--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 08:17 ---
Subject: Bug 35366
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 12 08:16:12 2008
New Revision: 141782
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141782
Log:
PR target/35366
* expr.c (expand_expr_addr_expr_1
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 08:20 ---
Subject: Bug 35334
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 12 08:18:45 2008
New Revision: 141783
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141783
Log:
PR c++/35334
* c-pretty-print.c (pp_c_complex_exp
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 08:30 ---
I guess it should use
#define CAP_INFINITY (((HOST_WIDEST_INT) 1) << (HOST_BITS_PER_WIDEST_INT - 1))
instead. gcov_type (and HOST_WIDEST_INT) can be long long, long or __int64.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show
--- Comment #11 from alon dot barlev at gmail dot com 2008-11-12 09:04
---
I get the error only if I use -O3.
But the two bugs are related.
Last checked rev#141779
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37955
--- Comment #1 from martin dot jansa at mk dot cvut dot cz 2008-11-12
10:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=16658)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16658&action=view)
Preprocessed source with -O0
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38090
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 14:27 ---
I have tested:
2008-11-12 Jakub Jelinek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR bootstrap/38088
* mcf.c (CAP_INFINITY): Use HOST_WIDE_INT maximum, not GCC specific
__LONG_LONG_MAX__.
--- gcc/mcf.c.jj
--- Comment #3 from froydnj at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 14:32 ---
Fixed in 4.3.
--
froydnj at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UN
This is my system information,
FreeBSD cowboy.branda.to 8.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 8.0-CURRENT #7: Fri Oct 17
22:32:29 CST 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/i386/compile/cowboy
i386
My configuration command is
../configure --prefix=/home/thinker/tmp/dest \
--target=bfin-unknown-elf --hos
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-11-12 15:31 ---
Revision 141780 is the case.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Summary|Internal compiler error: in |[4.
--
hp at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu dot org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |
--- Comment #5 from marc dot glisse at normalesup dot org 2008-11-12 16:19
---
This is not a bug (see previous comments).
--
marc dot glisse at normalesup dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-11-12 16:30 ---
The testcase compiles OK with
GNU C (GCC) version 4.4.0 20081112 (experimental) [trunk revision 141785]
(x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #8 from marc dot glisse at normalesup dot org 2008-11-12 16:30
---
The comments already say this bug is a duplicate (of a now fixed bug), I am
just marking it for cleanup. Hope that is the right thing to do...
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 27843 ***
--
--- Comment #12 from marc dot glisse at normalesup dot org 2008-11-12
16:30 ---
*** Bug 30083 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
marc dot glisse at normalesup dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 17:03 ---
Subject: Bug 35366
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 12 17:01:51 2008
New Revision: 141790
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141790
Log:
PR target/35366
PR fortran/33759
* fold-c
--- Comment #15 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 17:03 ---
Subject: Bug 33759
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 12 17:01:51 2008
New Revision: 141790
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141790
Log:
PR target/35366
PR fortran/33759
* fold-
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 10:00 ---
Subject: Bug 37986
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Nov 12 09:59:27 2008
New Revision: 141784
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141784
Log:
2008-11-12 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstd
On Linux/ia32, revision 141781 gave
FAIL: gfortran.dg/private_type_4.f90 -O (test for errors, line 14)
--
Summary: gfortran.dg/private_type_4.f90 -O doesn't work
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
--- Comment #11 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2008-11-12
17:14 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] FAIL: 26_numerics/complex/13450.cc: ICE in
verify_gimple_expr, at tree-cfg.c:3962
> Created an attachment (id=16650)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16650
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 10:42 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
Hi,
H8SX target supports generation of bit instructions in memory addressing mode.
However, these instructions are not getting generated and the bits in memory
are operated using other instructions which consume more memory. The
attached patch "h8sx.patch" generates these bit instructions and hen
--- Comment #1 from prafullat at kpitcummins dot com 2008-11-12 10:09
---
Created an attachment (id=16660)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16660&action=view)
Patch for bit insn enhancement
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38091
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-11-12 16:12 ---
With the patch for pr38065, compiling gfortran.dg/private_type_4.f90 without
-std=f95 does not return the expected error:
/opt/gcc/_gcc_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/private_type_4.f90:14.24:
type(t1) function
Trying to build libstdc++ on Solaris 11/SPARC with GNU ld 2.19 and Sun as fails
compiling src/compatibility.cc:
libtool: compile: /vol/gccsrc/obj/gcc-4.4.0-20081110/11-gcc-gld/./gcc/xgcc
-shared-libgcc -B/vol/gccsrc/obj/gcc-4.4.0-20081110/11-gcc-gld/./gcc
-nostdinc++
-L/vol/gccsrc/obj/gcc-4.4.0-2
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2008-11-12 10:12
---
May be related to libstdc++/38000...
