http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54863
Bug #: 54863
Summary: [4.8 regresssion] multiple 'comparison between signed
and unsigned integer expressions' errors in
simplify-rtx.c:simplify_truncation broke m68k-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54864
Bug #: 54864
Summary: Decltype in nested class
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54862
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54863
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54862
--- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-10-09
07:41:22 UTC ---
I got the exact same failure with gcc-4.8-20121007 on m68k-linux.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54860
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.8 Regression]: build |[4.8 Regression]: build
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54754
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-10-09
08:16:36 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Oct 9 08:16:13 2012
New Revision: 192240
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192240
Log:
PR libstdc++/54754
* include/p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54754
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54257
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53365
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54257
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gseanmcg at gmail dot com
--- Com
> On that machine, the entire user-space is built without any static
> libstdc++
> libraries, so it's quite annoying (and unexpected) to have to install them
> for
> Ada bootstrap. Couldn't Ada use the g++/libstdc++ bits from the compiler
> being built?
That would probably be better indeed, it's
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
--- Comment #4 from charlet at adacore dot com
2012-10-09 08:34:03 UTC ---
> On that machine, the entire user-space is built without any static
> libstdc++
> libraries, so it's quite annoying (and unexpected) to have to install them
> for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54661
--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton 2012-10-09 08:37:10
UTC ---
Author: nickc
Date: Tue Oct 9 08:37:00 2012
New Revision: 192241
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192241
Log:
PR target/54661
* config/mcore/m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54661
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton 2012-10-09 08:39:03
UTC ---
This was due to a silly typo, now fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54865
Bug #: 54865
Summary: [parallel mode] tests timeout on power64
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54866
Bug #: 54866
Summary: gcc.target/i386/long-double-80-7.c FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54866
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54826
Andreas Arnez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #4 from Andr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54867
Bug #: 54867
Summary: gcc.dg/pr44194-1.c FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
Bug #: 54868
Summary: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/forwprop-22.c FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53934
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
Bug #: 54869
Summary: ext/random/simd_fast_mersenne_twister_engine/cons/defa
ult.cc FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54739
--- Comment #11 from Nick Clifton 2012-10-09
09:22:00 UTC ---
Author: nickc
Date: Tue Oct 9 09:21:47 2012
New Revision: 192244
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192244
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/54739
* con
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54870
Bug #: 54870
Summary: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_4.f90 FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54871
Bug #: 54871
Summary: [4.8 regression] gfortran.dg/vector_subscript_1.f90
FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54856
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54871
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54872
Bug #: 54872
Summary: [4.8 regression] abi_check FAILs on Solaris 10/11
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54866
--- Comment #1 from Uros Bizjak 2012-10-09 09:45:15
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> /var/gcc/regression/trunk/9-gcc/build/gcc/include/xmmintrin.h:32:3: error:
> #erro
> r "SSE instruction set not enabled"
> /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/loc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-09
09:49:08 UTC ---
Guys, I don't have Sparc-Solaris machines and didn't design the testcase. To be
honest, I didn't even realize so far that this simd_* variant was meant for
other targets besides
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54865
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||singler at kit dot edu
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54873
Bug #: 54873
Summary: runtime/pprof FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse 2012-10-09 09:57:58
UTC ---
I expected these 2 lines to disqualify a basic x86 target:
/* { dg-require-effective-target vect_double } */
/* { dg-require-effective-target vect_perm } */
but sadly it look
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54862
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
Bug #: 54874
Summary: OOP: polymorphic allocation with SOURCE
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54784
--- Comment #9 from Salvatore Filippone
2012-10-09 09:59:28 UTC ---
Just opened 54874. May or may not be a duplicate of this one.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54194
--- Comment #9 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-10-09 10:01:37 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 9 10:01:31 2012
New Revision: 192246
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192246
Log:
2012-10-09 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
--- Comment #1 from Salvatore Filippone
2012-10-09 10:02:41 UTC ---
Interestingly, taking out the outer container p% makes the code work...
---
[sfilippo@jacobi bug34]$ gfo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54194
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54867
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|sparc*-*-solaris2* |sparc*-*-solaris2*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-09
10:20:45 UTC ---
Can also be something even more trivial, because I bet we didn't exercise much
the codepath for __SSE2__ undefined before committing the code.
Actually - and this is a questio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
--- Comment #2 from Salvatore Filippone
2012-10-09 10:37:13 UTC ---
And it is also a regression, as it works on 4.6.3:
---
[sfilippo@jacobi bug34]$ gfortran -v
Using built-in specs.
COL
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54699
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-10-09
10:48:30 UTC ---
> And it is also a regression, as it works on 4.6.3: ...
Well, this may be more complicated. On x86_64-apple-darwin10, compiling the
attached test with 4.6.3 gives:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
--- Comment #4 from Salvatore Filippone
2012-10-09 11:03:10 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> > And it is also a regression, as it works on 4.6.3: ...
>
> Well, this may be more complicated. On x86_64-apple-darwin10, compiling the
> at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #4 from Ulrich Drepper 2012-10-09
11:23:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> The new ext/random/simd_fast_mersenne_twister_engine/cons/default.cc testcase
> FAILs on Solaris/SPARC (both 32 and 64-bit):
That's expected. I m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-09
11:28:45 UTC ---
Ok, thanks, I missed that remark of yours. Well, at present nothing prevents
people with big endian machines to try to use the code, and we unconditionally
run the testsuite. Th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-10-09
11:35:19 UTC ---
> ... I don't have access to any big endian machines
> and therefore didn't even try to make it work.
