[Bug c++/33754] Default argument of type list < pair < A, B > > compiles only when typedef is used

--- Comment #2 from photon at seznam dot cz 2007-10-13 08:24 --- (In reply to comment #1) > > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 57 *** > >> I should note this bug is suspended. This is because the standard is >> unclear at what is the correct behavior. See DR 325 for a

[Bug c++/33754] Default argument of type list < pair < A, B > > compiles only when typedef is used

--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 08:54 --- (In reply to comment #2) > I vote for this to be fixed in GCC, especially since the standard is unclear. > The compiler has the knowledge 'pair' is a template class. MS C++ accepts the > syntax and does not violate a

[Bug target/33755] Gcc 4.2.2 broken for mips linux kernel builds

--- Comment #9 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 10:47 --- The problem comes from dbr_schedule, although it's not really a bug there. We have: bne $5,$0,L1# A ...stuff... L1: bne $5,$0,L2# B ...printk call... L2: an

[Bug fortran/33760] New: Bind(C): Using C_PTR as structure constructor gives an ICE

gfortran crashes if one uses cptr = C_PTR(p+1) Here, C_PTR is a structure constructor; this usage is invalid Fortran 2003 (as type(C_PTR) has PRIVATE components according to the Fortran 2003 standard); NAG f95 therefore diagnoses: Error: Components of structure constructor 'c_ptr' at (1) are

[Bug target/33761] New: non-optimal inlining heuristics pessimizes gzip SPEC score at -O3

The measurements were actually done on gzip-1.2.4 sources on core2-d with: a) gcc -mtune=generic -m32 -O2 b) gcc -mtune=generic -m32 -O3 The testfile was created as the tar archive of current SVN trunk repository, which currently accounts for 865M uncompressed. profile of a) % cumulative

[Bug target/33761] non-optimal inlining heuristics pessimizes gzip SPEC score at -O3

--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 12:31 --- I suppose that alias partitioning makes the difference instead. This is not really a fault of the inliner but our dumb memory optimizers. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33761

[Bug fortran/33745] -fbounds-check: Bogus out-of-bounds run-time error for assumed-size array

--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 14:34 --- (In reply to comment #2) > The wrong-code bug is fixed by the followed patch. Actually, it is not. The problem is - both in the compile time and at the run time bound checking - the combination of element vs. array r

[Bug boehm-gc/33442] 1938 unexpected fails in libjava testsuite

--- Comment #10 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 15:01 --- Subject: Bug 33442 Author: danglin Date: Sat Oct 13 15:01:29 2007 New Revision: 129283 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129283 Log: PR boehm-gc/33442 * pthread_support.c (GC_P

[Bug boehm-gc/33442] 1938 unexpected fails in libjava testsuite

--- Comment #11 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 15:04 --- Fixed on trunk and 4.2. I believe that this problem isn't present in 4.1. -- danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/33735] [4.3 Regression] verify_stmts failed: missing PHI def

--- Comment #4 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 18:37 --- Proposed patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-10/msg00802.html -- aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug c++/33762] New: partial template specialization question

Probably this is not a bug, but just I want to make clear to myself... I have a 'general' template class, and can specialize it for one class(say base), can I then assume all other classes that derived from 'base' class are using the specialized version template function(same as the base one)? Ex

[Bug c++/33762] partial template specialization question

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 19:05 --- specializations are direct matches and don't look at the class's bases. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33762

[Bug ada/29283] Bug box in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at expr.c:6393 on alpha

--- Comment #3 from ludovic at ludovic-brenta dot org 2007-10-13 19:09 --- Here is a second, shorter test case that triggers the bug on i386, x86_64 and powerpc. Thanks to Prakash Countcham at imag.fr and Xavier Grave for confirming on i386 and powerpc. This bug is not in GCC 4.2. pr

[Bug tree-optimization/33763] New: [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Bogus inlining failed in call to `xxx': redefined extern inline functions are not considered for inlining

/* { dg-do compile } */ /* { dg-options "-O2" } */ typedef struct { void *a; void *b; } T; extern void *foo (const char *, const char *); extern void *bar (void *, const char *, T); extern int baz (const char *, int); extern inline __attribute__ ((always_inline, gnu_inline)) int baz (const ch

[Bug tree-optimization/33140] [4.3 Regression] ICE in build2_stat, at tree.c:3115

--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 19:35 --- Fixed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug java/33764] New: [4.3 regression] gij is built as 32-bit binary when building multilib gcc

When building gcc on x86_64 with multilib support, gij is built as 32-bit executable with some strange -rpaths. The other parts of gcj are ok. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ ldd /usr/bin/gcj libmpfr.so.1 => /usr/lib64/libmpfr.so.1 (0x2b0221bea000) libgmp.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libgmp.so.3

[Bug c++/30303] [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with invalid constructor definition

--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 19:44 --- Testing this patch again to make sure it still works. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30303

