On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Robert Dewar wrote:
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
with no more qualifications (this definition is slightly different in
some nearby languages), it is slippery to found optimizations on
pointer overflows.
Well I think unfortunately the standard does allow such
Hi,
I'd like to add some source and header files into gcc. I think I
probably need to make some change in Makefile.in. But the Makefile.in
looks very complicated. Could anyone give some advice on this?
Regards,
Haibin
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| Humpf! Can people please cite exact paragraphs of the relevant
| Standards? Otherwise, I think we are just adding to the confusion. For
| example, in my reading of C99 6.5.9 and C++03 5.10 pointers *can* be
| compared for
Richard Guenther writes:
So the basic question remains - is pointer overflow defined?
No. You've already asked, and it's already been answered, with
langauge from the standard. What more do you want?
Andrew.
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
There is:
[#5] An integer may be converted to any pointer type.
Exceptaspreviouslyspecified, the result is
implementation-defined, might not be correctly aligned,
might not point to
On Thu, 22 Dec 2005, Andrew Haley wrote:
Richard Guenther writes:
So the basic question remains - is pointer overflow defined?
No. You've already asked, and it's already been answered, with
langauge from the standard. What more do you want?
Well, nothing - just again clarification
Richard Guenther writes:
On Thu, 22 Dec 2005, Andrew Haley wrote:
Richard Guenther writes:
So the basic question remains - is pointer overflow defined?
No. You've already asked, and it's already been answered, with
langauge from the standard. What more do you want?
Dear gcc@gcc.gnu.org,
Your question was not submitted to the helpdesk because of a problem:
You need to register online at http://ccgi.rowley.co.uk/support/ before you
can submit new questions via e-mail.
Why is this? To provide better tracking of user issues and because we need to
reduce
HOST: AIX, 8 * IBM POWER2 CPU
COMPILER: GCC 4.0.1, GCC 3.4.4
I am trying to compile my low-level library, which contains
several inline assembly functions. It doesn't work, because
the compiler (4.0.1) does not replace local labels from the
assembly code (i.e. 0:, 1:, etc.) with their
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 02:28:08PM +0100, Piotr Wyderski wrote:
HOST: AIX, 8 * IBM POWER2 CPU
COMPILER: GCC 4.0.1, GCC 3.4.4
I am trying to compile my low-level library, which contains
several inline assembly functions. It doesn't work, because
the compiler (4.0.1) does not replace local
On Dec 22, 2005 02:28 PM, Piotr Wyderski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
HOST: AIX, 8 * IBM POWER2 CPU
COMPILER: GCC 4.0.1, GCC 3.4.4
I am trying to compile my low-level library, which contains
several inline assembly functions. It doesn't work, because
the compiler (4.0.1) does not replace local
Hi Dan,
I think the right place for this question might have
been gcc-help (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/).
Thanks to Ben, I've already posted the same question to
gcc-help.
[ Why doesn't dynamic_cast work when I dlopen a
shared library? ]
I've checked out
Hello!
The new scheme to select target tools breaks building GCC for me. Maybe I
have an unusal setup. The problem in my case is that configure now chooses
tools from $prefix/bin. It did use tools from $prefix/$target/bin before.
On my setup I have *different* tools in those places. Until know
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 05:34:14PM +0100, Gunther Nikl wrote:
Hello!
The new scheme to select target tools breaks building GCC for me. Maybe I
have an unusal setup. The problem in my case is that configure now chooses
tools from $prefix/bin. It did use tools from $prefix/$target/bin before.
It looks to me like this last changed around 2005-06-16 on HEAD, and we
assume that the assembler installed in $prefix is the assembler you
want the compiler to be using - it's the same assembler you'd get if
you said as, so why shouldn't we use it?
When building from a combined tree, I
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 05:58:34PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
It looks to me like this last changed around 2005-06-16 on HEAD, and we
assume that the assembler installed in $prefix is the assembler you
want the compiler to be using - it's the same assembler you'd get if
you said as, so why
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 05:58:34PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
It looks to me like this last changed around 2005-06-16 on HEAD, and we
assume that the assembler installed in $prefix is the assembler you
want the compiler to be using - it's the same assembler you'd
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 06:13:22PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
I am a bit confused.
