--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
08:13 ---
(Of course, the root cause of this problem is that fold is being called before
gimplification, which Nathan and I have sermonized about previously.)
There's interesting interplay between this PR and PR
Hi, in the Hecl programming language, I do this:
public String toString() throws HeclException {
Vector v = ListThing.get(new Thing(new HashThing(val)));
ListThing newthing = new ListThing(v);
return newthing.toString();
}
Apparently, that should generate a
--- Additional Comments From igodard at pacbell dot net 2005-03-04 08:51
---
Sorry guys :-) After a while I forget, and then I run across it again :-(
Ivan
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20311
--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04 09:07
---
Created an attachment (id=8326)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8326action=view)
Patch I'm testing
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20282
In:
templateint struct s1{ s1(int); };
templateint i s1i::s1(int j){}
templateint struct s;
template struct s0 { s(int); };
template struct s1 { s(int); };
templateint i si::s(int j) {}
int main() {
s0 a(5);
s10 b(5);
}
you get:
~/ootbc/members/src$ g++ foo.cc
foo.cc:10: error:
--- Additional Comments From wanderer at rsu dot ru 2005-03-04 10:43
---
Current CVS mainline bootstrap fine at self with and without reverting patch
in #30.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17526
--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-03-04
10:47 ---
This is really _very_ inefficient, by a factor of 20.
Some test numbers:
$ g77 write-record.f
$ time ./a.out
real0m1.819s
user0m1.774s
sys 0m0.044s
$ gfortran write-record.f
$ time
--- Additional Comments From wanderer at rsu dot ru 2005-03-04 11:27
---
Ops... sorry.
I withdraw my prev. note.
Current mainline CVS GCC fail bootstrap with reverted patch in #30
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04 11:27
---
- a simpler compiler
- simpler interfacing with C code
- less excess precision problems with floating point returns (REAL*4 returns are
not returned as REAL*8)
- faster executables
- we'll never get this if we
With:
int
f1 (void)
{
int x = 4, y;
__asm__ volatile (imull %3\n\tshrdl %%cl,%1,%0
: +a,a (x), =d,d (y)
: %0,0 (x), m,r (8), c,c (2));
return x;
}
int
f2 (void)
{
int x = 4, y;
__asm__ volatile (imull %3\n\tshrdl %%cl,%1,%0
:
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04 11:40
---
BTW, most (if not all) of the affected functions in BLAS / LAPACK are auxiliary
functions, i.e. are only called from within those libraries. Changing the
interface will only affect functions called from the
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|aph at gcc dot gnu dot org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
||dot org
I had a derived class template which was making use of two protected
variables of its base class. Now using GCC 3.4.4 (which implements the two-
stage dependant name lookup) Ive read that you need to use the prefix this-
or the prefix BaseClassNameT to avoid getting a undeclared variable
I have this test program:
struct P { char a; int b; } __attribute__ ((__packed__));
int f (char i) { return ++ i; }
int f (int i) { return ++ i; }
int f (char * i) { return ++ * i; }
int f (int * i) { return ++ * i; }
int main ()
{
P x;
x.a = 1;
x.b = 1;
int i = f (x.a) + f (x.b) +
--- Additional Comments From falk at debian dot org 2005-03-04 12:51
---
(In reply to comment #0)
Probably, this is not a bug but a feature
Indeed, it is.
but what can I do
to my program, which needs a lot of packed structures and runs fine
with gcc3.3?
Nothing. It only worked by
--- Additional Comments From olh at suse dot de 2005-03-04 13:30 ---
thanks Jakub, this patch fixes bootstrap for me.
tested on mainline and gcc-4_0-branch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20282
Compiling the program
#define _XOPEN_SOURCE 600
#include math.h
int main()
{
double x = HUGE_VAL;
}
using
/opt/sfw/bin/gcc --std=gnu99 a.c
gives
a.c: In function `main':
a.c:6: error: incompatible types in initialization
I'll attach the preprocessor output if I can; in short,
HUGE_VAL
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-03-04 14:13
---
(In reply to comment #10)
Upon further thought, and agreeing that the explicit use of an asm macro is
likely
the most appropriate near term solution; it would appear the most ideal longer
term solution would be
--- Additional Comments From martin at v dot loewis dot de 2005-03-04
14:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=8327)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8327action=view)
preprocessor output
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20317
--- Additional Comments From ericw at evcohs dot com 2005-03-04 14:19
---
(In reply to comment #11)
Paul,
Everybody who works on the AVR toolchain knows that it would be desirable to
have attributes to allow objects to be put in and accessed in different address
spaces. This has
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
14:26 ---
Confirmed.
