--- Comment #15 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-20 23:15
---
There appears to be an design inconsistency in the way that we have specified
the various dataflow problems with respect to the eq notes.
I hate eq notes.
In the rd patch that just went in where we trim the
--- Comment #17 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-20 23:27
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] gfortran.dg/array_constructor_9.f90
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #16 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-20 23:22
> ---
> I favo
--- Comment #19 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-21 13:02
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] gfortran.dg/array_constructor_9.f90
bonzini at gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #18 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-01-21 08:04 ---
> I agree with Steven. The tr
--- Comment #21 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-21 13:25
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] gfortran.dg/array_constructor_9.f90
bonzini at gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #20 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-01-21 13:21 ---
> Subject: Re: [4.3 Regr
--- Comment #27 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-21 15:36
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] gfortran.dg/array_constructor_9.f90
bonzini at gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #26 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-01-21 14:54 ---
> Subject: Re: [4.3 Regr
--- Comment #28 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-22 13:35
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] gfortran.dg/array_constructor_9.f90
zadeck at naturalbridge dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #27 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-21 15:36
> ---
> Su
--- Comment #30 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-22 13:58
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] gfortran.dg/array_constructor_9.f90
Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
> zadeck at naturalbridge dot com wrote:
>
>> --- Comment #27 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2
--- Comment #31 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-22 14:35
---
resolved with the patch referenced in comment 30.
--
zadeck at naturalbridge dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-22 22:15
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-15.c
execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops
dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote:
> --- Comment #2 from dave at hiau
--- Comment #6 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-01-23 23:22
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-15.c
execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #5 from danglin at gcc dot
--- Comment #3 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-02-06 16:26
---
The dataflow changes caused, at least, the latest level of messing this up by
splitting, combining and removing a large number of passes without regard to
this antiquated system of naming the passes.
if the
--- Comment #5 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-02-12 14:56
---
Richi,
I looked at this code once but I really do not know this code at all and really
do not want to learn it. It will take a fair amount of time to try to figure
out what the underlying dataflow problem is and
Summary: heisenbug in tree vectorizer
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy:
--- Comment #3 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-03-19 19:26
---
I forgot to mention that valgrind does not find anything.
kenny
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35642
--- Comment #8 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-03-20 13:59
---
Subject: Re: heisenbug in tree vectorizer
bonzini at gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #7 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-03-20 13:51 ---
> Indeed my patch exposes additional vectorization abi
Component: testsuite
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
GCC host triplet: all
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39096
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
GCC host triplet: all
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39097
--- Comment #4 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2009-10-03 23:57
---
Richard,
the problem is that at least for the linux world there are two elf
implementations that while they claim to be compatible are distinctly different
on the inside. LTO, for better or worse, needs to use
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
Kenneth Zadeck changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zadeck at naturalbridge dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
--- Comment #5 from Kenneth Zadeck 2012-05-02
20:35:47 UTC ---
For each mode larger than the word size of the machine, a factor is
computed. That factor is the number of times that mode is larger than
a word mode. A move is split if the cost
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
--- Comment #7 from Kenneth Zadeck 2012-05-02
21:19:18 UTC ---
I do apologize for the lack of heads up.that was a mistake on our part.
I am also a little skeptical about the simple rtl cost model being good
enough to encompass every machine
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
--- Comment #13 from Kenneth Zadeck
2012-05-03 13:14:31 UTC ---
The arm is one of the architectures for which lower-subreg is harmful
for some of the implementations.
kenny
On 05/03/2012 06:29 AM, Greta.Yorsh at arm dot com wrote:
> http://gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53278
Kenneth Zadeck changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zadeck at naturalbridge dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53904
Bug #: 53904
Summary: trunk has valgrind errors for
c-c++-common/torture/complex-sign-mul.c on x86-64.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Stat
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
GCC build triplet: same
GCC host triplet: ppc, x86-64, ia-32 on linux
GCC target triplet: same
http
--- Comment #3 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-12 12:46
---
I am not surprised at this at all. Given that there are no regression tests
that use -fsee and this pass is never on by default.
I will look into this.
However, the big picture is that we need to make a
--- Comment #5 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-12 18:13
---
This bug should be assigned to Mircea Namolaru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. I have
sent him mail asking that he get a proper bugzilla id.