Does Gunther's failure mean that the default for the proposed
--with-build-tools option, should be $prefix/$target/bin? This would
set AS_FOR_TARGET, etc. from within the GCC_TARGET_TOOL toplevel
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 10:08:14AM +0900, 김성박 wrote:
How can I register gcc build status for HP-UX 11i
I successfully installed gcc3.4.4 gcc 4.0.0 for hppa64-hp-hpux11.11
but therer are no build status in http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.4/buildstat.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0/buildstat.html
On Dec 22, 2005, at 5:28 AM, Piotr Wyderski wrote:
I am trying to compile my low-level library, which contains
several inline assembly functions. It doesn't work, because
the compiler (4.0.1) does not replace local labels from the
assembly code (i.e. 0:, 1:, etc.) with their machine-specific
Hi all,
Have the keywords 'auto' and 'decltype' already have been implemented?
- as described in
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2004/n1607.pdf?
- for easier use of template expressions.
I have difficulty to find information concerning this problem.
If yes, could you please
Snapshot gcc-4.0-20051222 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.0-20051222/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.0 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
Hi,
It appears GCC 3.x no longer supports the
-fvtable-thunks option. Is gcc 3.x using thunks by
default for its vtable format? Also, can the
_G_USING_THUNKS macro no longer used to determine if
thunks are being used?
Thanks,
John
__
Is there any way to tell cse how many times a value gets reused before
putting a copy in a register is profitable? The logic seems to
compare the address costs, but doesn't account for the cost of storing
in the register. What I'd like is some way of saying the cutoff is N
uses, not the current
A regresion with __attribute__ ((alias (foo+X))) breaks newlib builds. The
testcase is distilled from newlib-1.13.0/newlib/libc/ctype/ctype_.c:
--cut here--
static const char _foo_b[4] = {
'a', 'b', 'c', 'd'
};
extern const char _foo_[4] __attribute__ ((alias (_foo_b+2)));
--cut here--
--- Comment #5 from mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-12-22 08:19 ---
Subject: Re: Werror problem in build
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 07:35
---
(In reply to comment #3)
So, on MinGW, you should
--- Comment #10 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 08:38
---
Shorter testcase:
=
struct A
{
static void foo();
};
templatevoid (*fp)() struct B
{
B() { fp(); }
};
BA::foo b;
=
--
--- Comment #9 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 09:17
---
The regression was introduced with Kriang's patch for PR 19311:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2005-03/msg00242.html
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 09:33 ---
The types are only messed up during gimplification though, into gimplify_expr
goes in both C and ObjC:
if (*(const unsigned charD.10 * {ref-all}) (const charD.1 *) msgD.1465 != 0)
{
statusD.1464 = 200;
}
Not
--enable-checking=release
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.2.0 20051222 (experimental)
/home/martin/software/ugcc/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.2.0/cc1 -E
-lang-fortran -traditional-cpp -D_LANGUAGE_FORTRAN -quiet -v test.F90 -mtune=k8
-o /tmp/ccCu0SZq.f95
ignoring nonexistent directory
/home
--- Comment #1 from martin at mpa-garching dot mpg dot de 2005-12-22 09:43
---
Created an attachment (id=10549)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10549action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25532
--- Comment #10 from trick at icculus dot org 2005-12-22 10:38 ---
Maybe you could add a new variable attribute so that these warnings could at
least be avoided in cases where the coder knows the code is correct ?
Something like:
int x __attribute__((__notuninited__));
if (y) x = 0;
--- Comment #14 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 11:37 ---
Subject: Bug 18990
Author: tobi
Date: Thu Dec 22 11:37:03 2005
New Revision: 108946
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108946
Log:
fortran/
PR fortran/18990
* gfortran.h
--- Comment #3 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 12:01
---
Subject: Bug 2
Author: reichelt
Date: Thu Dec 22 12:01:44 2005
New Revision: 108947
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108947
Log:
2005-12-22 Volker Reichelt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #4 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 12:08
---
Fixed on mainline.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 12:30
---
Unassigning and requesting CLOSED INVALID.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Dear gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org,
Your question was not submitted to the helpdesk because of a problem:
You need to register online at http://ccgi.rowley.co.uk/support/ before you
can submit new questions via e-mail.
