[Bug libfortran/50105] [4.6/4.7 Regression] I/O with g6.5 - wrong number of "**" shown

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50105 --- Comment #13 from Tobias Burnus 2012-01-10 08:45:21 UTC --- (In reply to comment #12) > Did any interpretation requests go in on this and did we get an answer back? No, but I just wrote one: http://j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/2012-January/0

[Bug debug/51471] [4.7 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/20040811-1.c and gcc.c-torture/execute/vla-dealloc-1.c fails at -O3 -g on mips64-linux-gnu

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51471 --- Comment #18 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-10 08:49:50 UTC --- Author: vries Revision: 183038 Modified property: svn:log Modified: svn:log at Tue Jan 10 08:49:45 2012 -

[Bug rtl-optimization/51271] [4.7 Regression] ICE in in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2244

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51271 --- Comment #18 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-10 08:50:45 UTC --- Author: vries Revision: 183052 Modified property: svn:log Modified: svn:log at Tue Jan 10 08:50:40 2012 -

[Bug rtl-optimization/51271] [4.7 Regression] ICE in in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2244

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51271 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug debug/51471] [4.7 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/20040811-1.c and gcc.c-torture/execute/vla-dealloc-1.c fails at -O3 -g on mips64-linux-gnu

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51471 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/48946] [OOP] Deferred Overloaded Assignment

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48946 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug bootstrap/51796] [4.7 regression] internal compiler error: in distribute_notes, at combine.c:13285 for libgomp/alloc.c on m68k-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51796 --- Comment #9 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-01-10 09:10:07 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) > Ah, obviously s/REG_UNUSED/REG_NORETURN/g in the patch, sorry for that. With the above modification I can now build a cross successfully. I'll resume m

[Bug tree-optimization/50913] [4.7 Regression] ICE in scan_tree_for_params_right_scev, at graphite-sese-to-poly.c:633 compiling libgfortran with -floop-interchange -m32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50913 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/50913] [4.7 Regression] ICE in scan_tree_for_params_right_scev, at graphite-sese-to-poly.c:633 compiling libgfortran with -floop-interchange -m32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50913 --- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-10 09:14:57 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Jan 10 09:14:51 2012 New Revision: 183055 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183055 Log: 2012-01-10 Richard Guenther PR tree-op

[Bug ada/51483] [4.7 regression] cstand.adb:Register_Float_Type makes invalid assumptions about FP representation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51483 --- Comment #6 from Andreas Schwab 2012-01-10 09:24:48 UTC --- > If I understand correctly, you're changing the interface to pass the object > size (Esize) instead of the precision (RM_Size). That is not correct. I'm just restoring previous beha

[Bug fortran/51197] [4.7 Regression] Backtrace information less useful

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51197 --- Comment #10 from Tobias Burnus 2012-01-10 09:32:34 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Tue Jan 10 09:32:29 2012 New Revision: 183057 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183057 Log: 2012-01-10 Tobias Burnus PR fortran/5

[Bug target/49868] Implement named address space to place/access data in flash memory

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49868 --- Comment #11 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-01-10 09:42:14 UTC --- Author: gjl Date: Tue Jan 10 09:42:10 2012 New Revision: 183058 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183058 Log: libgcc/ PR target/49868 Extend __pgmx sem

[Bug middle-end/51766] [4.7 regression] sync_fetch_and_xxx atomicity

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51766 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-10 09:43:16 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > > It says above them "In most cases, these > > builtins are considered a full barrier." and only __sync_lock_test_and_set > > and > > __sync_lock_release

[Bug gcov-profile/51807] Fail to generate .gcno file when use libtool to compile la library

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51807 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/51808] New: Improve handling of ISO_C_BINDING binding names

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51808 Bug #: 51808 Summary: Improve handling of ISO_C_BINDING binding names Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement

[Bug fortran/51809] New: [4.7 Regression] ICE (use statements order)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51809 Bug #: 51809 Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE (use statements order) Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priori

[Bug lto/51806] -flto ignores -Werror

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51806 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libfortran/51803] gfortran getcwd at startup

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51803 --- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-10 10:04:17 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > Confirmed. I'll fix it for 4.8, while the patch is trivial we're already in > stage 4 for 4.7. It's certainly fine for 4.7. > Also, can you state your n

[Bug tree-optimization/51801] [4.7 Regression] ICE in inline_small_functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51801 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/51799] Compiler ICE in vect_is_simple_use_1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51799 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added CC||irar at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug fortran/51809] [4.7 Regression][OOP] ICE (segfault) depending on USE statements order

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51809 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code CC|