==
The underlying problem is that see.c:273
--- Comment #4 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-14 12:05
---
This bug was fixed a long time ago, i did not realize there was a bugzilla
opened on it.
--
zadeck at naturalbridge dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-16 17:37
---
please include the preprocessed source (the .i file) and the command line to
compiler this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32335
--- Comment #1 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-16 17:45
---
Subject: Re: New: [frv] macro "DF_LIVE_IN" passed 2 arguments,
but takes just 1
mstein at phenix dot rootshell dot be wrote:
> Hello,
> there seems to be a problem compiling frv-elf-gcc:
>
--
zadeck at naturalbridge dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #4 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-17 01:23
---
Subject: Re: libgcc build failure, ICE in cselib_record_set,
at cselib.c:1508
zadeck at naturalbridge dot com wrote:
the new dse code is failing during a call to cselib. However I do not
believe that the new
--- Comment #2 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-17 13:51
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] ICE in df_refs_verify
with -O2 -fmodulo-sched for spec tests
This patch fixes the df issues with modulo scheduling. It simply never
worked and was not tested because there is no
--- Comment #6 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-17 14:01
---
Subject: Re: libgcc build failure, ICE in cselib_record_set,
at cselib.c:1508
rask at sygehus dot dk wrote:
> --- Comment #5 from rask at sygehus dot dk 2007-06-17 08:43 ---
> I agree that the i
--- Comment #5 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-17 17:52
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] ICE in df_refs_verify
with -O2 -fmodulo-sched for spec tests
committed as revision 125776
Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
> This patch fixes the df issues with modulo scheduling. It sim
--- Comment #6 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-17 17:53
---
fixed as committed.
--
zadeck at naturalbridge dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-17 20:13
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] ICE in df_lr_verify_transfer_functions,
at df-problems.c:1924
There are possibly two problems here. Fixing the first one fixes this ice.
The first problem is that after a call to
--- Comment #1 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-18 12:33
---
I believe that the failure is due to a an insn illegally sharing with a
reg_equal note. Insn 8 is modified in regmove. When this happens, the
reg_equal note in insn 22 magically changes. That reg_equal note was
--- Comment #2 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-18 12:35
---
s/cse/cse1/
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32372
--- Comment #3 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-18 13:18
---
Subject: Re: [frv] macro "DF_LIVE_IN" passed 2 arguments,
but takes just 1
:reviewmail:
patchapp at dberlin dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #2 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 200
--- Comment #4 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-18 16:48
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] ICE in df_lr_verify_transfer_functions,
at df-problems.c:1924
committed as revision 125812
zadeck at naturalbridge dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #1 from zadeck at naturalbri
--- Comment #5 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-18 16:50
---
fixed,revision 125812
--
zadeck at naturalbridge dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: bonzini at gnu dot org
ReportedBy: zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
GCC host triplet: any
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32394
--- Comment #4 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-20 17:13
---
Subject: Re: New: ICE in global_alloc, at global.c:514
rask at sygehus dot dk wrote:
> Configure gcc like this:
>
> $ [...]/configure --target m32c-unknown-elf --with-newlib--enable-sim
> -
--- Comment #8 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-20 20:12
---
Subject: Re: ICE in global_alloc, at global.c:514
rask at sygehus dot dk wrote:
> --- Comment #7 from rask at sygehus dot dk 2007-06-20 20:08 ---
> This is something I have no clue about.
>
&
--- Comment #2 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-21 12:29
---
Subject: Re: ICE in df_refs_verify, at df-scan.c:4066
rask at sygehus dot dk wrote:
> --- Comment #1 from rask at sygehus dot dk 2007-06-20 16:58 ---
> Created an attachment (id=13747)
--&
--- Comment #5 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-21 12:49
---
this was fixed with the commit.
