinterpret_cast(-1) in
libstdc++-v3/include/ext/codecvt_specializations.h, all of which are invalid if
iconv_t does not resolve to a pointer (on NetWare it is a plain int, but
obviously it could also be a compound type).
/home/jbeulich/build/gcc/4.2.1-netware/./gcc/xg
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 07:26 ---
Confirmed.
Tobias,
You should have received the fix.
Cheers
Paul
Index: gcc/fortran/trans-array.c
===
*** gcc/fortran/trans-array.c (révision 12912
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 07:29 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> The failure from #2 is now PR 33727.
Tobi,
Why don't you fix them both at once? :-)
Cheers
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33254
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 08:11 ---
Subject: Bug 33726
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Oct 11 08:11:18 2007
New Revision: 129227
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129227
Log:
2007-10-11 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 08:59 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 08:58 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 08:58 ---
Subject: Bug 33724
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Oct 11 08:58:28 2007
New Revision: 129228
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129228
Log:
2007-10-11 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 09:38 ---
After applying the patch and the one to PR33727 (thanks Paul!-), the first test
fails at runtime:
At line 6 of file pr32703_1.f90
Fortran runtime error: Different CHARACTER lengths (1/2) in array constructor
but the
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 09:39 ---
Subject: Bug 31441
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Oct 11 09:39:41 2007
New Revision: 129229
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129229
Log:
/testsuite
2007-10-11 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 09:39 ---
Subject: Bug 33461
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Oct 11 09:39:41 2007
New Revision: 129229
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129229
Log:
/testsuite
2007-10-11 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #12 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 09:41 ---
The problem is that D.1556 (the var that hasn't been renamed or with the patch
can't be looked up) has been deleted.
*.phiprop has:
long unsigned intD.4 D.1556;
...
D.1554_11 = (long unsigned intD.4) dimD.1539_4(D
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-11 09:44 ---
Fixed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-11 09:45 ---
Fixed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
/usr/lib/gcc/i586-suse-linux/4.3.0/cc1plus -fpreprocessed incomingscript.ii
-quiet -dumpbase incomingscript.cpp -march=i586 -mtune=i686 -auxbase-strip
incomingscript.o -O2 -Wall -version -fmessage-length=0 -fstack-protector -o
incomingscript.s
GNU C++ (SUSE Linux) version 4.3.0 20071009 (experiment
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 09:51 ---
Created an attachment (id=14338)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14338&action=view)
testcase (unreduced)
Reducing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33735
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 10:12 ---
Reduced testcase, fails with -O:
./cc1plus -quiet -O incomingscript.3.min.ii -m32
incomingscript.3.min.ii: In function 'void run()':
incomingscript.3.min.ii:41: error: missing PHI def
py_state_1(ab) = PHI
incoming
--- Comment #31 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 10:17 ---
Works as advertised without regression so far (PPC Darwin, 32 bit mode close to
complete), but for the codelets in #30.
I wonder if the code in #28 is valid: the line(s)
merge(transfer(string,"x",len(string)), stri
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pcarlini at suse dot de
|dot org |
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 10:26 ---
It cannot be a coumpounded type because of the definition of iconv_open which
says it returns -1 for a falure.
"
Otherwise iconv_open() returns (iconv_t)-1 and sets errno to indicate the
error.
"
>From http://www.op
--- Comment #2 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-10-11 10:28 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> You cannot bootstrap if you use --with-cpu=405 as the 405 has some string
> instructions which are not in other PowerPCs. You can do a normal/cross build
> but not a bootstrap.
So it's just a coin
--- Comment #2 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-11 10:31 ---
Indeed, I'm just changing to cast notation per that document.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33734
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 10:36 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
On 11 Oct 2007 10:28:03 -, tbm at cyrius dot com
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So it's just a coincidence that 4.1 and 4.3 bootstrap?
Yes. You should look at what instruction is being executed to be sure
but this is just the normal trying to boostrap using --with-cpu when
you really don't have
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2007-10-11 10:40 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 regression] Illegal instruction with build/genmddeps with
PPC405 build on powerpc
On 11 Oct 2007 10:28:03 -, tbm at cyrius dot com
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So it's just a coincidence that 4.1 an
--- Comment #13 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2007-10-11 10:43 ---
Maybe we can fix DCE not to eliminate such vars?
Or somehow fix split_constant_offset?
The following patch changes the base from
(int[0:D.1553] *) newcentroid.1_22 + (long unsigned int) dim_4(D) * 8
to (int[0:D.1553]
--- Comment #6 from Tobias dot Schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de
2007-10-11 10:45 ---
Subject: Re: Diagnose different string lengths in array
constructors at run time
dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr wrote:
> program array_char
> implicit none
> character (len=2) :: x, y
> cha
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 10:50 ---
Subject: Bug 33734
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Oct 11 10:50:09 2007
New Revision: 129232
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129232
Log:
2007-10-11 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstd
--- Comment #4 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-11 10:52 ---
Fixed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 10:53 ---
This fixes it.