[Bug java/33765] New: [4.3 regression] gcj internal compiler error when reading an empty file

Feeding gcj an empty input file results in [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ rm -f crap.java ; touch crap.java ; gcj crap.java /tmp/cck13U8f.jar:0: internal compiler error: in java_parse_file, at java/jcf-parse.c:1951 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See

[Bug c/33766] New: [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] ICE in bsi_for_stmt at tree-cfg.c when using -O1 -ftree-loop-linear

building xorg-server with -O1 -ftree-loop-linear on x86 fails with: texcompress_fxt1.c: In function 'fxt1_encode': texcompress_fxt1.c:1376: internal compiler error: in bsi_for_stmt, at tree-cfg.c:2827 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. tested with 4.0.4, 4.1

[Bug c/33766] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] ICE in bsi_for_stmt at tree-cfg.c when using -O1 -ftree-loop-linear

--- Comment #1 from vapier at gentoo dot org 2007-10-13 19:52 --- bugzilla seems to be droppin a brick when i try to attach files, so here's the reduced test case i've been testing with: fxt1_quantize_ALPHA1() { int j1; int i; float *tv; for (j1 = 1; j1;

[Bug regression/32582] Bootstrap with vectorization enabled fails with ICE on PPC

--- Comment #34 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 20:40 --- Does this still reproduce for you? After workarounding the crtstuff.c misscompilation as described in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-10/msg00743.html, bootstrap with BOOT_CFLAGS="-O2 -ftree-vectorize -malt

[Bug fortran/33745] -fbounds-check: Bogus out-of-bounds run-time error for assumed-size array

--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 20:53 --- Mine. Patch for both problems, see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-10/msg00796.html -- burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug target/33767] New: GLOBAL_ASM_OP needs to be documented in tm.texi

There's just one mention in all of the internals docs: The default implementation relies on a proper definition of @code{GLOBAL_ASM_OP}. varasm.c has this: /* Default function to output code that will globalize a label. A target must define GLOBAL_ASM_OP or provide its own function to glo

[Bug other/33768] New: splay-tree.c typo

in the functions "rotate_left" and "rotate_right" in in the libiberty package, the comments preceding the functions should have an apostrophe in the word "grandparents" (common to both comments) changing the meaning from plural to possessive. a small point to sure but it confounded my understandin

[Bug ada/29283] Bug box in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at expr.c:6393 on alpha

--- Comment #4 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 21:39 --- 4.1 is pretty much closed at this point, so closing. -- charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/32878] FAIL: 23_containers/bitset/cons/16020.cc execution test

--- Comment #22 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 21:40 --- This test stopped failing at revision 127720. -- danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug fortran/33727] Segfault with ugly string array constructor

--- Comment #6 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 21:44 --- Subject: Bug 33727 Author: tobi Date: Sat Oct 13 21:43:49 2007 New Revision: 129286 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129286 Log: 2007-10-13 Tobias Schlueter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Paul Thomas

[Bug fortran/33254] Diagnose different string lengths in array constructors at run time

--- Comment #12 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 21:44 --- Subject: Bug 33254 Author: tobi Date: Sat Oct 13 21:43:49 2007 New Revision: 129286 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129286 Log: 2007-10-13 Tobias Schlueter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Paul Thomas

[Bug fortran/33727] Segfault with ugly string array constructor

--- Comment #7 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 21:45 --- Fixed. -- tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug fortran/33254] Diagnose different string lengths in array constructors at run time

--- Comment #13 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 21:47 --- Fixed. -- tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug debug/33739] [Regression 4.3] Failure of gfortran.dg/literal_character_constant_1_*.F with -m64 -g on Darwin

--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-13 21:52 --- I have forgotten to say that it is a regression, the tests pass with version 4.3.0 20071004 (revision 129004) and fail at after version 4.3.0 20071005 )revision 129038). -- dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr changed:

[Bug fortran/33727] Segfault with ugly string array constructor

--- Comment #8 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 22:28 --- Dominique, I forgot to say: your testcase is also fixed by Paul's patch, and it's really the same problem, so the testcase I added is enough. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33727

Erinnerung - Empfehlung persoenlich fuer gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org - Bereits der 2. Hinweis

Hallo gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, dieses ist nun schon unsere 2. Mail an Sie, da wir nicht moechten, dass Ihnen die für Sie reservierten 2400,00 EUR verloren gehen. Ja tatsaechlich, dieser Betrag ist für Sie als Inhaber der Email gcc- [EMAIL PROTECTED] reserviert Greifen sie jetzt zu und holen sie s

[Bug target/33755] Gcc 4.2.2 broken for mips linux kernel builds

--- Comment #10 from ddaney at avtrex dot com 2007-10-14 02:02 --- Subject: Re: Gcc 4.2.2 broken for mips linux kernel builds rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > --- Comment #9 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-13 10:47 > --- > The problem comes from dbr_sched