--
zadeck at naturalbridge dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-21 13:37
---
What is the configure string that i use to recreate this?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32423
--- Comment #7 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-23 02:12
---
dave,
i have a patch for this. i am doing regtests now and will have a patch posted
first thing tomorrow.
the bug is in dce.c:deletable_insn_p. The problem is that it does not look
inside of parallels. so
--- Comment #8 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-23 15:55
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] MIPS: FAIL in gcc.dg/cleanup-[8|9|10|11].c
This patch changes dce:deletable_insn_p so that it looks at all of the
top level
clauses in a parallel to make it's decision. It wa
--- Comment #12 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-23 16:23
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] MIPS: FAIL in gcc.dg/cleanup-[8|9|10|11].c
Richard Guenther wrote:
> On 6/23/07, Kenneth Zadeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> This patch changes dce:deletable_in
--- Comment #5 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-24 01:10
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] function with asm()
does not setup stack frame
spark at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #4 from spark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-24 01:05 ---
> I
--- Comment #7 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-24 02:48
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] function with asm()
does not setup stack frame
spark at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #6 from spark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-24 02:01 ---
> (In re
--- Comment #12 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-24 12:20
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] ICE in global_alloc, at global.c:514
rask at sygehus dot dk wrote:
have you done a recent update? there have been two bugs fixed that might
effect this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-25 19:29
---
I cannot recreate this bug.
I have tried building both 32 and 64 bit compilers with both revision 125972
and the current 126001.
All of my machines are suse, so if this requires someone elses abi, I am out
--- Comment #5 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-25 20:04
---
sorry, pilot error on my part, i am too embarrassed to actually tell you what i
did.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32481
--- Comment #8 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-25 23:27
---
Subject: Re: ICE in df_refs_verify, at df-scan.c:4058
spark at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #6 from spark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-25 23:13 ---
> This patch:
>
> diff -r
--- Comment #4 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-26 02:19
---
so kazu,
is there anything that i need to do with this bug?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32423
--- Comment #16 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-26 17:27
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] MIPS: FAIL in gcc.dg/cleanup-[8|9|10|11].c
daney at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #15 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-26 17:14
> ---
> mip
--- Comment #18 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-26 17:53
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] MIPS: FAIL in gcc.dg/cleanup-[8|9|10|11].c
dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote:
> --- Comment #17 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-06-26
>
--- Comment #9 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-26 23:01
---
Subject: Re: [Bug target/32437] ICE in df_refs_verify,
at df-scan.c:4058
This patch fixes a problem introduced with the patch to fix pr32437.
In that patch we introduced recursion in dce:deleteable_insn_p in
--- Comment #20 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-27 14:39
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] MIPS: FAIL in gcc.dg/cleanup-[8|9|10|11].c
richard at codesourcery dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #19 from richard at codesourcery dot com 2007-06-27 14:37
> ---
>
--- Comment #15 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-27 18:04
---
it does not look like you ever dealt with the issue of EH_RETURN_STACKADJ_RTX
that i pointed out. That code is clearly wrong.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32418
--- Comment #17 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-27 19:30
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] ICE in global_alloc, at global.c:514
rask at sygehus dot dk wrote:
> --- Comment #16 from rask at sygehus dot dk 2007-06-27 19:15 ---
> What's wrong with the p
--- Comment #19 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-27 19:56
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] ICE in global_alloc, at global.c:514
rask at sygehus dot dk wrote:
> --- Comment #18 from rask at sygehus dot dk 2007-06-27 19:48 ---
> It has not been committ
--- Comment #20 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-27 20:15
---
I believe that rask is going to submit the patch at the end of comment #9 to
close this bug.
--
zadeck at naturalbridge dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-29 19:34
---
there is a rumor being circulated by bonzini that one of honza's unsharing
patches fixes this. However, this fails on the current truck.
One positive note is that if you add in honza's illegal sharin
--- Comment #7 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-29 21:02
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] ICE in df_refs_verify,
at df-scan.c:4065
hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #6 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-29 20:15
> ---
> Paol
--- Comment #2 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-30 02:05
---
Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]
Re: Fwd: INCOMING_RETURN_ADDR_RTX
--- Comment #3 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-30 02:10
---
I was wondering if we could do something like:
/* If we have a definition of INCOMING_RETURN_ADDR_RTX, assume that
the rest of the DWARF 2 frame unwind support is also provided. */
#if !defined
--- Comment #10 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-30 11:47
---
Richard,
Could you check to see if this bug is collateral damage from your latest fix to
deletable_insn_p. It's appearance has been tied to that function in the past.