[Bug rtl-optimization/48496] [4.7 Regression] 'asm' operand requires impossible reload in libffi/src/ia64/ffi.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48496 --- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-10 11:18:32 UTC --- Bootstrap/test seems to work for Andreas (and for my own internal testing) but still no results from HJ on gcc-testresults. Still the testcase is broken, reproducible with a bare c

[Bug fortran/51652] Allocate with type-spec and source-expr: check whether length type-parameter is the same is lacking

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51652 --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2012-01-10 11:22:24 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Tue Jan 10 11:22:16 2012 New Revision: 183061 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183061 Log: 2012-01-10 Tobias Burnus PR fortran/51

[Bug middle-end/50283] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/eh/simd-1.C execution test

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50283 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug rtl-optimization/50176] [4.7 Regression] 4.7 generates spill-fill dealing with char->int conversion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50176 --- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-10 12:11:31 UTC --- We are expanding from # BLOCK 5 freq:9100 # PRED: 5 [91.0%] (dfs_back,true,exec) 3 [91.0%] (true,exec) # outptr_89 = PHI # col_90 = PHI D.1396_32 = MEM[base: inptr0_

[Bug tree-optimization/51801] [4.7 Regression] ICE in inline_small_functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51801 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/51810] New: internal compiler error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51810 Bug #: 51810 Summary: internal compiler error Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Comp

[Bug c++/51810] internal compiler error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51810 --- Comment #1 from David Tardon 2012-01-10 13:15:48 UTC --- Created attachment 26290 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26290 preprocessed source

[Bug tree-optimization/51801] [4.7 Regression] ICE in inline_small_functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51801 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot

[Bug tree-optimization/51799] [4.7 Regression] Compiler ICE in vect_is_simple_use_1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51799 Matthew Gretton-Dann changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.6.2 Summary|Compiler

[Bug tree-optimization/51801] [4.7 Regression] ICE in inline_small_functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51801 --- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-10 13:38:46 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Jan 10 13:38:41 2012 New Revision: 183064 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183064 Log: 2012-01-10 Richard Guenther PR tree-op

[Bug tree-optimization/51801] [4.7 Regression] ICE in inline_small_functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51801 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c++/51810] internal compiler error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51810 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||error-recovery, |

[Bug bootstrap/51705] [4.7 Regression] FreeBSD uses unsupported C++11 features when __cplusplus == 201103L

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51705 --- Comment #44 from Jason Merrill 2012-01-10 13:44:22 UTC --- There is a conflict between the FreeBSD headers and G++, and we can fix it with fixincludes. Let's do that and move on.

[Bug tree-optimization/51799] [4.7 Regression] Compiler ICE in vect_is_simple_use_1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51799 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0 --- Comment #3 from Richard Guen

[Bug fortran/50981] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Wrong-code for scalarizing ELEMENTAL call with absent OPTIONAL argument

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50981 --- Comment #13 from Tobias Burnus 2012-01-10 14:20:13 UTC --- Created attachment 26291 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26291 Another extensive test case (In reply to comment #12) > Draft patch. That patch unfortunately does

[Bug libstdc++/51811] New: [C++0x] Incorrect incrementation/decrementation of atomic pointers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51811 Bug #: 51811 Summary: [C++0x] Incorrect incrementation/decrementation of atomic pointers Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/50981] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Wrong-code for scalarizing ELEMENTAL call with absent OPTIONAL argument

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50981 --- Comment #14 from Tobias Burnus 2012-01-10 14:29:39 UTC --- (In reply to comment #13) > TODO: > * Add also tests for polymorphic components as actual argument And a test case where the dummy argument is BT_CLASS.

[Bug c++/51812] New: Virtual public inheritance leads to "undefined reference" in header files.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51812 Bug #: 51812 Summary: Virtual public inheritance leads to "undefined reference" in header files. Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCO

[Bug c++/51812] Virtual public inheritance leads to "undefined reference" in header files.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51812 --- Comment #1 from bredelin at ucla dot edu 2012-01-10 14:32:46 UTC --- Created attachment 26293 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26293 Preprocessed source

[Bug c++/51433] constexpr caching leads to incorrect dynamic initialization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51433 --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2012-01-10 14:37:30 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Tue Jan 10 14:37:26 2012 New Revision: 183065 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183065 Log: PR c++/51433 * semantics.c (cxx_eval_call_e

[Bug c++/51813] New: -fvisibility=hidden causes std::codecvt members to be undefined

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51813 Bug #: 51813 Summary: -fvisibility=hidden causes std::codecvt members to be undefined Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/51433] constexpr caching leads to incorrect dynamic initialization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51433 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/51766] [4.7 regression] sync_fetch_and_xxx atomicity

