[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roger Sayle) wrote on 09.02.06 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, 9 Feb 2006, Kaz Kojima wrote:
Here is a patch to remove CHAR_TYPE from config/sh/sh.h.
My apologies to the SH folks. I did check the entire tree with
find . -type f -exec grep CHAR_TYPE {} \; -print, but
Any properly written dwarf reader will ignore attributes it doesn't
understand, and hence in theory there should be no need for a -
gdwarf-2+ option. You can just emit the new info by default and
everything should work.
The problem is that the switch will also change what is contained in
Dear developers!
Can I use c++ (g++) and fortran (g77) together
in one multilanguage application?
Main program is written on c++,
subroutine or function are written on fortran.
And how can I do it?
Where can I read about this?
gcc, g77,g++ version 3.2.3 (Linux)
Best regards,
Dear developers!
Can I use c++ (g++) and fortran (g77) together
in one multilanguage application?
Main program is written on c++,
subroutine or function are written on fortran.
And how can I do it?
Where can I read about this?
gcc, g77,g++ version 3.2.3 (Linux)
Best regards,
Hi all,
here is the result on ARM of my little program:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/admin# ./test2
4 5 6 8
2 3 4 6
Is it normal to add an attribute __packed__ on each union{}
contained in a structure, or is it a bug of my compiler ?
On X86, this kind of structure has always the good size.
Nicolas DICHTEL writes:
Hi all,
here is the result on ARM of my little program:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/admin# ./test2
4 5 6 8
2 3 4 6
Is it normal to add an attribute __packed__ on each union{}
contained in a structure, or is it a bug of my compiler ?
On X86, this kind
On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 04:56:20PM +0100, Nicolas DICHTEL wrote:
Hi all,
here is the result on ARM of my little program:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/admin# ./test2
4 5 6 8
2 3 4 6
Is it normal to add an attribute __packed__ on each union{}
contained in a structure, or is it a bug of my
i686-pc-linux-gnu
Reading specs
from /home/dust/compiler/gcc-3.4.5/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.5/specs
Configured with: /home/dust/foundation/compiler/gcc-3.4.5/configure
--prefix=/home/dust/compiler/gcc-3.4.5
--exec-prefix=/home/dust/compiler/gcc-3.4.5
Thread model: posix
gcc version 3.4.5
Hi folks.
Sorry I've taken so long on this. There was this marriage thing in
which I was a protagonist, and it's gotten me way off balance :).
I've been chasing my tail on implementation details. I was hoping
someone could give me a few hints.
A solution that comes to mind is to have the
On Feb 10, 2006, at 5:22 AM, Sapojnikova T.F. wrote:
Can I use c++ (g++) and fortran (g77) together in one
multilanguage application?
Wrong list, gcc-help is more appropriate, thanks.
Snapshot gcc-4.1-20060210 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.1-20060210/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.1 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
The attached testcase usually segfaults on i?86-linux and x86_64-linux
(and likely on most other DWARF2_UNWIND_INFO 1 targets, though the testcase
would need to be tweaked for them).
The problem is that instruction pointer saved in the signal frame is after
last successfully executed instruction
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 08:23 ---
Created an attachment (id=10814)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10814action=view)
cleanup-12.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26208
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 08:23 ---
Created an attachment (id=10815)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10815action=view)
cleanup-12a.S
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26208
--
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 #1 from konqueror at gmx dot de 2006-02-10 08:29 ---
Subject: Re: New: Regex bug ++
Works fine with jamvm 1.4.2 and current GNU classpath CVS.
Porting this fix to 4.1 branchshould be done.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26202
--- Comment #3 from toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl 2006-02-10
08:42 ---
We don't warn for other Fortran 2003 features we support without a -std=f95, so
I'll look into it and fix it.
--
toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl changed:
What|Removed
We have a problem that gcc 4.1-20060203 emits an internal compiler error
while compiling a certain code construct.