Why is this? To provide better tracking of user issues and because we need to
Dear gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org,
Your question was not submitted to the helpdesk because of a problem:
You need to register online at http://ccgi.rowley.co.uk/support/ before you
can submit new questions via e-mail.
Why is this? To provide better tracking of user issues and because we need to
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 13:05
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-12/msg01071.html
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 13:18
---
Created an attachment (id=10550)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10550action=view)
Patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25407
--- Comment #4 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 13:22
---
The patch above fixes PR c++/25407 (ice-on-valid-code regression)
on the 3.4 branch. It is a backport of Nathan's patch for PR c++/18803
including the fixes for its fallout PR c++/18949, PR c++/19298, and
PR
It seems that on ia64, the function pthread_create does not use the value of
pthread_attr_setstacksize for the stack size, but something like the half of
it. The reproducer attached tries to fill the stack according to its supposed
size, and show that we are actually able to fill only half of it
--- Comment #1 from ochem at gnat dot com 2005-12-22 13:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=10551)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10551action=view)
Bug reproducer
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25533
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 13:59 ---
This is not a gcc issue but maybe a glibc one.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #20 from dir at lanl dot gov 2005-12-22 14:00 ---
Thanks FX - You gave me the first good explaination of how it should be done.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25139
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 14:10 ---
That version of newlib is broken,
see the thread at
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/newlib/2005/msg00177.html
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from uttamp at us dot ibm dot com 2005-12-22 14:11 ---
Sorry for the delay and I never expected that someone else will figure it out
for me. It just that I got distracted doing other things and right now I'm on
vacation. I don't have access to the machine where I could do
--- Comment #21 from dir at lanl dot gov 2005-12-22 14:18 ---
The second example in comment 3 should fail as it does - since it does try read
beyond the end of file. As far as I can tell, the FX patch does not fix any of
the test cases on the Macintosh and I think that it actually is
On Dec 22, 2005, at 5:38 AM, trick at icculus dot org wrote:
--- Comment #10 from trick at icculus dot org 2005-12-22 10:38
---
Maybe you could add a new variable attribute so that these warnings
could at
least be avoided in cases where the coder knows the code is correct ?
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 14:22
---
Subject: Re: Incorrectly produces '`var' might be used uninitialized in this
function'
On Dec 22, 2005, at 5:38 AM, trick at icculus dot org wrote:
--- Comment #10 from trick at icculus dot org
--- Comment #22 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 14:24
---
(In reply to comment #21)
new = file_position (u-s) - m - 2*sizeof (gfc_offset);
as 2*sizeof (gfc_offset) is the size of the green words before and after the
data and m is the size of the data.
--- Comment #3 from arno at heho dot snv dot jussieu dot fr 2005-12-22
15:33 ---
Might this be related to make-bug #1379 (Don't use alloca() for automatic
variable values like $^, etc. In the case of very large lists of
prerequisites this causes problems.), which has been solved
after
--- Comment #23 from dir at lanl dot gov 2005-12-22 16:01 ---
What is happening here is actually quite simple. The program reads the green
word for the previous record from the file from location file_position (u-s)
- length), that word gives the length of the previous record in bytes.
--- Comment #8 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2005-12-22 16:05 ---
Alan's patch has already been approved by Ian here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-12/msg01397.html
I think it would also be good idea to add the original bugzilla test
case, from comment #1, to the testsuite, to
--- Comment #24 from dir at lanl dot gov 2005-12-22 16:32 ---
Also, I just noticed that, if length != sizeof (gfc_offset) then 'm' has not
been correctly read - so the routine should quit. Using a bad number to
calculate 'new' will not likely useful.
--
--- Comment #23 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 16:33 ---
I've pretty much got everything going back to the 3.4.x branch.
Let me know if there's anything remaining.
