Is std::thread (only usable with g++-4.5 I think) known to be broken?
The following program:
#include
#include
int g = 0;
void f ()
{
g++;
}
int main ()
{
std::thread t (f);
t.join ();
std::cout << "after joing, g = " << g << std::endl;
return
Your message dated Thu, 01 Apr 2010 02:06:58 +0200
with message-id <4bb3e3a2.40...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#576111: gcc-4.4 miscompiles __builtin_expect in -O0
has caused the Debian Bug report #576111,
regarding gcc-4.4 miscompiles __builtin_expect in -O0
to be marked as done.
This mea
For what it's worth, there is at least _another_ regression introduced
by the -4 or -5 revision in -O0, that I've not been able to track down
yet. I mean that when I remove all my uses of __builtin_expect in the
code that lead me to find out about this bug, I still have (at least)
another issue tha
Package: gcc-4.4
Version: 4.4.3-4
Severity: grave
Since gcc-4.4 version 4.4.3-4 (and yes -5 is still affected), gcc miscompiles
__builtin_expect when no optimization is set (at least).
Test case:
int foo(int t) {
if (__builtin_expect(t & 0x100, 0))
return 0;
retur
--- Comment #32 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-03-31 21:43 ---
(In reply to comment #31)
> There appears to be a mistaken presumption running through this thread that
> there is a 1<->1 mapping between unwind blocks and source language functions.
> This is not the case, and any cod
Package: gcc-4.3
Version: 4.3.2-1.1
Severity: important
wcstoll returns only the value for 32bit.
For instance, wcstoll(L"1", NULL, 16) returns 0
though it is sure to become 4294967296.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 5.0.4
APT prefers stable
APT policy: (990, 'stable')
Archite
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 575954 upstream
Bug #575954 [gnat-4.4] gnat-4.4: [amd64] GNAT.Expect.Non_Blocking_Spawn double
free or corruption
Added tag(s) upstream.
> forwarded 575954 http://gcc.gnu.org/PR43598
Bug #575954 [gnat-4.4] gnat-4.4: [amd64] GNAT.Expect.Non_B
--- Comment #31 from rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-31 08:47
---
(In reply to comment #30)
> (In reply to comment #29)
> > Wouldn't it be better to just remove _Unwind_GetRegionStart?
> > This function is not part of the ARM EABI, and removing it would expose any
> > (already b
Package: libstdc++6-4.5-dev
Version: 4.5-20100103-1
Severity: normal
The file "/usr/include/c++/4.5/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/c++config.h"
doesn't seem to actually reflect the available facilities of the system.
In particular (from that file):
/* Defined if nanosleep is available. */
/* #und
9 matches
Mail list logo