The following reduced test case code reproduces the bug:
--
#include boost/multi_array.hpp
using namespace std;
We have a problem that gcc 4.1-20060203 emits an internal compiler error
while compiling a certain code construct.
The following reduced test case code reproduces the bug:
--
#include boost/multi_array.hpp
using namespace std;
--- Comment #2 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 09:58
---
I can't reproduce this anymore.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from walter dot zimmer at dlr dot de 2006-02-10 10:01
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26209 ***
--
walter dot zimmer at dlr dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from walter dot zimmer at dlr dot de 2006-02-10 10:01
---
*** Bug 26210 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26209
--- Comment #2 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 10:03
---
Could you please compress test.ii and attach it to the problem report?
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from walter dot zimmer at dlr dot de 2006-02-10 10:08
---
Created an attachment (id=10816)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10816action=view)
The preprocessor output of the testcase code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26209
... as such (27.6.1.3/1) should construct a sentry.
--
Summary: basic_istream::tellg, seekg are unformatted input
functions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
--- Comment #4 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 11:17
---
Reducing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26209
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #9 from amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2006-02-10 12:16
---
Created an attachment (id=10817)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10817action=view)
Patch against current 3.4 sources
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21616
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|minor |normal
Keywords|
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 13:03 ---
Somebody forgot to call update_domiantator (or what ever the function is
called).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26209
--- Comment #6 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 13:21
---
Reduced testcase:
==
struct A
{
void f() {}
~A();
};
void foo(A* p)
{
for ( ; p; --p)
(p-*A::f)();
}
void bar()
{
A a;
foo(a);
foo(a);
}
==
--
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|minor |major
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 13:28 ---
It is ICE while in the sccp pass.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
this testcase segfaults:
=== Cut ===
class A
{
public:
A()·{ x1 = 0; x2 = -1; }
int· x()· · const { return x1; }
void setX( int x ) { x1 = x; }
int· width()· const { return x2 - x1 + 1; }
void setWidth( int w );
private:
int x1;
int x2;
};
A
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 13:40 ---
This is a dup of bug 26179 which was just fixed yesterday.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26179 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 13:40 ---
*** Bug 26212 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
5.106 total
[Exit 130 (INT)]
$ cat /t/err
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: /mirror/d/gcc/configure --disable-nls
--prefix=/p/p/gcc-2006-02-10.10h41 --disable-multilib --enable-languages=c
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.2.0 20060210 (experimental)
/nobak/p/p
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 14:24 ---
Confirmed, the backtrace:
#0 0x004c0784 in thread_across_edge (dummy_cond=0x41ee29f0, e=0x41ee24e0,
handle_dominating_asserts=0 '\0', stack=0x6c9530, simplify=0x422674
simplify_stmt_for_jump_threading) at
--- Comment #1 from zak at transversal dot com 2006-02-10 15:00 ---
I think the bug here is that handle_pragma_interface in gcc/cp/lex.c is calling
get_file_info(filename), which refers to the name in the #pragma, rather than
get_file_info(lbasename(input_filename)) -- hence it is
--- Comment #2 from zak at transversal dot com 2006-02-10 15:53 ---
On thinking about this further, I don't understand the application of lbasename
to the input_filename before it is passed to get_fileinfo. I included this for
consistency with the code in cxx_make_type that checks for
--- Comment #2 from law at redhat dot com 2006-02-10 16:19 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] new (within
last few days) infinite loop with -O1
On Fri, 2006-02-10 at 14:24 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from zak at transversal dot com 2006-02-10 17:05 ---
After making the change suggested in comment #1, the following test case
demonstrates the problem mentioned in comment #2.
