http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48852
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Henlich
2011-05-05 06:50:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> neither 0PFw.d nor 1PEw.dEe allow it). However, AFAICS leading blanks are
> still
> allowed as they are part of the real parts, the prohibition against emb
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48877
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48879
Summary: Compilation cannot find file asm/errno.h
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48878
Summary: Default I/O rounding on output should be round to
nearest
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48852
--- Comment #3 from Janne Blomqvist 2011-05-05 03:33:30
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> We have another PR in place that is related to this, pr31190
Thanks for the reminder.
> One thought was to hide this behind an option so that one could s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48749
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-05
02:51:06 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu May 5 02:51:01 2011
New Revision: 173414
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173414
Log:
PR c++/48749
* class.c (resolves_to_fixed_t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48877
Summary: Inline asm for rdtsc generates silly code
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedT
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48749
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-05
02:20:17 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu May 5 02:20:12 2011
New Revision: 173412
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173412
Log:
PR c++/48749
* class.c (resolves_to_fixed_t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48787
--- Comment #19 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-05-05
01:19:33 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Thu May 5 01:19:30 2011
New Revision: 173408
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173408
Log:
2011-05-04 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48787
--- Comment #20 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-05-05
01:23:50 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Thu May 5 01:23:46 2011
New Revision: 173409
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173409
Log:
2011-05-04 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19538
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-05
00:56:11 UTC ---
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#407 is no longer
open, I think [2] should be accepted
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48852
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31584
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |NEW
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakel
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29131
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-05
00:58:04 UTC ---
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_closed.html#225 is now NAD
(I think that should un-suspend several PRs)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6273
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #17 from Vincent Riviere
2011-05-04 23:59:00 UTC ---
For me the bug seems to be fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47913
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47913
--- Comment #24 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-05-04 23:23:57 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed May 4 23:23:54 2011
New Revision: 173400
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173400
Log:
2011-05-04 Marc Glisse
PR libst
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48858
--- Comment #3 from Bill Long 2011-05-04 22:40:31 UTC
---
On 5/4/11 3:28 AM, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48858
>
> (In reply to comment #1)
> [BIND(C) with OPTIONAL arguments]
>> The Intel and P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48574
--- Comment #16 from dodji at seketeli dot org
2011-05-04 21:28:49 UTC ---
Indeed. I haven't re-checked the initial test case; I have only
considered the reduced one. Sorry, my bad. I am looking into this.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48679
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48876
--- Comment #1 from mhp77 at gmx dot at 2011-05-04 21:08:09 UTC ---
Created attachment 24187
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24187
test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48876
Summary: ICE when initializing character variable with
zero-length string
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48852
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #16 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-05-04
20:24:19 UTC ---
Author: bernds
Date: Wed May 4 20:24:15 2011
New Revision: 173393
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173393
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/47612
* df-problems.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48853
--- Comment #15 from H.J. Lu 2011-05-04 19:55:15
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> (In reply to comment #13)
> > Created attachment 24184 [details]
> > gcc47-pr48853.patch
> >
> > So like this? CONST_DOUBLEs really shouldn't appear in the add
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48720
--- Comment #10 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-05-04 19:18:04 UTC ---
Author: kargl
Date: Wed May 4 19:18:01 2011
New Revision: 173392
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173392
Log:
2011-05-04 Steven G. Kargl
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48720
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48875
--- Comment #1 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2011-05-04 18:36:12 UTC ---
Created attachment 24186
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24186
BT
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48875
Summary: Segmentation fault in maybe_clone_body with
-fsyntax-only
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48708
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48872
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48708
--- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-05-04 18:25:33 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed May 4 18:25:25 2011
New Revision: 173389
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173389
Log:
Backport from mainline
2011-04-21 U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40315
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48749
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48853
--- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu 2011-05-04 18:10:24
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> Created attachment 24184 [details]
> gcc47-pr48853.patch
>
> So like this? CONST_DOUBLEs really shouldn't appear in the addresses...