AFAICT there are big endian machines in the CompileFarm (see
http
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-10-09
11:39:17 UTC ---
As Nathan Froyd said at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg00772.html
"Please try to consider what's best for all the people who use GCC, not just
the cases
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini 2012-10-09
11:44:09 UTC ---
Boy, nobody cites me like that, at least, not while I'm still alive.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54862
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
> > On that machine, the entire user-space is built without any static
> > libstdc++
> > libraries, so it's quite annoying (and unexpected) to have to install
> > them for
> > Ada bootstrap. Couldn't Ada use the g++/libstdc++ bits from the compiler
> > being
> > built?
>
> No, this is stage 1 so
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
--- Comment #6 from charlet at adacore dot com
2012-10-09 13:09:38 UTC ---
> > On that machine, the entire user-space is built without any static
> > libstdc++
> > libraries, so it's quite annoying (and unexpected) to have to install
> >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54867
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth 2012-10-09 13:35:01 UTC
---
Created attachment 28398
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28398
final dump
Unfortunately, this doesn't help. I'm attaching the -m64 dump for reference.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse 2012-10-09 13:37:56
UTC ---
Maybe moving the test from tree-ssa/ to vect/ would be enough? Seems like
vect.exp uses check_vect_support_and_set_flags (I don't see how to use that for
a single test).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou 2012-10-09
13:37:57 UTC ---
> Well, we could first build g++ and libstdc++, and then Ada I guess, but
> that's probably too ambitious.
Very likely indeed, since you need to have binary compatibility betw
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54875
Bug #: 54875
Summary: Forward declare enums cannot be used as a template
argument
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54866
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth 2012-10-09 13:40:32 UTC
---
Author: ro
Date: Tue Oct 9 13:40:21 2012
New Revision: 192253
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192253
Log:
Fix gcc.target/i386/long-double-80-7.c (PR ta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54866
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54845
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54834
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Schlüter 2012-10-09
14:00:43 UTC ---
Created attachment 28399
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28399
toplevel config.log
I'm attaching the toplevel config.log. From it I read that the compiler is
c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54834
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Schlüter 2012-10-09
14:06:19 UTC ---
I ran make in a directory with a pre-existing build, ao maybe that include file
was an old leftover. Please don't invest any further time in this now, I'll
try a clean build first.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54860
--- Comment #8 from dodji at seketeli dot org
2012-10-09 14:08:20 UTC ---
I can reproduce it now. I guess I shouldn't look at bugs around
midnight or something.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54808
--- Comment #3 from chgena at mail dot ru 2012-10-09 14:10:09 UTC ---
Some 4.8 betas seem to be affected too
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54837
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2012-10-09
14:14:36 UTC ---
DECL_ABSTRACT_ORIGIN (parm) == aexp
(gdb) call debug_tree (parm)
unit size
align 32 symtab -165706496 alias set 2 canonical type 0x760c85e8
precis
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54875
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54875
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dodji at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54837
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2012-10-09
14:40:12 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 9 14:40:01 2012
New Revision: 192255
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192255
Log:
2012-10-09 Richard Guenther
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
--- Comment #6 from Salvatore Filippone
2012-10-09 14:46:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > I am getting the following output from the test case. It seems wrong, I do
> > not
> > see why allocating the pol
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09 14:47:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Well, this may be more complicated. On x86_64-apple-darwin10, compiling the
> attached test with 4.6.3 gives:
> [...]
> a.out(97528) malloc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #9 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-10-09 14:50:31 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 9 14:50:19 2012
New Revision: 192256
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192256
Log:
2012-10-09 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54860
--- Comment #9 from Dodji Seketeli 2012-10-09
14:52:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 28400
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28400
Candidate fix patch
Guys, could you please test this patch on your trees to see if it fixe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-10-09 15:05:31 UTC ---
> --- Comment #4 from Ulrich Drepper
> 2012-10-09 11:23:41 UTC ---
> (In reply to comment #0)
>> The new ext/random/simd_fast_mersenne_twister_engine/cons
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54837
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29383
--- Comment #8 from Andy Nelson 2012-10-09
15:19:36 UTC ---
Interesting. Didn't see this dup originally in my search.
In response to your other email (that it is very very hard), can you explain
a bit why if you've got the time/inclinati
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54876
Bug #: 54876
Summary: [4.8 Regression] LTO bootstrap broken, streaming
garbage-collected BLOCK
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54876
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54876
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener 2012-10-09
15:29:12 UTC ---
Err,
static tree
prune_expression_for_jf_1 (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees, void *)
{
if (EXPR_P (*tp))
SET_EXPR_LOCATION (*tp, UNKNOWN_LOCATION);
else
*walk_s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51228
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53397
Venkataramanan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53763
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
--- Comment #8 from Salvatore Filippone
2012-10-09 16:02:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > (In reply to comment #0)
> > > I am getting the following output from the test case. It seems wrong, I
> > > do n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53763
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-10-09 16:09:39 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 9 16:09:32 2012
New Revision: 192263
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192263
Log:
2012-10-09 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53763
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
--- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09 16:15:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> I can confirm that patching my 4.7.2 source tree fixes not just the test case
> but also the code it was derived from, on x86_64-linux.
Ve
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52733
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53520
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54860
davem at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||davem at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52961
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54876
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52961
--- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-10-09
16:58:36 UTC ---
In any case, there are only 3 warnings in -Wempty-body. All of them seem worth
to warn by default.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29383
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52961
--- Comment #8 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-10-09
17:06:25 UTC ---
The problem of default warnings without options is that default warnings are
often the most useful and, hence, the ones that people would like to make an
error with -Werror=. U
1 - 100 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