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 17:35 ---
Subject: Bug 34269
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 12 17:33:48 2008
New Revision: 141793
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141793
Log:
PR c++/34269
* parser.c (cp_parser_simple_declara
--- Comment #14 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 17:48 ---
Subject: Bug 37202
Author: janis
Date: Wed Nov 12 17:47:13 2008
New Revision: 141794
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141794
Log:
2008-11-12 Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR testsu
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 17:53 ---
Subject: Bug 38008
Author: janis
Date: Wed Nov 12 17:52:24 2008
New Revision: 141795
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141795
Log:
2008-11-12 Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR testsui
Hmm, shouldn't the preprocessor just mark the include as a duplicate?
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 12, 2008, at 8:50 AM, "paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2008-11-12 18:01 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression] System header files not found once -isystem
/usr/include is used
Hmm, shouldn't the preprocessor just mark the include as a duplicate?
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 12, 2008, at 8:50 AM,
Hello,
with gcc-4.4 from trunk (tested on revisions 140300 and 141769) I get internal
error while building kernel from git.
It happen after this commit to linux-2.6.git tree
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=d6c88a507ef0b6afdb013cba4e7804ba7324d99a
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 12:38 ---
Fixed, either of the patch is sufficient to fix it, though the other patch is
still highly desirable.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 18:39 ---
Subject: Bug 38094
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Nov 12 18:38:08 2008
New Revision: 141798
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141798
Log:
2008-11-12 Tobias Burnus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortr
--- Comment #14 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 18:39 ---
Subject: Bug 38065
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Nov 12 18:38:08 2008
New Revision: 141798
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141798
Log:
2008-11-12 Tobias Burnus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fort
--- Comment #3 from mrs at apple dot com 2008-11-12 18:33 ---
I'm merely eching bits from the clang development list... Now they think the
above doesn't apply, but 3.4.5p3 does:
3 If the unqualified-id is
∼ type-name, the type-name is looked up in the context of the entire
postfix-expre
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 18:46 ---
FIXED.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--
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 #4 from martin dot jansa at mk dot cvut dot cz 2008-11-12
19:46 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> The testcase compiles OK with
>
> GNU C (GCC) version 4.4.0 20081112 (experimental) [trunk revision 141785]
> (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Confirmed, fixed betwee
--- Comment #2 from martin dot jansa at mk dot cvut dot cz 2008-11-12
10:05 ---
Created an attachment (id=16659)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16659&action=view)
Preprocessed source with -O1
Created with:
gcc-4.4.0-pre -O1 -D__KERNEL__ -Iinclude
-I/usr/src/li
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 20:27 ---
While gfortran should not ICE, I'd be interested in knowing if
this code compiles with any other compiler. (Hint: remove
elemental from trim_append).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38095
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 20:29 ---
Add ice-on-invalid-code to keywords.
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 20:39 ---
Whoop, it is valid Fortran 2003. I forgot that
Lahey's checker does not understand the F2003
array syntax.
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 20:52 ---
Subject: Bug 38007
Author: jason
Date: Wed Nov 12 20:50:45 2008
New Revision: 141800
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141800
Log:
PR c++/38007
/*
% gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: /usr/local/gcc-4.4-20081107/src/gcc-4.4-20081107/configure
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,java
--with-gmp=/usr/local/gmp-4.2.3/x86_64-Linux-fc8-core2-gcc-4.3.1
--with-mpfr=/usr/local/mpfr-2.3.2/x86_64-Linux-fc8-gm
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-11-12 21:02 ---
The test is still failing, now with two failures. One is due to the mismatch
between the expected error: "cannot be of PRIVATE type" and the actual one
"Fortran 2003: PUBLIC variable 'f1' at (1) of PRIVATE derived typ
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 21:04 ---
Fixed on the trunk.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-11-12 21:09 ---
> Whoop, it is valid Fortran 2003. I forgot that
> Lahey's checker does not understand the F2003 array syntax.
I was about to say that the code is compiled by ifort and g95.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_
--- Comment #6 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 21:22 ---
No, NOT FIXED.
--
hp at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED
--- Comment #7 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 21:25 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> No, NOT FIXED.