--
ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
$ uname -a
Linux hertz 2.6.7-gentoo-r14 #8 SMP Mon Sep 6 16:08:44 BST 2004 x86_64 AMD
Opteron(tm) Processor 844 AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux
gcc-4.2.0 svn revision 108950.
$ cd build_hertz
$ rm -rf *
$ ../trunk/gcc/configure --build=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
--host=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
--- Comment #15 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 16:36 ---
Fixed on the mainline, will commit to 4.1 soon.
--
tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #19 from mark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 16:45 ---
The testcase in the following message still seems to fail:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/2005-12/msg00181.html
Here is a variant of the original example that also fails:
public class A
{
public static class B
{
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 17:05 ---
You are configuring from the gcc directory which is not support, you have to
configure with the toplevel directory.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #24 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 17:13 ---
Subject: Bug 20772
Author: ghazi
Date: Thu Dec 22 17:13:01 2005
New Revision: 108953
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108953
Log:
PR testsuite/20772
* gcc.dg/20020523-1.c: Change
BC-compiled code doesn't work on a big-endian 64-bit box because of a
silly mistake initializing entries in the constant pool. In all cases
the initializer must appear as the first 32-bit integer of a machine
word stored in memory.
--
Summary: gcj broken on 64-bit big-endian systems
--- Comment #25 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 17:15 ---
Subject: Bug 20772
Author: ghazi
Date: Thu Dec 22 17:15:05 2005
New Revision: 108954
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108954
Log:
PR testsuite/20772
* gcc.dg/20020523-1.c: Change
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 17:16 ---
public class Test {
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(javax.rmi.CORBA.Stub.class);
}
}
This fails with a SEGV on PPC 64.
--
--- Comment #8 from pluto at agmk dot net 2005-12-22 17:54 ---
could you try current 4.1? on my i486 gij works now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25121#c8
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25239
--- Comment #45 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 17:58
---
Created an attachment (id=10552)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10552action=view)
Middle-end (IPA) patch.
Tested Darwin/4.1 branch.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #25 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 17:59
---
The failure in the second example in comment #3 is that the reading past the
record is not being caught by the end specifier in the read statement. It
should go to 1011 and continue. This is a different bug.
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 18:06 ---
Subject: Bug 25513
Author: pinskia
Date: Thu Dec 22 18:06:35 2005
New Revision: 108958
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108958
Log:
2005-12-22 Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 18:11 ---
Subject: Bug 25513
Author: pinskia
Date: Thu Dec 22 18:11:39 2005
New Revision: 108959
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108959
Log:
2005-12-22 Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 18:12 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 18:34 ---
Subject: Bug 25535
Author: aph
Date: Thu Dec 22 18:34:01 2005
New Revision: 108961
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108961
Log:
2005-12-22 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR java/25535
--- Comment #26 from dir at lanl dot gov 2005-12-22 19:23 ---
I ran the check-gfortran tests before and after putting in the two changes
that I suggested on the Macintosh and the results were identical and my real
programs now run Ok with the changes, but someone is currectly making
--- Comment #2 from eedelman at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 19:49
---
With GNU Fortran 95 (GCC) 4.2.0 20051221 it works (I get a lot of 'undefined
reference' messages, but no ICE:s). But with 20051222 I get the same ICE
message that Martin gets. So it seems the problem
--- Comment #11 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 19:59
---
Subject: Bug 25364
Author: mmitchel
Date: Thu Dec 22 19:59:00 2005
New Revision: 108971
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108971
Log:
PR c++/25364
* semantics.c
--- Comment #12 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 20:02
---
Subject: Bug 25364
Author: mmitchel
Date: Thu Dec 22 20:02:21 2005
New Revision: 108972
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108972
Log:
PR c++/25364
* semantics.c
--- Comment #13 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 20:08
---
Subject: Bug 25364
Author: mmitchel
Date: Thu Dec 22 20:08:39 2005
New Revision: 108973
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108973
Log:
PR c++/25364
* typeck.c (build_unary_op):
--- Comment #14 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 20:15
---
Fixed in 4.0.3.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 20:51
---
The problem here is that:
1. mark_used doesn't add inline functions to the deferred function list if
processing_template_decl. (I guess this is a compile-time optimization, so
that the deferred function list
EXTRA_MULTILIB_PARTS, as used in target t-* fragments, is undocumented. (All
target t-* variables should be documented in fragments.texi.)
