http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51391
--- Comment #17 from pnewell at cs dot cmu.edu 2011-12-06 08:00:42 UTC ---
I am a bit afraid to do this, but I think I need to do it for my own education.
I saw the comment by Richard (#16) and have to admit that I would like a
translation into so
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51430
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51113
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-06
08:32:02 UTC ---
This bug is about the regression that it caused, so if that regression is
fixed, this should be closed. Whether you file a new bug (or is it enhancement
PR?) or keep it in your had i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32667
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|builtin operator= generates |block copy with exact
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50335
Maxim Kuvyrkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mkuvyrkov at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51113
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51434
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51363
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-06
09:02:23 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Dec 6 09:02:17 2011
New Revision: 182041
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182041
Log:
2011-12-06 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51363
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51432
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
Blocks|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48094
--- Comment #14 from Iain Sandoe 2011-12-06 09:11:56
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> (In reply to comment #12)
> > I guess, ideally, the ObjC meta-data should be re-created after LTO has done
> > its magic -- but that's def. not a stage 3 typ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50977
razya at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51435
Bug #: 51435
Summary: Bad association status after null() of derived type
component
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26003
Reduced test case (test.ii, 5 KiB)
The attached test case compiles with g++ 4.6 but with the current 4.7.0
20111206 it fails with:
$ g++ test52.ii
test52.ii: In static member function ‘static Dest
v8::internal::BitCastHelper::cast(Source*) [w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|paolo.carlini at oracle dot |
|com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50904
--- Comment #49 from Venkataramanan Kumar 2011-12-06 09:59:39 UTC ---
I am planning to test the patch on polyhedron benchmarks.
Then I test it on CPU2006 SPEC.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51354
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51427
--- Comment #3 from Dodji Seketeli 2011-12-06
10:06:55 UTC ---
Author: dodji
Date: Tue Dec 6 10:06:49 2011
New Revision: 182043
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182043
Log:
PR c++/51427 - Better diagnostic when union/struct
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51435
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48087
--- Comment #20 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-06
10:09:20 UTC ---
Looking again, I think that for warnings promoted to errors we should _not_
increase errorcount, but we should instead have a new global flag that
tells us whether there were any "
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51427
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #13 from Chris Jefferson 2011-12-06
10:13:56 UTC ---
You can if you like, but if you haven't started yet, I plan on having a patch
ready in about... 2 hours?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48193
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48666
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51436
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #14 from Paolo Carlini 2011-12-06
10:30:42 UTC ---
I'm attaching what I already tested and was going to commit. If you like,
please work on top of it and produce a combined new patch. Like, if you think
another testcase is necessary o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #15 from Paolo Carlini 2011-12-06
10:31:30 UTC ---
Created attachment 26005
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26005
Tested patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48766
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51435
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2011-12-06
10:33:57 UTC ---
Lightly tested patch:
--- a/gcc/fortran/expr.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/expr.c
@@ -3733,17 +3733,14 @@ gfc_has_default_initializer (gfc_symbol *der)
if (c->ts.type == BT_DERIVED)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49772
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50426
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50601
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50601
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-06
11:03:29 UTC ---
Which shifts the error to
/space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/20100302_1.C: In
function 'main':^M
/space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/201003
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51437
Bug #: 51437
Summary: GCC should warn on the use of reserved
identifier/macro names
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50601
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-06
11:34:41 UTC ---
Because the decl isn't considered decl_address_invariant_p () - of course,
it is neither TREE_STATIC nor DECL_EXTERNAL ...
It _is_ both TREE_PUBLIC and TREE_STATIC when created by
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51437
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-06
11:37:39 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> For C and C++, Clang
Ahem!
> For C++ a single underscore is also reserved for the global namespace.
That comes from C, not C++:
"All identifiers that be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51245
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-06
11:41:04 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Dec 6 11:41:00 2011
New Revision: 182044
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182044
Log:
2011-12-06 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34501
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51437
--- Comment #2 from Ruben Van Boxem
2011-12-06 11:50:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > For C and C++, Clang
>
> Ahem!
>
> > For C++ a single underscore is also reserved for the global namespace.
>
> That comes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50622
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50802
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50729
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51245
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51436
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51436
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-06
12:17:42 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Dec 6 12:17:31 2011
New Revision: 182045
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182045
Log:
2011-12-06 Richard Guenther
PR middle-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51436
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51144
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43674
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50823
--- Comment #13 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-06
13:03:40 UTC ---
This fixes it:
Index: gcc/ipa-inline.c
===
--- gcc/ipa-inline.c(revision 182044)
+++ gcc/ipa-inline.c(worki
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51435
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48666
--- Comment #5 from franz.sirl-kernel at lauterbach dot com 2011-12-06 13:09:25
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
I see. Does it make sense to file an enhancement request for something like
-Warray-bounds=strict ? In our case the code was really w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48666
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50601
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-06
13:26:20 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Dec 6 13:26:09 2011
New Revision: 182048
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182048
Log:
2011-12-06 Richard Guenther
PR middle-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50601
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51437
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-06
13:34:36 UTC ---
The C standard also reserves various names for future use in 7.26
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49997
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49997
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-06
13:45:28 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Dec 6 13:45:19 2011
New Revision: 182049
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182049
Log:
2011-12-06 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51263
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50823
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matt at use dot net
--- Comment #14 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50744
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-06
13:52:58 UTC ---
Also see PR51362 which looks related (is it a dup? size overflowing to zero?)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50913
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50955
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51069
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
Priority|P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51094
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51097
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Component|regression
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51132
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-06
14:00:06 UTC ---
Can we please lower that stack space requirement?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51435
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51223
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51197
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51215
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51228
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51135
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||mingw32
Priority|P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51248
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51225
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51229
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51262
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51297
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51315
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-06
14:16:21 UTC ---
Note that in the end it's always us transforming
a->b.c
to (effectively)
T *tem = &a->b.c;
*tem
which expand unfortunately handles differently. So whenever we do that
we hav
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51318
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51318
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51328
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51327
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51354
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51262
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51384
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51325
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51398
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51369
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51403
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51362
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51431
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51406
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51430
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51370
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51361
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51402
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51416
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #16 from Chris Jefferson 2011-12-06
14:25:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 26006
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26006
Piecewise patch
Patch to make piecewise_construct work properly on std::pair.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51132
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-06
14:33:00 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Dec 6 14:32:54 2011
New Revision: 182050
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182050
Log:
PR libgomp/51132
* testsuite/libgomp.graphi
1 - 100 of 181 matches
Mail list logo