At least not at 141791, though I see related changes for 141798 that might have
fixed it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38094
--- Comment #1 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-11-12 21:29 ---
The paste of the ICE itself would be nice indeed:
pr38096.c: In function foo:
pr38096.c:13: internal compiler error: in vectorizable_store, at
tree-vect-transform.c:5447
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocesse
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-11-12 21:30 ---
Revision 141798 gave:
FAIL: gfortran.dg/private_type_4.f90 -O (test for errors, line 17)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/private_type_4.f90 -O (test for excess errors)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3809
--- Comment #9 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-11-12 21:31 ---
> Revision 141798 gave:
see comment #5. I have forgotten to give the revision: it was r141798.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38094
--- Comment #2 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-11-12 21:31 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 37955 ***
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #12 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-11-12 21:31 ---
*** Bug 38096 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 21:35 ---
Subject: Bug 38010
Author: janis
Date: Wed Nov 12 21:33:34 2008
New Revision: 141803
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141803
Log:
2008-11-12 Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR bootstr
--- Comment #4 from irar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 10:37 ---
Subject: Bug 38079
Author: irar
Date: Wed Nov 12 10:36:03 2008
New Revision: 141785
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141785
Log:
PR tree-optimization/38079
* tree-vect-analyze.c (v
Compiling
module bar
implicit none
contains
!
elemental function trim_append(xx,yy) result(xy)
character (len=*), intent(in) :: xx,yy
character (len=len(xx) + len(yy)) :: xy
xy = trim(xx) // yy
end function trim_append
!
function same(xx) result(yy)
character (len=*), intent(in) :: xx(:)
character
--- Comment #30 from sje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 21:37 ---
Subject: Bug 27880
Author: sje
Date: Wed Nov 12 21:35:46 2008
New Revision: 141804
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141804
Log:
PR target/27880
* config/unwind_ipinfo.m4 (GCC_CHEC
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2008-11-12 10:02
---
Fixed again.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #31 from sje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 21:38 ---
Subject: Bug 27880
Author: sje
Date: Wed Nov 12 21:37:34 2008
New Revision: 141805
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141805
Log:
PR target/27880
* configure.ac (GCC_CHECK_UNWIND_GET
--- Comment #25 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 21:59 ---
Subject: Bug 27574
Author: dodji
Date: Wed Nov 12 21:57:44 2008
New Revision: 141807
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141807
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog:
2008-11-12 Dodji Seketeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #2 from kamaraju at gmail dot com 2008-11-12 13:49 ---
Andrew (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2008-11/msg00131.html) suggested to use
#define CAP_INFINITY INTTYPE_MAXIMUM(HOST_WIDEST_INT)
I tried it out. The mcf.c compiles with this modification.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 22:08 ---
I see gcc-testresults for this target posted in:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-11/msg00649.html
Was this with -fno-ira or is this bug gone?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37422
--- Comment #5 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 22:09 ---
Subject: Bug 38007
Author: jason
Date: Wed Nov 12 22:08:01 2008
New Revision: 141808
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141808
Log:
PR c++/38007
--- Comment #5 from vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com 2008-11-12 22:12 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> > Whoop, it is valid Fortran 2003. I forgot that
> > Lahey's checker does not understand the F2003 array syntax.
> I was about to say that the code is compiled by ifort and g95.
I hope someon
--- Comment #6 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 22:14 ---
Subject: Bug 38007
Author: jason
Date: Wed Nov 12 22:13:26 2008
New Revision: 141809
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141809
Log:
PR c++/38007
--- Comment #7 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 22:15 ---
Fixed on all open branches.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 22:19 ---
Subject: Bug 36478
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 12 22:18:03 2008
New Revision: 141810
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141810
Log:
PR c++/36478
Revert:
2007-05-07 Mike Stu
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 22:24
---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I see gcc-testresults for this target posted in:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-11/msg00649.html
> Was this with -fno-ira or is this bug gone?
It's a dup of PR rtl-opt/372
--- Comment #6 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-11-12 22:26 ---
> I hope someone will mark the bug as "confirmed".
I have tried, but If I am allowed to do it, I did not find how. Did you try
yourself?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38095
--- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 22:28 ---
Subject: Bug 38094
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Nov 12 22:27:10 2008
New Revision: 141811
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141811
Log:
2008-11-12 Tobias Burnus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR for
--- Comment #17 from froydnj at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 14:34
---
Fixed for 4.4.