kenny
--
zadeck at naturalb
--- Comment #22 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-30 17:24
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] MIPS: FAIL in gcc.dg/cleanup-[8|9|10|11].c
richard at codesourcery dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #21 from richard at codesourcery dot com 2007-06-30 12:26
> ---
>
--- Comment #14 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-06-30 20:11
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] function with asm()
does not setup stack frame
ian at airs dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #13 from ian at airs dot com 2007-06-30 18:08 ---
> The problem here i
--- Comment #24 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-07-01 14:45
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] MIPS: FAIL in gcc.dg/cleanup-[8|9|10|11].c
ian at airs dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #23 from ian at airs dot com 2007-06-30 17:57 ---
> The patch in comment #19
--- Comment #16 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-07-02 00:19
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] function with asm()
does not setup stack frame
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> Adding the stack pointer for asms is certainly the easiest thing to do.
>>
>
> I
--- Comment #18 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-07-02 02:45
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] function with asm()
does not setup stack frame
ian at airs dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #17 from ian at airs dot com 2007-07-02 01:45 ---
> Before I tackle the sp
--- Comment #21 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-07-02 14:12
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] function with asm()
does not setup stack frame
ian at airs dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #13 from ian at airs dot com 2007-06-30 18:08 ---
> The problem here i
--- Comment #5 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-07-02 19:12
---
Subject: Re: Runtime failure in SPEC CPU2000 benchmark
fma3d and applu
wilson at specifix dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #4 from wilson at specifix dot com 2007-07-02 18:34 ---
> Subject: Re: R
--- Comment #9 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-07-07 22:40
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of
object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files:
cannot compile
dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote:
> --- Comment
--- Comment #11 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-07-08 00:57
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of
object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files:
cannot compile
dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote:
> --- Comm
--- Comment #13 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-07-08 02:41
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of
object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files:
cannot compile
dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote:
> --- Comm
--- Comment #18 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-07-09 22:28
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of
object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files:
cannot compile
dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote:
> --- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52573
--- Comment #7 from Kenneth Zadeck 2012-12-07
13:39:10 UTC ---
alexandre,
when we did the dataflow stuff, my expertise was primarily in deciding which
problems could be applied to which of the passes and how and when to actually
(re)sol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71389
Kenneth Zadeck changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
Kenneth Zadeck changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
Kenneth Zadeck changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31412
--- Comment #22 from Kenneth Zadeck ---
if i had to put money on it, i would say that it is not dead, it is only
sleeping.
kenny
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66790
--- Comment #20 from Kenneth Zadeck ---
>> On second thoughts, for the first point, maybe a native speaker understands
>> "an available definition on any path" as "an available definition on one
>> path,
>> whatever it is", in which case the de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66790
--- Comment #23 from Kenneth Zadeck ---
This change to the doc looks fine to me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64807
Kenneth Zadeck changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64182
Kenneth Zadeck changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63427
Kenneth Zadeck changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32394
--- Comment #2 from Kenneth Zadeck ---
yeh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66311
--- Comment #5 from Kenneth Zadeck ---
thanks
> On Jul 16, 2015, at 5:12 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
> wrote:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66311
>
> Richard Biener changed:
>
> What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66311
--- Comment #10 from Kenneth Zadeck ---
I have audited the patch for the non memory management issues and it is
approved.
thanks for doing this.
kenny
On 08/04/2015 07:38 AM, mikael at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sho
--- Additional Comments From zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2005-07-18
10:50 ---
It looks pretty clear to me that this test case should be non conforming. It is
almost exactly example 2 of the committee discussion and that case is "invalid".
--
http://gcc.gnu.or
--- Additional Comments From zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2005-07-18
11:53 ---
I am not a language lawyer (at least with respect to c) but it seems that the
intent of the committee in n was to limit when you were "looking at" a
union,
Dr 257 seems to be only talking
--- Additional Comments From zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2005-07-19
20:39 ---
While it is true that this problem will go away because I removed the pass,
there still seemed to be the feeling that the reason that this was iced was that
this was goofy gimple and that that goofy gimple
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |zadeck at naturalbridge dot
|dot org |com
Status|NEW
101 - 200 of 271 matches
Mail list logo