It looks much better. I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48872
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler
2011-05-04 17:59:21 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> As I side remark, I'm not sure to understand why your testcases often include
> an 'int main { }' line, I don't think are about link-time problems, no? If y
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48853
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24183|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47913
--- Comment #23 from Paolo Carlini 2011-05-04
17:56:19 UTC ---
Nit (for the future): library patches are diffed from where the library
ChangeLog is.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42616
Charles Wilson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc.20.cwilson at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48869
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-04
17:46:33 UTC ---
I think it would be fine to mark_used the copy ctor in cases where it might or
might not be used.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48872
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2011-05-04
17:53:25 UTC ---
As I side remark, I'm not sure to understand why your testcases often include
an 'int main { }' line, I don't think are about link-time problems, no? If you
compile only what's the mai
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48872
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler
2011-05-04 17:38:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
an error happended when I tryied to transform my original example (using
std::declval) to a form with a minimum of library support. So let me provide
this f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40315
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-04
17:38:37 UTC ---
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_closed.html#1001 is NAD so I
think we can close this bug as INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48853
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu 2011-05-04 17:24:24
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Created attachment 24183 [details]
> gcc47-pr48853.patch
>
> Is this better?
No, it doesn't handle DW_OP_GNU_const_type:
(gdb) f 0
#0 mem_loc_descriptor (rtl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48636
--- Comment #13 from Tobias Burnus 2011-05-04
17:30:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Perhaps frontend could help us here since the descriptors are probably
> constant after they are initialized, or is there way to change existing
> descript
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48874
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48853
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24170|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48874
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48864
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2011-05-04
17:10:20 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Wed May 4 17:10:15 2011
New Revision: 173385
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173385
Log:
gcc/
2011-05-04 Tobias Burnus
PR fortr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48865
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-04
17:10:49 UTC ---
Or, as I've just done, learn how to do it in your favourite editor. For mine
(vim) it's [i to display the value and [^i to jump to the definition, which
seems at least as good as the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47913
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48787
--- Comment #18 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-05-04
16:49:17 UTC ---
Ne patch submitted to list for approval.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-05/msg00022.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48773
--- Comment #8 from froydnj at codesourcery dot com 2011-05-04 16:47:52 UTC ---
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 04:25:19PM +, mfortune at gmail dot com wrote:
> Can anyone speculate as to which passes consume REG_DEAD notes or is it a case
> of trawli
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48773
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou 2011-05-04
16:38:54 UTC ---
> Can anyone speculate as to which passes consume REG_DEAD notes or is it a case
> of trawling the source? invoking df_note_add_problem in the final pass should
> resolve the bug I hav
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48869
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-04
16:37:40 UTC ---
Say:
template
struct B
{
B () {}
B (const B&) = delete;
~B () {}
};
template
struct A
{
A () {}
A (const A&) { B b; B c = b; }
void foo () {}
~A() {}
};
int
main()
{
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47913
--- Comment #21 from Marc Glisse 2011-05-04
16:27:28 UTC ---
Created attachment 24182
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24182
first iteration in patch format
Inserted in , with some cleanup of dead code, rewrite of ratio_less.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48869
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-04
16:25:46 UTC ---
Not sure if it would be ok to request instantiation of say copy ctor when we
are unsure if the var will be firstprivate or not. The copy ctor can be marked
as =delete, or perhaps say
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48874
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-05-04 16:17:12 UTC ---
On Wed, 4 May 2011, jb at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> #include
> #include
>
> int main()
> {
> double _Complex a = 0.0 + I*0.0;
> double _Complex b = 0.0 - I*0.0;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48773
--- Comment #6 from Matthew Fortune 2011-05-04
16:19:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> This is a known issue introduced by the DF merge. I think that the current
> state of affairs is that the passes consuming REG_DEAD/REG_UNUSED notes have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48636
--- Comment #12 from Jan Hubicka 2011-05-04
16:09:19 UTC ---
Hi,
I discussed some of the issues today with Martin. For the array descriptor
testcase, we really want ipa-cp to be propagate the constant array bounds
instead of making Inliner to bl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48869
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de
2011-05-04 15:46:47 UTC ---
On Wed, 4 May 2011, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48869
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What|Removed
", REALPART_EXPR ,
IMAGPART_EXPR );
}
return 0;
so it seems the negative sign of the real part of c is lost already in the
frontend.
Version of the compiler:
gcc version 4.7.0 20110504 (experimental) (GCC)
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48869
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.4.6
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48868
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu 2011-05-04 15:42:11
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Can't you run the testsuite with -mtls-dialect=gnu2 to see if there are any
> failures?