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51766 --- Comment #5 from David Edelsohn 2012-01-10 14:39:16 UTC --- I understand that fixing __sync_* is a hassle. This is why I opened a separate bug for libstdc++. While __sync_* is deprecated in favor of __atomic_*, use of __sync_* for portabilit

[Bug c++/51810] internal compiler error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51810 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/51810] internal compiler error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51810 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-10 14:43:12 UTC --- Created attachment 26294 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26294 autoreduced testcase Reduced testcase for trunk. Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation f

[Bug middle-end/51766] [4.7 regression] sync_fetch_and_xxx atomicity

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51766 --- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-10 14:48:54 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > I understand that fixing __sync_* is a hassle. This is why I opened a > separate > bug for libstdc++. > > While __sync_* is deprecated in favor of __at

[Bug ada/39138] Fix Copyright Dates Before 4.5.0 Branch (or sooner)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39138 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug lto/49677] GCC 4.6.0 LTO files not compatible with GCC 4.6.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49677 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug lto/44965] lto option code breaks file format with each added option

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44965 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added CC||edwintorok at gmail dot com --- Commen

[Bug c/49934] gcc 4.6.1 messes up code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49934 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/33123] internal compiler error: in decode_addr_const ( arm-linux-gcc 3.4.6)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33123 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug java/48515] [4.6] GCJ fails to compile jni.cc because of reflection errors on i686-w64-mingw32 target

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48515 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c++/51812] Virtual public inheritance leads to "undefined reference" in header files.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51812 --- Comment #2 from bredelin at ucla dot edu 2012-01-10 15:09:09 UTC --- Also note that the bug report is based on a snapshot of 4.7 that was taken on Jan 7, 2012. $ g++-4.7 -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=/usr/bin/g++-4.7 COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER

[Bug bootstrap/50103] gcc-4.4.6/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.md:153: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50103 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/51330] Compiling issue that seems specific to i586 with gcc 4.6

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51330 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/50981] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Wrong-code for scalarizing ELEMENTAL call with absent OPTIONAL argument

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50981 --- Comment #15 from Mikael Morin 2012-01-10 15:15:47 UTC --- I'm having a look.

[Bug lto/47891] GCC 4.6/4.7 LTO not worked reliable on Windows target

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47891 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/30826] alignment error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30826 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/15087] IA64: Wrong alignment for structure > 8 byte

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15087 --- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-10 15:23:35 UTC --- *** Bug 30826 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug fortran/51809] [4.7 Regression][OOP] ICE (segfault) depending on USE statements order

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51809 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug target/15087] IA64: Wrong alignment for structure > 8 byte

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15087 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |SUSPENDED --- Comment #7 from Richard

[Bug middle-end/51766] [4.7 regression] sync_fetch_and_xxx atomicity

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51766 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-01-10 15:29:09 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > > It says above them "In most cases, these > > builtins are considered a full barrier." and only __sync_lock_test_and_set > > and > > __sync_lock_release

[Bug java/19325] Invoking gcj -C on a list of source files consumes insane amount of memory

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19325 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug rtl-optimization/20367] alias analysis doesn't take into account that variables that haven't their address taken can't alias arbitrary MEMs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20367 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/20675] Small targets without 64 bit long long support are can't bootstrap GCC.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20675 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/21855] array bounds checking elimination

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21855 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug rtl-optimization/23168] [OOM] GCC 4.0.1 OOM's while compiling VBA (works with 3.4.x)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23168 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libgcj/23216] IncompatibleClassChangeError when Using Java-Gnome

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23216 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/51809] [4.7 Regression][OOP] ICE (segfault) depending on USE statements order

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51809 --- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2012-01-10 15:49:52 UTC --- Some debugging. To make it easier, I split the test case into two files and I look at the one which only consists of "module merry_ICE". The ICE occurs for writing the .mod file of m

[Bug target/24419] ix86 prologue clobbers memory when it shouldn't

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24419 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/25249] inconsistent code for template function calls

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25249 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/25372] Aligned args on IA64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25372 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/25622] undefined reference to `_gfortran_st_set_nml_var_dim'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25622 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug bootstrap/25511] bootstrap-lean fails

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25511 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/21855] array bounds checking elimination

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21855 Andrew Haley changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|WAITING Resolution|INVALID

[Bug gcov-profile/26313] arm-elf-gcc with gcov option do not work

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26313 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/27140] Compiling LLVM now takes nearly 5x as long with 4.1 as it did with 4.0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27140 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/27308] Compiler generates incorrect code when calling a function with the result of an inline function as parameter

