--- Comment #144 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 08:17 ---
(In reply to comment #143)
> CP2K fails again to compile
Joost,
It's me again! I had naively thought that all the simple combinations of USE
statements were covered in the testsuite. Evidently, I was not just nai
Hi,
While grepping the OpenBSD sourcetree for occurences of a typo I
found (beeing -> being), I came across one instance in the gcc
distribution. Attached is a patch that fixes it, but it is a patch
against the OpenBSD cvs repository. It is very minor, but still I hope
this is of use to you guys.
This testcase fails with g++
--cut here--
typedef double EXPRESS[5];
extern int Terms;
void Parse_Rel_Factor (EXPRESS Express, int *Terms)
{
EXPRESS Local_Express = {5.0, 4.0, 3.0, 2.0, 1.0};
int Local_Terms = 5;
int i;
for (i = (*Terms); i < Local_Terms; i++)
Express[i] = 0.0;
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 09:23 ---
Subject: Bug 34333
Author: burnus
Date: Thu Dec 6 09:23:00 2007
New Revision: 130644
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=130644
Log:
2007-12-06 Tobias Burnus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fort
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 09:33 ---
Subject: Bug 34336
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 6 09:33:26 2007
New Revision: 130645
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=130645
Log:
PR c++/34336
* tree.c (stabilize_call, stabilize_
--- Comment #15 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 10:06 ---
Subject: Bug 34005
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 6 10:06:38 2007
New Revision: 130647
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=130647
Log:
2007-12-06 Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dorit
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 09:54 ---
Fixed on the trunk.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|
--- Comment #16 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 10:07 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 10:37 ---
Confirmed.
eliminate_local_variables_1 changes &Express[0] to &(*Express.96_73)[0]
without re-computing invariantness.
With the structure of eliminate_local_variables_stmt (it seems to operate
on non-gimple), it lo
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 12:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=14702)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14702&action=view)
Draft patch for further BOZ diagnostic
The attached patch shows how one could implement:
- Error for initializi
Tried to bootstrap using gnat-gpl-2007-i686-gnu-linux-libc2.3-bin.tar.gz as
host compiler. Error is :
/var/pisi/gcc-4.3_pre20071206-31/work/gcc-4.3-20071206/build-default-i686-pc-linux-gnu/./prev-gcc/xgcc
-B/var/pisi/gcc-4.3_pre20071206-31/work/gcc-4.3-20071206/build-default-i686-pc-linux-gnu
--- Comment #1 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2007-12-06 12:23
---
Dup of bug #32581, stupid me.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 32581 ***
--
ismail at pardus dot org dot tr changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2007-12-06 12:23
---
*** Bug 34356 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ismail at pardus dot org dot tr changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2007-12-06 12:24
---
This still affects mainline as of revision 130641.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32581
===
$ g++-trunk -v -c ice.cpp
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ./configure --prefix=/tmp --program-suffix=-trunk
--enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.3.0 20071206 (experimental) (GCC)
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-v' '-c' '-shared-
--- Comment #1 from gcc at abeckmann dot de 2007-12-06 13:02 ---
Also present in
gcc version 4.2.3 20071123 (prerelease) (Debian 4.2.2-4)
==> internal compiler error: in layout_type, at stor-layout.c:1851
Not found in
gcc version 4.1.3 20071019 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.2-17)
gcc version
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 13:16 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--- Comment #13 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 13:25 ---
Subject: Bug 20983
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 6 13:25:37 2007
New Revision: 130650
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=130650
Log:
PR middle-end/20983
* tree-ssa-ccp.c (optimize_s
--- Comment #14 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 13:28 ---
Fixed on the trunk.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
with: ../gcc_trunk/configure --disable-nls
--prefix=/Volumes/Stock/dev/gcc-4.3_trunk --host=i686-apple-darwin8
--target=i686-apple-darwin8 --build=i686-apple-darwin8 --enable-languages=c,ada
--with-gmp=/opt/local
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.3.0 20071206 (experimental) (GCC)
* the system type
--- Comment #1 from bechir dot zalila at gmail dot com 2007-12-06 13:48
---
Created an attachment (id=14703)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14703&action=view)
Patch file that solves the problem
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34358
--- Comment #4 from dir at lanl dot gov 2007-12-06 14:56 ---
I have several programs (f77 and f90) that do this and their intent is clear -
just put the bit patterns into to words as requested - no data conversion - no
range checking. BOZ seems to have been created for this purpose, but
I downloaded the December 6 version of gfortran from
http://quatramaran.ens.fr/~coudert/gfortran/gfortran-linux.tar.gz and attempted
to compile the following file:
SUBROUTINE f1
INCLUDE "anything"
END SUBROUTINE f1
SUBROUTINE f2
INCLUDE "anything"
END SUBROUTINE f2
The INCLUDE file can contain an
Perusing the file I see around line 879:
TOOLS_TARGET_PAIRS = \
mlib-tgt.adbhttp://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34360
The comments at the top of mlib-tgt.adb are now wrong; subprograms are not
dummies anymore, they are stubs that call their counterparts in
MLIB.Tgt.Specific. The comment is misleading.
--
Summary: Incorrect comment at top of mlib-tgt.adb
Product: gcc
Version: 4.
The following code produces segmentation fault at runtime.