--
Summary: EXTRA_MULTILIB_PARTS undocumented
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #27 from dir at lanl dot gov 2005-12-22 21:14 ---
In the second example in comment #3, the first read reads the end of file and
the end=1008 works correctly. On the second read, the end of file has been
passed so that the end=1011 does not and should not catch it - it is an
I thought that I saw this before, but I could not find it with a search. Here
is an ICE on a bad program -
[dranta:~/tests/gfortran-D] dir% gfortran -c rspace.F
rspace.F:1: internal compiler error: in build_function_decl, at
fortran/trans-decl.c:1130
Please submit a full bug report,
with
I thought that I saw this before, but I could not find it with a search. Here
is an ICE on a bad program -
[dranta:~/tests/gfortran-D] dir% gfortran -c rspace.F
rspace.F:1: internal compiler error: in build_function_decl, at
fortran/trans-decl.c:1130
Please submit a full bug report,
with
--- Comment #1 from dir at lanl dot gov 2005-12-22 21:59 ---
I don't know why this showed up twice
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25539
--- Comment #28 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 22:49
---
On i686-pc-linux-gnu:
$ cat back3.f
integer dat(5)
dat = (/ 0, 0, 0, 0, 1 /)
write(11) dat,dat,dat,dat
rewind 11
write(11) dat
read(11,end=1008) dat
call abort()
1008
--- Comment #29 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 23:03
---
Dale, do you have copyright assignment and/or commit priviliges? Also, I have
gone to comp.lang.fortran for an interpretation on my comment #28. I see what
you are saying and I see what ifort is doing. Ifort
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 23:05 ---
Subject: Bug 25328
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 22 23:05:20 2005
New Revision: 108982
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108982
Log:
PR objc/25328
* c-typeck.c (comptypes): If
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 23:07 ---
Subject: Bug 25328
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 22 23:07:19 2005
New Revision: 108983
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108983
Log:
PR objc/25328
* objc/execute/pr25328.m: New test.
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 23:09 ---
Subject: Bug 25328
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 22 23:09:48 2005
New Revision: 108984
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108984
Log:
PR objc/25328
* objc/execute/pr25328.m: New test.
--- Comment #11 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 23:10 ---
Fixed in SVN.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 23:19 ---
Subject: Bug 25432
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 22 23:19:49 2005
New Revision: 108985
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108985
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/25432
* reload1.c
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 23:21 ---
Subject: Bug 25432
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 22 23:21:00 2005
New Revision: 108986
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108986
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/25432
* reload1.c
--- Comment #11 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 23:22 ---
Fixed in SVN, thanks a lot, Alan.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-23 00:09 ---
The generated code is indeed different between hosts, but that by itself is not
the cause of the bug - there's a target bug and seemingly the same as in the
other PR.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 24342
--- Comment #13 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-23 00:09 ---
*** Bug 22382 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24342
--- Comment #30 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-23 00:21
---
Based on feedback on comp.lang.fortran, the code in #28 is illegal and so the
behavior is acceptable and probably appropriate. Based on this I believe we
have a working solution to this bug. We just need to
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-23 00:36 ---
Fixed by:
* config/i386/mmintrin.h (_mm_add_si64): Only define for SSE2.
(_mm_sub_si64): Likewise.
* config/i386/xmmintrin.h (_mm_shuffle_pi16, _m_pshufw): Likewise.
*
--- Comment #14 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-23 00:45 ---
Subject: Bug 24342
Author: hp
Date: Fri Dec 23 00:45:36 2005
New Revision: 108998
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=108998
Log:
PR target/24342
* config/cris/cris.c
The -Wunused warning generation doesn't take modifications of global variables
into account. Compiling the following code with -Wunused -Werror fails
although this is perfectly reasonable code. Some registered exit handler could
check the value of the variable.
int global;
struct monitor
{
--
hp at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24342
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