Index: gcc/fortran/simplify.c
===
*** gcc/fortran/simplify.c (révision 129121)
--- gcc/fortran/simplify.c (copie de travail)
***
--- Comment #9 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-10-11 10:32 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> int bar (char *s)
> {
> return foo (strlen(s));
> }
The testcase above fails with AREG spill failure. The testcase below fails with
DIREG spill failure:
int bar (int x, long l);
int foo (ch
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 11:14
---
> Revision 128957 causes this regression.
There is a suspect non-documented hunk in the commit:
* reload1.c (compute_use_by_pseudos): Change DF_RA_LIVE
usage to DF_LIVE usage.
--- trunk/gcc/rel
--- Comment #14 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-11 11:43
---
Subject: Re: libgfortran bootstrap failure: selected_int_kind.f90:22:
Segmentation fault, wrong code with -fomit-frame-pointer
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 11:57 ---
The original issue seems to no longer trigger with the testcase, the missed
combining is fixed with a patch I have.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Add
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 11:40 ---
This was fixed by
2007-08-20 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR c++/22369
PR c++/22451
* call.c (build_new_method_call): Convert initializer to
the basetype.
* init.c
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 12:10 ---
Also
because in fold_binary where we handle this kind of stuff we have
if (!offset0 || !offset1
|| TREE_TYPE (offset0) == TREE_TYPE (offset1))
{
...
is no longer
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 12:19 ---
With
2007-06-21 Eric Botcazou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR tree-optimization/25737
* misc.c (gnat_post_options): Do not force flag_tree_salias to 0.
this has to be no longer true. And indeed those tes
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 12:20 ---
With
2007-06-21 Eric Botcazou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR tree-optimization/25737
* misc.c (gnat_post_options): Do not force flag_tree_salias to 0.
this has to be no longer true. Indeed, the test now
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25736
--- Comment #15 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 12:24
---
> That is fine, there are no top sets anymore.
Thanks for the explanation, please fix the ChangeLog though.
> the problem is the code that builds the reload insn chain. the new code
> uses the cfg and does not
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #7 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 12:34 ---
> This is weird, and can't really be (well, in a hypothetical world where
> only the bounds check goes wrong), as the whole array has only a single
> string length, so I would expect it to either print two length on
--- Comment #14 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2007-10-11 12:34 ---
BTW, without this patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-07/msg02122.html
there is no ICE and the loop gets vectorized.
Ira
--
irar at il dot ibm dot com changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 12:50
---
Sorry for overlooking the PR... Do not hesitate to CC me for Ada related PRs.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #16 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-11 12:40
---
Subject: Re: libgfortran bootstrap failure: selected_int_kind.f90:22:
Segmentation fault, wrong code with -fomit-frame-pointer
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #15 from ebotcazou at gcc
Integer constants that don't fit into a long cause a pedwarn in GCC as of the
20070907 snapshot (this has been the behavior for a while). However this is
incorrect for C++0x which does (at least in the WG draft) allows for something
to be placed in a long long or unsigned long long if it doesn't fi
20071011 (experimental) [trunk revision
129228] (i586-suse-linux)
compiled by GNU C version 4.3.0 20071011 (experimental) [trunk revision
129228], GMP version 4.2.1, MPFR version 2.2.1.
GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=30 --param ggc-min-heapsize=4096
Compiler executable checksum
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 13:34 ---
Created an attachment (id=14339)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14339&action=view)
testcase (unreduced)
Reducing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33737
--- Comment #2 from s__nakayama at infoseek dot jp 2007-10-11 13:50 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> This code is invalid, and we should reject both of them.
Why do you think that this is invalid?
Member with same name as class have restrictions(ISO/IEC 14882:2003 9.2
p13/13a).
But, I can
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 13:53 ---
The patch fixes the tests but resurect an old ICE on (was pr18769):
program gfcbug21
implicit none
type t
integer :: i
end type t
type (t), parameter :: u = t (1)
integer, parameter :: idx_list(1) = (
--- Comment #8 from Tobias dot Schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de
2007-10-11 14:04 ---
Subject: Re: Diagnose different string lengths in array
constructors at run time
dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr wrote:
> --- Comment #7 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 12
--- Comment #9 from Tobias dot Schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de
2007-10-11 14:09 ---
Subject: Re: Diagnose different string lengths in array
constructors at run time
Tobias dot Schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de wrote:
> all printed strings should be length 10, no
--- Comment #10 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 14:10 ---
> ... What I menat is the following: after the
> data has been added to the array, the compiler should use the string
> length of the array, ...
