--- Comment #4 from dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-04-26
07:23 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > (In reply to comment #1)
> > > What is the status on this? Does reverting the langhooks.c change
> > > remanifest
> > > PR27067?
> > >
> > No.
--- Comment #5 from dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-04-26
08:24 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > (In reply to comment #2)
> > > (In reply to comment #1)
> > > > What is the status on this? Does reverting the langhooks.c change
> > > > remani
--- Comment #7 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 08:50 ---
I'll look at this (and handle the m4 parts, which I am getting
to be good at), but not today.
The good part is that we'll only need to fix this in a single
place, the definition of SCALAR_ARRAY_FUNCTION in
ifunction
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 09:12 ---
I think we should restrict the warning to explicitly specified qualifiers, thus
move it completely under the control of the parser.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36052
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfi
--- Comment #3 from george at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 09:46 ---
Subject: Bug 35154
Author: george
Date: Sat Apr 26 09:46:01 2008
New Revision: 134696
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134696
Log:
2008-04-26 George Helffrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fo
--- Comment #23 from george at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 09:46 ---
Subject: Bug 35892
Author: george
Date: Sat Apr 26 09:46:01 2008
New Revision: 134696
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134696
Log:
2008-04-26 George Helffrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR f
--- Comment #10 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-04-26 09:56 ---
Fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|http://gcc.gnu.org/m
--- Comment #4 from george at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 10:14 ---
Reworked patch committed as rev. 134696.
--
george at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #24 from george at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 10:18 ---
ICE/segfault on test case eliminated by rev. 134696.
Memory leaks unrelated to original patch still unresolved.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35892
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 12:52
---
Looking at product.m4 as an example:
--- snip ---
MASKED_ARRAY_FUNCTION(1,
` result = 1;',
` if (*msrc)
result *= *src;')
SCALAR_ARRAY_FUNCTION(1)
`#endif'
The SCALAR_ARRAY_FUNCTION is empty. It needs
Gcc 4.4 revision 134659 gives
ERROR: tcl error sourcing
/home/regress/tbox/svn-gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/dg.exp.
ERROR: unmatched open brace in list
Revision 134655 is OK.
--
Summary: [4.4 Regression]: ERROR: tcl error sourcing
/home/regress/tbox/svn-gcc/gcc/tests
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-04-26 13:32 ---
The only change between revision 134655 and 134659 is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2008-04/msg00888.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-04-26 14:01 ---
A patch is posted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-04/msg01960.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 14:50 ---
Subject: Bug 36053
Author: hjl
Date: Sat Apr 26 14:50:02 2008
New Revision: 134706
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134706
Log:
2008-04-26 H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR testsuite/36053
--- Comment #4 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 15:28 ---
Subject: Bug 36053
Author: hjl
Date: Sat Apr 26 15:27:34 2008
New Revision: 134707
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134707
Log:
2008-04-26 H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR testsuite/36053
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 15:34
---
Subject: Bug 35994
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Apr 26 15:33:27 2008
New Revision: 134708
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134708
Log:
2008-04-26 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 15:36
---
Subject: Bug 35994
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Apr 26 15:35:14 2008
New Revision: 134709
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134709
Log:
2008-04-26 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 15:36
---
Fixed now on 4.3.1 Closing
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
hi all,
(first of all, sorry for this unprofessional bug report)
compiling my application with gcc-4.3 with -O2 -ftree-vectorize, it segfaults.
i haven't been able to write a stripped-down test case, but here are the
information, that i gathered:
the constructor of the main data structure of my
--- Comment #1 from tim at klingt dot org 2008-04-26 16:27 ---
Created an attachment (id=15533)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15533&action=view)
preprocessed source file
preprocessed source file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36054
movQI constraints force load of register with immediate to registers R16-R31
However, load of zero can use any register.
Due to this register allocation is sub optimal.
Offend entry is
(define_insn "*movqi"
[(set (match_operand:QI 0 "nonimmediate_operand" "=r,d,Qm,r,q,r,*r")
(match_oper
--- Comment #3 from simonb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 17:00 ---
Subject: Bug 35652
Author: simonb
Date: Sat Apr 26 16:59:38 2008
New Revision: 134714
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134714
Log:
PR c/35652
* builtins.c (c_strlen): Suppressed mu
--- Comment #4 from simon_baldwin at yahoo dot com 2008-04-26 17:21 ---
Closing. Location information may still not be accurate, but duplicate
warnings are gone.
--
simon_baldwin at yahoo dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 19:15 ---
Subject: Bug 36053
Author: hjl
Date: Sat Apr 26 19:14:46 2008
New Revision: 134716
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134716
Log:
2008-04-26 H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR testsuite/36053
I got
Executing on host:
/export/build/gnu/gcc-avx/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/testsuite/g++/../../g++
-B/export/build/gnu/gcc-avx/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/testsuite/g++/../../
/export/gnu/src/gcc-avx/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/vector14.C -nostdinc++
-I/export/build/gnu/gcc-avx/build-x86_64-linux/x86_
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 19:53 ---
-w might be a better idea.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 19:57
---
Fixed on mainline and 4.3 branch.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 20:52 ---
Re-opening. Only parts of the problem is fixed and it is still a regression
on all branches.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
This commit
2008-02-20 Uros Bizjak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* g++.dg/compat/struct-layout-1_generate.c (DG_OPTIONS): New define.
(switchfiles): Use DG_OPTIONS. Explicitly name arguments in fprintf
templates to reduce number of passed arguments.
breaks the G++ struct-layout
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-04-26 21:39 ---
Fixed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #6 from dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-04-26
22:29 ---
Patch submitted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-04/msg01977.html
Danny
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33155
--- Comment #25 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-27 01:08
---
Memory leaks are now gone. Not sure why, but no complaints here
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
Gfortran is not allowing pointers to certain derived types to reside in COMMON.
While there are constraints for derived type objects themselves (ref section
5.5.2 of F2003), there do not appear to be constraints on pointers to them. So
it seems that gfortran is not considering 'pointeredness' whe
--- Comment #1 from eric dot weddington at atmel dot com 2008-04-27 03:56
---
Andy, can you provide a test case that shows the problem?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36055
--- Comment #1 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-04-27 05:49 ---
"IEEE Std 1003.1, 2004 Edition" [1] says:
Conversions can be applied to the nth argument after the format in the argument
list, rather than to the next unused argument. In this case, the conversion
specifier character % (
--- Comment #2 from dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-04-27
06:03 ---
Changed summary to be more precise about "non-standard".
--
dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
37 matches
Mail list logo