90% of gcc testsuites don't use TLS. Run the whole testsuite with
-mtls-di
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48873
Summary: [C++0x][noexcept] Placement-new problem with deleted
destructors
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48853
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu 2011-05-04 15:37:43
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Can you track down on which mem_loc_descriptor call these new
> DW_OP_GNU_*_type/DW_OP_GNU_{convert,reinterpret}
> locs have been added, and for that post a backt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48869
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48872
Summary: [C++0x][noexcept] Placement-new problem with non-empty
arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48868
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-05-04
15:31:21 UTC ---
Can't you run the testsuite with -mtls-dialect=gnu2 to see if there are any
failures?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48860
Jack Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48826
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-04
14:10:20 UTC ---
Most probably the backend is reordering insns after var-tracking, it shouldn't
be doing that. ARM/SH/S390 backends all have fixed similar bugs very quickly
after this patch went in.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48871
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-04
14:37:05 UTC ---
I think this is a dup of PR 10541
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48860
--- Comment #12 from Jack Howarth 2011-05-04
14:13:04 UTC ---
This looks similar to this bug...
http://www.mail-archive.com/mpir-devel@googlegroups.com/msg04286.html
where is claimed these are bugs in the older gas on darwin.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48818
--- Comment #2 from Melanie Cappelaere 2011-05-04
14:19:01 UTC ---
Created attachment 24181
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24181
Example with custom allocator
Thank you for the workaround.
Little side note: this bug also ap
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48866
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-04
14:21:28 UTC ---
The problem is the MEMs nested in other MEM addresses, cselib isn't prepared to
handle it efficiently.
So, either we should break very deep MEM nests using extra DEBUG_INSNs and
debug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48871
Summary: gcc doesn't accept null pointer value as a template
non-type argument
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48826
Ryan Mansfield changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48870
Summary: operator== overload of vector types
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48853
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-04
14:06:56 UTC ---
Can you track down on which mem_loc_descriptor call these new
DW_OP_GNU_*_type/DW_OP_GNU_{convert,reinterpret}
locs have been added, and for that post a backtrace and debug_rtx on the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47723
--- Comment #14 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-04
13:42:19 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> struct S { };
> S* p = new S::S();
EDG 4.0-4.3 all reject this as well.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48859
fabien at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fabien at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48853
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu 2011-05-04 13:33:57
UTC ---
I still got
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/stackalign/alloca-1.c -O1 (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/stackalign/alloca-1.c -O1 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/stackal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48860
--- Comment #11 from Uros Bizjak 2011-05-04 13:25:28
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Could this be similar to the required change from...
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-08/msg01024.html
>
> to adapt to the darwin assembler's usa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48860
--- Comment #10 from Jack Howarth 2011-05-04
13:10:23 UTC ---
Could this be similar to the required change from...
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-08/msg01024.html
to adapt to the darwin assembler's usage of movq?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39055
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48868
Summary: There are no -mtls-dialect=gnu2 run-time tests
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: un
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48869
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48602
--- Comment #48 from jvdelisle at frontier dot com 2011-05-04 12:30:59 UTC ---
On 05/04/2011 05:15 AM, ebay.20.tedlap at spamgourmet dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #47 from Lionel GUEZ
> 2011-05-04 12:15:16 UTC ---
> (In reply to comment #46)
--- s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48869
Summary: OpenMP task construct fails to instantiate copy
constructor(same as Bug 36523)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48826
--- Comment #1 from Ryan Mansfield 2011-05-04
13:01:31 UTC ---
The change that introduced this ICE is rev171033.
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=171033
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48860
--- Comment #9 from Jack Howarth 2011-05-04
12:58:41 UTC ---
Opened radr://9381460 with extenddftf2.s generated with -dp as the testcase.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48860
--- Comment #7 from Jack Howarth 2011-05-04
12:49:27 UTC ---
Created attachment 24180
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24180
assembly file for libgcc/../gcc/config/soft-fp/extenddftf2.c with -dp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48860
--- Comment #8 from Jack Howarth 2011-05-04
12:52:02 UTC ---
The assembler is from...
Xcode 4.0.2
Build version 4A2002a
but the assembler from...
Xcode 3.2.6
Component versions: DevToolsCore-1809.0; DevToolsSupport-1806.0
BuildVersion: 10M2518
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48602
--- Comment #49 from Thomas Henlich
2011-05-04 12:48:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #47)
> (In reply to comment #46)
> > I have started on the second phase of this effort which is to get rid of the
> > floating point issue on -m32 machines.
>
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39055
--- Comment #14 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-04
12:38:03 UTC ---
It was discussed on the reflector in messages 15450-3 and 80, but seems never
to have made it into the issues list...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48859
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48859
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-04
12:33:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
>
> The workaround, of course, is to define the empty default constructor in
> ConstMember.
Or simply add an empty new-initializer, which works when you ca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48865
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-04
12:11:04 UTC ---
Teach them to how to pipe the output of gcc -E -dD to grep, it'll do them good
in the long run.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48602
Lionel GUEZ changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebay.20.tedlap at
|
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