I agree, this is why I posted the second code with y(1:len(trim(x)))
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 14:14 ---
I don't know if this the right fix, but
--- /opt/gcc/_gcc-clean/gcc/fortran/simplify.c 2007-10-07 09:37:46.0
+0200
+++ /opt/gcc/gcc-4.3-work/gcc/fortran/simplify.c2007-10-11
16:05:57.0 +0200
--- Comment #11 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 14:14 ---
I'm adding Paul to the CC list, as perhaps he immediately knows what's
happening (Paul, see comment #5). Otherwise I will investigate tomorrow
evening or Saturday.
--
tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #15 from jsjodin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 14:17
---
(In reply to comment #14)
> BTW, without this patch
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-07/msg02122.html
> there is no ICE and the loop gets vectorized.
>
> Ira
>
It may be that the test to go through an S
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 14:22 ---
Created an attachment (id=14340)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14340&action=view)
reduced testcase
The testcase depends on the exact (or minimal) amount of branching, so I
suppose
this might be
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 14:23 ---
The reduced testcase also fails with x86_64, plain -O2.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 14:55 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Ah this bug was present before my patch for PR30746. I can see from my
notes that I was fixated on PR30746, whilst not altering the behaviour of
gfortran in any other way., whether rig
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 15:23 ---
Subject: Bug 33734
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Oct 11 15:23:11 2007
New Revision: 129235
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129235
Log:
2007-10-11 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstd
--- Comment #6 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-11 15:24 ---
Fixed for 4.2.3 too.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.3.0
--- Comment #17 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-11 16:21
---
Subject: Re: libgfortran bootstrap failure: selected_int_kind.f90:22:
Segmentation fault, wrong code with -fomit-frame-pointer
2007-10-11 Kenneth Zadeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR middle-end/33676
* globa
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 16:27 ---
If cprop_jump changes a conditional jump into unconditional, then it forgets
to add a BARRIER after it. When not in cfglayout mode that's enough, but
in cfglayout mode it is uglier, though I haven't found a cfg hook w
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 17:17 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Dominique,
Oui, c'est bon! Merci.
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33733
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 17:30 ---
Works as expected: now gfortran agrees with xlf. Regtest almost finished in 32
bit mode.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33233
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 17:31 ---
> Oui, c'est bon! Merci.
Question: is this the only omission?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33733
This was found on GCC 4.2.1. In this test case, VRP quietly folds a comparison
between an enum type and a constant value that the enum type can never take.
With -Wtype-limits, this should give the warning:
comparison always false due to limited range of data type
extern void link_error (void);
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 18:09 ---
Warnings from optimizers are semi a no-no. Yes we have them for strict
aliasing and overflow but I think those cases are a bit weird. This is
unspecified behavior no matter what and there is no flag to change the b
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 18:52 ---
What do the edge flags look like after cprop changes the jump? EDGE_FALLTHRU
should be set.
Also, the unconditional JUMP_INSN should be removed. Unconditional jumps are
removed when going into cfglayout mode, and w
--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 18:53 ---
The patch from comment #4 is wrong and should not be applied.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33673
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 19:15 ---
This is not a testsuite error, this is a target issue with some stabs.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
>From http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2007-10/msg00083.html:
On revision 129030 (built from scratch at revision 129024) I get the following
error on Darwin:
[karma] f90/bug% gfc -m64 -g
/opt/gcc/gcc-4.3-work/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/literal_character_constant_1_x.F
ld64 warning: BINCL
(/opt/gcc/g
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 19:10 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Dominique,
Oui, c'est bon! Merci.
Paul
(In reply to comment #5)
> > Oui, c'est bon! Merci.
>
> Question: is this the only omission?
>
I think so - most important is that EXPR_FUNCTION a
--- Comment #18 from belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru 2007-10-11
19:52 ---
Subject: Re: libgfortran bootstrap failure: selected_int_kind.f90:22:
Segmentation fault, wrong code with -fomit-frame-pointer
Kenneth Zadeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2007-10-11 Kenneth Zadeck
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 19:29 ---
It calls purge_dead_edges after changing the jump, so if it changed that into
an unconditional jump, purge_dead_edges will purge the EDGE_FALLTHRU
edge and keep the other edge.
If cfglayout mode is supposed to avoid u
--- Comment #22 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 19:35 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] ICE with -O3 -ftree-loop-linear
There are several bugs that fail in the exact same place, because
we're not able to generate code for some induction variable containing
a phi nod
I would like to report a probable gcc compiler bug that is to present on AIX
5.3, but not on x86 linux. The problem is that Totalview and gdb fail to see a
static value 'stupify' when the program is compiled and linked using gcc 4.1.1.