Patch posted here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-03/msg00326.html.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
14:27 ---
So closing as a dup of bug 20282 since it was confirmed that this was the same
bug.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 20282 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
14:27 ---
*** Bug 20305 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20282
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
14:51 ---
The only poor diagnostic is that in the following code:
templateint struct s;
templateint i si::s(int j) {}
We don't print out si but print out sanonymous which really is the same
problem as the
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
14:51 ---
*** Bug 20313 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
14:57 ---
I hear from Richard Earnshaw that this also fails on ARM too which means that
it is a generic bug.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
15:04 ---
Confirmed, reduced self contained testcase:
class t
{
public String toString() throws java.io.IOException
{return ;}
}
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-03-04 15:05
---
Here's another very nice example from PR 20313:
-
templateint j struct s;
templateint i si::s(int j) {}
-
Note that the definition of the constructor is
--- Additional Comments From cjb at mrao dot cam dot ac dot uk 2005-03-04
15:11 ---
I'm not sure that I'm reproducing this; I'm getting the loop reported as
vectorized:
% ./g++ -O2 -msse2 -march=pentium4 -ftree-vectorize -fdump-tree-vect-stats
-ftree-vectorizer-verbose=9 -S 18546.cpp
--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-03-04 15:15
---
This seems to be more a problem of precompiled headers on solaris than
anything else...
W.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
15:18 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
I'm not sure that I'm reproducing this; I'm getting the loop reported as
vectorized:
No you are no missing reading. This is vectorized on x86 but not on PPC.
--
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-03-04 15:26
---
(In reply to comment #12)
Everybody who works on the AVR toolchain knows that it would be desirable to
have attributes to allow objects to be put in and accessed in different
address
spaces. This has
--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04 15:28
---
The thing that was stopping me from commiting was that I'm now seeing
FAIL: gcc.dg/cpp/arith-3.c (test for bogus messages, line 257)
regression on i386 and x86-64 when starting bootstrap from 20050228
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
15:28 ---
Subject: Bug 20253
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-04 15:28:46
Modified files:
gcc:
It would be useful to have a function attribute which specifies that the
function never returns NULL.
Currently the GCC 4 snapshots with -O2 -Wall generate ~15 spurious warnings in
the Subversion source code which could be eliminated if a couple of functions
could be marked as never returning
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
15:32 ---
Subject: Bug 18362
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-04 15:32:44
Modified files:
gcc/java :
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
15:33 ---
Subject: Bug 20305
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-04 15:33:24
Modified files:
libcpp : ChangeLog macro.c
Log message:
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
15:33 ---
Subject: Bug 20282
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-04 15:33:24
Modified files:
libcpp : ChangeLog macro.c
Log message:
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
15:35 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
The thing that was stopping me from commiting was that I'm now seeing
FAIL: gcc.dg/cpp/arith-3.c (test for bogus messages, line 257)
regression on i386 and x86-64 when starting
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
15:35 ---
Fixed also on the 4.0 branch, 3.4 is a little harder as the loop has changed.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
15:38 ---
Confirmed, PR 19476 is case which depends on this.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
15:38 ---
Subject: Bug 18362
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-04 15:38:14
Modified files:
gcc/java : ChangeLog class.c
Log message:
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
15:39 ---
Subject: Bug 20282
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-04 15:39:37
Modified files:
libcpp :
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
15:39 ---
Subject: Bug 20305
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-04 15:39:37
Modified files:
libcpp :
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04 15:43
---
I'm using:
./cc1 x.c
on
#define APPEND2(NUM, SUFF) NUM ## SUFF
#define APPEND(NUM, SUFF) APPEND2(NUM, SUFF)
# define MAX_INT 9223372036854775807
#define TARG_MIN (-TARG_MAX - 1)
#define TARG_MAX APPEND
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |nathan at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|NEW
Related discussion:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-03/msg00181.html
Given the following,
static char const rcsid[] =
$Id: f.c,v 5.4 1993/11/09 17:40:15 eggert Exp $;
int main() {}
When compiled with GCC 3.4.3, at -O2, the ident string above will _not_
appear in the executable. This is
Hi,
I am trying to install gcc 3.3.2 on AMD opetron 64 bits Linux machine and I am
getting following error.Any help would be highly appreciated.