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27308 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug other/27043] building Ada rts does not find 'as'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27043 Kai Tietz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c/28233] internal compiler error: in make_decl_rtl, at varasm.c:752

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28233 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW --- Comment #8 from Richard Guenth

[Bug debug/28547] Large compile time regression with -g

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28547 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug java/21855] array bounds checking elimination

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21855 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW Component|tree-optimizati

[Bug java/21855] array bounds checking elimination

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21855 --- Comment #16 from Andrew Haley 2012-01-10 16:26:51 UTC --- (In reply to comment #15) > (In reply to comment #14) > > (In reply to comment #13) > > > We can't optimize this because System.out.println can change args[]. > > > > That's the whole

[Bug lto/51806] -flto ignores -Werror

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51806 --- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-10 16:28:07 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Jan 10 16:27:55 2012 New Revision: 183069 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183069 Log: 2012-01-10 Richard Guenther PR middle-

[Bug lto/51806] -flto ignores -Werror

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51806 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug java/21855] array bounds checking elimination

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21855 --- Comment #17 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-10 16:30:30 UTC --- (In reply to comment #16) > (In reply to comment #15) > > (In reply to comment #14) > > > (In reply to comment #13) > > > > We can't optimize this because System.out.println can ch

[Bug c++/51810] internal compiler error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51810 --- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf 2012-01-10 16:32:23 UTC --- Created attachment 26295 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26295 another reduced testcase The testcase from Comment 4 doesn't work on my machine. Here is anoth

[Bug java/21855] array bounds checking elimination

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21855 --- Comment #18 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-10 16:35:46 UTC --- (In reply to comment #17) > (In reply to comment #16) > > (In reply to comment #15) > > > (In reply to comment #14) > > > > (In reply to comment #13) > > > > > We can't optimize th

[Bug libfortran/51803] gfortran getcwd at startup

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51803 --- Comment #3 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-10 16:39:33 UTC --- Mike Stump

[Bug libfortran/51803] gfortran getcwd at startup

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51803 --- Comment #4 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-10 16:44:24 UTC --- Oh, a related, but different bug would be, if getcwd isn't on the system, or fails, I think "." might be better than "", as we form getcwd '/' argv[0], and that doesn't make a

[Bug java/21855] array bounds checking elimination

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21855 --- Comment #19 from Andrew Haley 2012-01-10 16:44:16 UTC --- (In reply to comment #17) > (In reply to comment #16) > > (In reply to comment #15) > > > (In reply to comment #14) > > > > (In reply to comment #13) > > > > > We can't optimize this b

[Bug middle-end/51516] [trans-mem] problem with TM clone aliases

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51516 --- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez 2012-01-10 16:50:56 UTC --- Author: aldyh Date: Tue Jan 10 16:50:41 2012 New Revision: 183070 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183070 Log: PR middle-end/51516 * trans-mem.c

[Bug middle-end/51516] [trans-mem] problem with TM clone aliases

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51516 Aldy Hernandez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug rtl-optimization/37782] [4.4 regression] Stage2 ada compiler miscompiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37782 --- Comment #14 from Joseph S. Myers 2012-01-10 16:55:44 UTC --- Author: jsm28 Date: Tue Jan 10 16:55:40 2012 New Revision: 183071 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183071 Log: Revert: 2008-09-18 Andrew Pinski

[Bug rtl-optimization/37451] Extra addition for doloop in some cases

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37451 --- Comment #8 from Joseph S. Myers 2012-01-10 16:55:44 UTC --- Author: jsm28 Date: Tue Jan 10 16:55:40 2012 New Revision: 183071 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183071 Log: Revert: 2008-09-18 Andrew Pinski

[Bug java/21855] array bounds checking elimination

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21855 --- Comment #21 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-10 16:57:36 UTC --- The Java frontend could handle this by performing loads of the length field via a SAVE_EXPR and sharing this across a function. That way CSE would happen automagically.

[Bug java/47456] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault while using jna

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47456 Kai Tietz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug java/21855] array bounds checking elimination

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21855 --- Comment #20 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-10 16:55:52 UTC --- (In reply to comment #19) > > > No. What you can do is, via the method I outlined, tell GCC that > > args is to be treated similar to a local automatic variable - thus > > it cann

[Bug java/21855] array bounds checking elimination

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21855 --- Comment #22 from Andrew Haley 2012-01-10 17:08:30 UTC --- (In reply to comment #21) > The Java frontend could handle this by performing loads of the length field > via a SAVE_EXPR and sharing this across a function. That way CSE would > happ

  1   2   >