If I cross link and compile (e.g. compile using gcc and link
--- Comment #8 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 19:55 ---
Updating the CFG as suggested in comment #7 is the appropriate thing to do.
How about using delete_insn_and_edges() on the jump insn, and setting
EDGE_FALLTHRU on the remaining edge?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
Seeing a segfault trying to build 164.gzip from cpu2000. Noticed it with -O3,
but also occurs for "-O2/-O1 -ftree-vectorize".
run/0001> cat junk.c
typedef unsigned short ush;
extern ush prev[];
void fill_window()
{
register unsigned n, m;
for (n = 0; n < 32768; n++) {
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 21:14 ---
Can you try 4.1.2 or 4.2.x? 4.1.1 is getting a bit old.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from seppo at totalviewtech dot com 2007-10-11 21:37 ---
Hi Andrew,
Thanks for the quick reply.
We do not have more recent versions installed on AIX, but I have sent just now
an installation request. I'll keep you posted.
Thanks,
Seppo
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
--- Comment #7 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-11 21:50
---
kazumoto,
there was a set of miscommunications associated with the final patch for
pr33669.
hj had checked in an earlier version of the patch and that testcase and i asked
him to revert it because there were iss
--- Comment #19 from zadeck at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 22:32 ---
Subject: Bug 33676
Author: zadeck
Date: Thu Oct 11 22:31:55 2007
New Revision: 129244
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129244
Log:
2007-10-11 Kenneth Zadeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR mid
--- Comment #20 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-11 22:35
---
Subject: Re: libgfortran bootstrap failure: selected_int_kind.f90:22:
Segmentation fault, wrong code with -fomit-frame-pointer
zadeck at naturalbridge dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #17 from zadeck at natural
--- Comment #9 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 23:50 ---
Steve,
Does this bug also affect ia64-hpux?
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-12 00:11 ---
Mine
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gc
gcc-4.1 with patch from PR26208 doesn't support
unwinding through signal frames.
$ uname -a
SunOS hermes 5.9 Generic_117171-07 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Blade-1500
$ ./u-sparc-sun-solaris2.9
boom!
10af4 signalHandler+0x1c
ff31f010 _setuid+0x68
alive!
$ ./u-sparc64-sun-solaris2.9
boom!
10dac signa
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2007-10-12 00:25 ---
Created an attachment (id=14342)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14342&action=view)
makefile.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33743
--- Comment #2 from pluto at agmk dot net 2007-10-12 00:26 ---
Created an attachment (id=14343)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14343&action=view)
testcase.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33743
--- Comment #8 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-12 02:06 ---
> You tested against version 129192 and i checked in the corrected patch as
> 129193.
Oh, my tester had fallen into that narrow pitfall :-)
I've confirmed that the errors go away with the current trunk.
Thanks both
--- Comment #3 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-12 03:03 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Confirmed. You need HWI of 32bits to trigger the problem. Maybe latent on
> the trunk (I didn't check if it fails there, too).
The problem was fixed in mainline in this commit (I somehow
This compiled with 3.3:
template
struct A {
};
A< bool (2 > 1) > x;
It doesn't compile with at least some later versions, including 3.4 and 4.2.1,
with:
x.cpp:4: error: template argument 1 is invalid
x.cpp:4: error: invalid type in declaration before ';' token
Rejects-valid regression in the
--- Comment #21 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-12 04:07 ---
Kenny,
My build tonight's tree completed successfully. I think this
PR can be close, but you may want to hear from Gerald first.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33676
--
aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-12 04:49 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Better still is
if (source->expr_type == EXPR_FUNCTION)
return NULL;
since source is already tested to be a constant expression.
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?
--- Comment #1 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-10-12 06:11 ---
Also fails on i686-*-*, "-O2 -ftree-vectorize" _without_ -msse2.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-10-12 06:25 ---
I'm testing this patch:
--cut here--
Index: tree-vect-transform.c
===
--- tree-vect-transform.c (revision 129251)
+++ tree-vect-transform.c (work
In the following subroutine "findphase", the upper bound of the second
dimension of "jp" is not known. Using -fbounds-check:
Fortran runtime error: Array reference out of bounds, upper bound of dimension
2 of array 'jp' exceeded, 2 is greater than 0
implicit none
integer, parameter :: maxss=7,
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-12 06:36 ---
Forgot to mention that this bug was reported by Tom in
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/8fac8fcf6e93fba7/
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33745
1 - 100 of 101 matches
Mail list logo