-CODE-
#include
#include
main()
{
char * strArray[2];
printf("Enter 1:");
scanf("%s",strArray[0]);
printf("Enter 2:");
scanf("
--- Comment #15 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 16:54
---
WONTFIX on the branches, adjusting target milestone.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 17:06 ---
scanf does not initiale the pointers. You just have some random pointer values
passed to scanf.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 17:13 ---
Known, but not yet fixed. See:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-12/msg00260.html
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from appfault at hotmail dot com 2007-12-06 17:26 ---
Instead of trying to lock down the full and complete list of acceptable glibs,
you could at least give a hint as to what GCC was using at the time a given
release did work.
A "known working version" list seems very sim
Simple test case:
unsigned n;
void foo (unsigned *p)
{
n = 4;
*p = 0;
if (n != 0)
abort ();
}
main ()
{
foo (&n);
return 0;
}
Tested cross-compiling for MIPS, also verified that x86 also has the same
problem.
attached dump from the fre pass.
basically n.0_4 should not be assi
--- Comment #7 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 18:56 ---
Subject: Bug 29172
Author: tromey
Date: Thu Dec 6 18:56:26 2007
New Revision: 130656
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=130656
Log:
gcc
PR c/29172:
* c-opts.c (c_common_parse_file
--- Comment #8 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 18:58 ---
Fixed on trunk.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |sam at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 19:13 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I have several programs (f77 and f90) that do this and their intent is clear -
> just put the bit patterns into to words as requested - no data conversion - no
> range checking.
Which is of
The following code fails to compile
struct A {
virtual ~A() {}; //make A polymorphic
};
struct B: public A
{
template
class C
{
public:
static void f (A& a)
{
dynamic_cast( a ).g();
}
};
void g () {}
};
... and issues
When asked to compile the following code:
template void f();
void g() { f; }
G++ opines:
"error: statement cannot resolve address of overloaded function"
However, f is not overloaded. (The standard says: "When two or more different
declarations are specified for a single name in the same
--- Comment #5 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2007-12-06 20:56
---
a-except.adb
ali.adb
cstand.adb
einfo.adb
exp_attr.adb
exp_dbug.adb
osint.adb
par.adb
prepcomp.adb
restrict.adb
rtsfind.adb
s-os_lib.adb
scn.adb
sem_attr.adb
sem_util.adb
sprint.adb
switch-c.adb
targparm.adb
files
package test2 is
pragma elaborate_body;
type T is record
F1: access function(x: integer) return T;
F2: access function(x: T) return integer; --??
F3: access function(x: T) return T; --??
F4: access function(x: integer) return acce
package pak1 is
type T1 is tagged limited null record;
type T2 is limited interface;
function f1 (x2: access T2'Class) return integer;
type T3 is new T1 and T2 with record
x1: integer := f1 (T3'Access); -- line 8, column 28 is the tick
end record;
end pak1;
gnatmake -gnat05
package pak2 is
package pak3 is
end pak3;
end pak2;
limited with pak2;
package pak1 is -- line 2
pragma elaborate_body;
end pak1;
with pak2;
package body pak1 is
end pak1;
gnatmake -gnat05 pak1
gcc-4.1 -c -gnat05 pak1.adb
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED=
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 21:34 ---
> > but the committee seems the have lost track of why programs need specific
> > bit patterns and how they are used.
>
> See the TRANSFER intrinsic. I think J3 recognized the problems with
> specify a bit pattern.
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 21:46 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 11407 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 21:46
---
*** Bug 34365 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11407
The method java.net.URI.relativize(URI) returns incorrect results for a couple
of cases when compared to implementations from IBM Java or Sun Java.
This problem affects directly the debugging process of C projects on Eclipse.
Whenever someone is debugging a project whose part of its name is the
na
--- Comment #1 from lnx1138 at us dot ibm dot com 2007-12-06 22:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=14704)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14704&action=view)
testcase
Sample java code providing two examples where URI.relativize() method is not
consistent with other JVM
... should add a record marker.
F 2003, 9.2.3.1:
If a nonadvancing output statement leaves a file positioned 1 within a current
record and no further output
statement is executed for the file before it is closed or a BACKSPACE, ENDFILE,
or REWIND statement
is executed for it, the effect is as if
--- Comment #2 from lnx1138 at us dot ibm dot com 2007-12-06 22:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=14705)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14705&action=view)
gcc-libjava-uri-relativize.patch to fix java.net.URI.relativize(URI) method
This patch corrects two issues found
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 23:29 ---
Already fixed on trunk
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|U
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 23:30 ---
Already fixed on trunk
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|U
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-06 23:35 ---
Confirmed on 4.3.0 20071206
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from mrs at apple dot com 2007-12-06 23:46 ---
radr://2961456
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17736
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-07 00:14 ---
This worked in "4.3.0 20071127".
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34363
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-07 02:54 ---
Confirmed on 4.3.0 20071206
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-07 04:32
---
Thomas, this should be straightforward. Do you want to work this along with PR
34323 ?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34370
with current trunk:
(sid)2354:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~] /usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcc -c -O2
-ftree-vectorize
funnelweb-dump.c
funnelweb-dump.c: In function 'centerln':
funnelweb-dump.c:4: error: incorrect sharing of tree nodes
prologue_after_cost_adjust.25_40 = (unsigned int) D.1554_7;
(unsigned in
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-12-07 04:45 ---
/* Testcase by Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> */
void centerln (int width, int ch, char *s)
{
unsigned int sidebar;
int i;
char linet1[1000];
char linet2[100];
sidebar = (width - __builtin_strlen (s)) / 2;
57 matches
Mail list logo