uname -a - Linux abgixcluster.geoquest 2.4.21-4.ELsmp #1 SMP Fri Oct 3
17:32:58 EDT 2003 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Thanks
Ajay
loading cache
Hi,
I am trying to install gcc 3.3.2 on AMD opetron 64 bits Linux machine
and I am
getting following error.Any help would be highly appreciated.
uname -a - Linux abgixcluster.geoquest 2.4.21-4.ELsmp #1 SMP Fri Oct 3
17:32:58 EDT 2003 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Thanks
Ajay
loading cache
Related discussion:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-03/msg00181.html
Related bug report: Bug #20319
I tried adding a section attribute to a static constant string declaration
which is otherwise not referenced, in the hope that the compiler would
retain the static constant because it had been
--- Additional Comments From ajve at chevrontexaco dot com 2005-03-04
17:27 ---
Hi,
I am trying to install gcc 3.3.2 on AMD opetron 64 bits Linux machine and I am
getting following error.Any help would be highly appreciated.
uname -a - Linux abgixcluster.geoquest 2.4.21-4.ELsmp #1 SMP
libcpp/expr.c is miscompiled when compiled with gcc-4_0-branch GCC on x86-64
(and likely i386 as well).
expr.c miscompiled that way causes a testsuite regression on arith-3.c:
FAIL: gcc.dg/cpp/arith-3.c (test for bogus messages, line 257)
Self-contained testcase that reproduces the problem is:
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-03-04
17:53 ---
I don't object that this feature is indeed needed, but I would still like to
see a reduced testcase from Subversion which shows a bogus warning that could
be fixed with this attribute.
BTW, Diego, once
--- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com 2005-03-04
17:58 ---
Subject: Re: New: Solaris 10 and HUGE_VAL
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, martin at v dot loewis dot de wrote:
I'll attach the preprocessor output if I can; in short,
HUGE_VAL expands to __builtin_huge_val, which
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at redhat dot com 2005-03-04 17:59
---
Subject: Re: RFE: add attribute to specify that a function never
returns NULL
giovannibajo at libero dot it wrote:
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-03-04
17:53 ---
--- Additional Comments From mgilbert at airborne dot nrl dot navy dot mil
2005-03-04 18:01 ---
I updated all cygwin packages recently as well as gfortran before the hd crash
and ensuing lack of cygwin build on gfortran.org. However, I just got around to
testing the code again. It
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
18:09 ---
Use the attribute used to keep the constants.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
18:10 ---
Surely this is the same as bug 19933?
Right, Duplicates with a big D. :-)
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19933 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
18:10 ---
*** Bug 20317 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
18:11 ---
Confirmed by duplicate.
--
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
Keywords|
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.0 Regression]|[4.0/4.1 Regression]
|Miscompilation of |Miscompilation of
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
18:22 ---
How did you configure GCC and how did you build it?
Also why do you want 3.3.2, 3.4.3 is out and have some fixes for fortran too.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From ericw at evcohs dot com 2005-03-04 18:24
---
Could this problem be because it needs the --with-dwarf2 configure switch (for
the __EH_FRAME_BEGIN__)?
Reference: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-07/msg00352.html
--
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
18:29 ---
Nope, -fkeep-static-consts only control when optimization is not on:
From the docs:
Emit variables declared @code{static const} when optimization isn't
turned
on, even if the variables aren't
--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04 18:30
---
From initial skimming, this sounds like combiner bug.
(insn 78 41 79 0 (set (reg:CC 17 flags)
(compare:CC (reg:DI 58 [ e$b.9 ])
(reg:DI 59 [ e$b.8 ]))) 2 {cmpdi_1_insn_rex64}
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
18:31 ---
Fixed. thanks Jakub for looking into this.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--
Bug 20305 depends on bug 20282, which changed state.
Bug 20282 Summary: [4.0/4.1 Regression] gcc4 can not bootstrap itself anymore
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20282
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04 18:36
---
I vastly overstated the failures in SPEC CPU2000 for this problem: ammp fails
with both -m32 and -m64, and fma3d and sixtrack fail with -m32.
Mainline GCC built last night still gets all of the testsuite and
--- Additional Comments From ajve at chevrontexaco dot com 2005-03-04
18:53 ---
Thanks Pinskia for the reply.