--
froydnj at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #11 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 22:29 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> The test is still failing, now with two failures. One is due to the mismatch
> between the expected error: "cannot be of PRIVATE type" and the actual one
> "Fortran 2003: PUBLIC variable 'f
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 22:37 ---
Looks as if the code is valid. Valgrind shows:
==2910== Invalid read of size 4
==2910==at 0x4B1005: gfc_apply_interface_mapping_to_expr
(trans-expr.c:1916)
==2910==by 0x4B6FBE: gfc_apply_interface_mapping (tr
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 20:56 ---
Subject: Bug 33764
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 12 20:55:13 2008
New Revision: 141801
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141801
Log:
PR libgcj/33764
libjava/
* configure.ac (INSTALL_
--- Comment #8 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 22:43 ---
I tried to reduce the case.
module bar
implicit none
contains
!
elemental function trim_append(xx,yy) result(xy)
character (len=*), intent(in) :: xx,yy
character (len=len(xx) + len(yy)) :: xy
xy = xx // yy
end func
The following program works in g77, but gets an 'Bad value during floating
point read' error in gfortran.
c blank_test.f program
character(11) :: a = ' 2.0030e+ 3'
real :: f
read (a,'(BN,E11.0)'),f
print *,f
end
c end of program
I think that ' 2.0030e+
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 23:02 ---
The problem appears to be with the reference to SAME() in
subroutine xmain()
call foo(trim_append(["a"],same(["b"])))
end subroutine xmain
If one changes this to
call foo(trim_append(["a"],["b"]))
the code
--- Comment #10 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 23:15 ---
Although technically wrong-code, side effects in VLA size expressions are a
very dubious practice I don't expect to be used like this outside of
testsuites.
The fix is clearly unsuitable for any development stage othe
--- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 23:42 ---
Some debugging shows that sym->name is "same" and sym->attr.function == 1.
Furthermore is arg1->expr_type == EXPR_FUNCTION and arg1->ts.cl->length ==
NULL.
(For cross referencing: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2007-
--- Comment #11 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 23:45 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> I tried to reduce the case.
> This is probably unrelated to the original ICE though.
Looks unrelated, but still should be fixed; I think ICE from comment 8 is a
regression with regards t
The gcc.dg/cpp/subframework1.c -fno-show-column test case for excessive errors
fails on i686-apple-darwin9 with the errors...
Executing on host:
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc44-4.3.999-20081107/darwin_objdir/gcc/xgcc
-B/sw/src/fink.build/gcc44-4.3.999-20081107/darwin_objdir/gcc/
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc44-
On i686-apple-darwin9, the tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t027
c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute testcase fails with gcc trunk.
Executing on host:
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc44-4.3.999-20081107/darwin_objdir/gcc/xgcc
-B/sw/src/fink.build/gcc44-4.3.999-20081107/darwin_objdir/gcc/
c_compat_main_ts
--- Comment #4 from kamaraju at gmail dot com 2008-11-13 00:02 ---
I confirm that using this patch, mcf.c compiles cleanly.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38088
--- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-13 00:08 ---
Subject: Bug 38000
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Nov 13 00:06:55 2008
New Revision: 141812
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141812
Log:
2008-11-13 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstd
--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2008-11-13 00:09
---
Fixed for 4.4.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
The weekly snapshot (dated 20081107) of gcc 4.4 fails to compile on a Sun
Solaris machine with the following errors.
cc -g -DIN_GCC-DHAVE_CONFIG_H -o cc1-dummy c-lang.o stub-objc.o
attribs.o c-errors.o c-lex.o c-pragma.o c-decl.o c-typeck.o
c-convert.o c-aux-info.o c-common.o c-opts.o c-form
tree.c:
tree
decl_value_expr_lookup (tree from)
{
...
return NULL_TREE;
}
tree.h:
#define DECL_VALUE_EXPR(NODE) \
(decl_value_expr_lookup (DECL_WRTL_CHECK (NODE)))
dbxout.c:
static rtx
dbxout_expand_expr (tree expr)
{
switch (TREE_CODE (expr))
...
case PARM_DECL:
if (DECL_H
I tried building the latest 4.4.0 snapshot on a Powerbook G4 (PPC) running OS X
10.4.11 with the latest developer tools for OS X 10.4. The source directory
was the full gcc-4.4-20081107 drop and I ran configure with default options
only. The build got quite far along, but failed in stage 3 with t
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 12, 2008, at 8:11 PM, "d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
tree.c:
tree
decl_value_expr_lookup (tree from)
{
...
return NULL_TREE;
}
tree.h:
#define DECL_VALUE_EXPR(NODE) \
(decl_value_expr_lookup (DECL_WRTL_CHECK (NODE)))
db
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2008-11-13 05:56 ---
Subject: Re: New: dbxout_expand_expr() doesn't check return value of
DECL_VALUE_EXPR()
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 12, 2008, at 8:11 PM, "d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> tree.c
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-13 06:06
---
A patch has been submitted for review.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37294
96 matches
Mail list logo