Currently we are using GCC 3.3.2 on all the other machines and we have to go
with this for sometime before we decide to upgrade gcc on all the machines.
I use
1. ./configure
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
18:55 ---
Can you read the instruction here: http://gcc.gnu.org/install/ and try
building in a different
directory other than the source directory?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20320
--- Additional Comments From martin at v dot loewis dot de 2005-03-04
19:01 ---
Right. I did not find it because it does not have Solaris in its subject.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20317
--- Additional Comments From aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
19:08 ---
Subject: [PR c++/19199] don't turn cond_expr lvalue into min_expr rvalue
(continued from PR c++/20280)
On Mar 4, 2005, Mark Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, looking at this more
--- Additional Comments From aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
19:23 ---
Subject: Re: [PR c++/20280] hoist indirect_ref out of addressable cond_exprs
On Mar 4, 2005, Mark Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your reading is logical, but it depends on exactly what lvalue for a
--- Additional Comments From bjoern dot m dot haase at web dot de
2005-03-04 19:38 ---
In reply to comment #10.
I agree with you Jörg, it is not a dramatic loss if you have a bit less
efficient use of volatile pointers :-) and IMHO anybody in the avr community
could live with it. I
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||bjoern dot m dot haase at
||web dot de
--- Additional Comments From bjoern dot m dot haase at web dot de
2005-03-04 19:51 ---
Hi,
IMHO everyone working on the avr back-end is aware of this problem. The
difficulty is, that the present architecture of the avr back-end does not
easily permit to improve this case: Every
In the program below, the optional argument arg is used as part of the
specification expression for the length of a string. This is forbidden by
section 7.1.6.2; constraint (2) of the F95 standard (and wouldn't make
much sense anyway - what happens when the function is called without the
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||bjoern dot m dot haase at
||web dot de
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20222
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
20:19 ---
This is a bug in the middle-end:
;; if (ABS_EXPR xi1 != 1) (void) 0; else goto L3;
(insn 29 27 30 (set (reg:HI 44)
(mem/i:HI (symbol_ref:HI (xi1) [flags 0x40] var_decl 0x415784a4
xi1) [2 xi1+0 S2
--- Additional Comments From gary at intrepid dot com 2005-03-04 20:24
---
Emit variables declared @code{static const} when optimization isn't turned
on, even if the variables aren't referenced.
How odd. I should've checked the docs, but this brief explanation in the
help line made a
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
20:33 ---
Don't belive the comments in the source. Also the --help is way out of date.
you want to use the used
attribute like so:
static char const rcsid[]__attribute__((used)) =
$Id: f.c,v 5.4 1993/11/09
--- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com 2005-03-04
20:42 ---
Subject: Re: -fkeep-static-consts with -O asserted doesn't keep
consts
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Don't belive the comments in the source. Also the --help is way out of
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
21:04 ---
Subject: Bug 19673
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-04 21:03:46
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog trans-expr.c
On a Tru64 alpha system, when I compile a file containing:
#include iostream
using g++ 3.4.3 as follows:
g++ -c -gcoff
I get the following output:
mips-tfile, /tmp//ccnFchPc.s:1071 compiler error, badly formed
#.def (internal line
--- Additional Comments From gary at intrepid dot com 2005-03-04 21:54
---
Here is some detail on my proposed change in behavior:
1) Change the default setting to -fno-keep-static-consts:
/* Nonzero means that we should emit static const variables
regardless of whether or not
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
22:21 ---
Subject: Bug 19673
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-04 22:21:17
Modified files:
gcc/fortran:
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04 22:29
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
every frontend has one, treelang should have one as well
--
Summary: bugzilla is missing a treelang component
Product: gcc
Version: 3.4.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: other
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19673
the backend (tree1) is installed under the same name as the driver. if it does
that, please symlink it, don't copy it. and maybe don't install it as tree1, but
treelang, or something like this.
--
Summary: treelang does install the backend as a driver
Product: gcc
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
22:55 ---
Fixed. I added one.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|other |treelang
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20326
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
22:59 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 7055 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
22:59 ---
*** Bug 20324 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-04
23:22 ---
Subject: Re: [PR c++/20103] failure to gimplify constructors for addressable
types
On Mar 3, 2005, Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think this is the wrong approach. The front-end and not
the
1 - 100 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