$ g++ -Wall -pedantic -I. foo.cc nm -A foo.o
[no output]
If you switch the name in the pragma
On the following program, gcc -O2 creates incorrect code:
#include stdio.h
#define NUM 1
#define MAX 10.0
__inline__ float rsqrt(float x)
{
float xhalf = 0.5f * x;
int i = *(int*)x;
i = 0x5f375a86 - (i1);
x = *(float*)i;
x = x * (1.5f - xhalf * x * x);
return x;
}
int
--- Comment #2 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 17:15
---
This also holds for other duplicate member functions like void foo() {}.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19439
--- Comment #14 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 17:32 ---
Subject: Bug 24365
Author: jason
Date: Fri Feb 10 17:32:10 2006
New Revision: 110838
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110838
Log:
PR c++/25979
* tree.def: Elaborate on difference
--- Comment #13 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 17:32 ---
Subject: Bug 22439
Author: jason
Date: Fri Feb 10 17:32:10 2006
New Revision: 110838
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110838
Log:
PR c++/25979
* tree.def: Elaborate on difference
--- Comment #11 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 17:32 ---
Subject: Bug 25979
Author: jason
Date: Fri Feb 10 17:32:10 2006
New Revision: 110838
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110838
Log:
PR c++/25979
* tree.def: Elaborate on difference
--- Comment #12 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 17:32 ---
Subject: Bug 16405
Author: jason
Date: Fri Feb 10 17:32:10 2006
New Revision: 110838
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110838
Log:
PR c++/25979
* tree.def: Elaborate on difference
--- Comment #12 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 17:42
---
I get the following code for rld-legit2.c with the patch I am currently
testing:
_g:
subq 4,$sp
move $srp,[$sp]
subq 40,$sp
movem $r8,[$sp]
move $r10,$srp
move.d
--- Comment #14 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 18:08 ---
Subject: Bug 14771
Author: tobi
Date: Fri Feb 10 18:08:27 2006
New Revision: 110840
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110840
Log:
fortran/
PR fortran/14771
* arith.c
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 18:11 ---
x = *(float*)i;
You are violating C aliasing rules.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21920 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #84 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 18:11
---
*** Bug 26214 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 18:22 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
There's certainly a good case for warning about packing that's likely not to
have the desired results - we've been bitten by that before. But that doesn't
really apply to all non-POD; you
--- Comment #8 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 18:29 ---
Subject: Bug 26181
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Feb 10 18:29:04 2006
New Revision: 110841
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110841
Log:
2006-10-02 Paolo Carlini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #9 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-02-10 18:30 ---
Fixed for 4.2.0.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 19:01 ---
Subject: Bug 20858
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Feb 10 19:01:05 2006
New Revision: 110845
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110845
Log:
2006-02-05 Steven G. Kargl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR fortran/20858
--- Comment #3 from law at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 19:23 ---
Subject: Bug 26213
Author: law
Date: Fri Feb 10 19:22:58 2006
New Revision: 110846
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110846
Log:
PR tree-optimization/26213
* tree-ssa-threadedge.c
--- Comment #4 from law at redhat dot com 2006-02-10 19:23 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] new (within
last few days) infinite loop with -O1
On Fri, 2006-02-10 at 14:24 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 19:47 ---
Fixed in svn.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|---
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 19:52 ---
Subject: Bug 26202
Author: tromey
Date: Fri Feb 10 19:52:44 2006
New Revision: 110847
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110847
Log:
Re-merged all regular expression code.
For PR
--- Comment #8 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 19:52 ---
Subject: Bug 26177
Author: tromey
Date: Fri Feb 10 19:52:44 2006
New Revision: 110847
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110847
Log:
Re-merged all regular expression code.
For PR
--- Comment #9 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 19:53 ---
Fix checked in.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26177
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 19:54 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 19:54 ---
Forgot to mark as fixed.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 20:00
---
Yup. See how this is handled in config/s390/linux-unwind.c:
/* If we got a SIGSEGV or a SIGBUS, the PSW address points *to*
the faulting instruction, not after it. This causes the logic
in
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 20:09 ---
Subject: Bug 20858
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Feb 10 20:09:41 2006
New Revision: 110848
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110848
Log:
2006-02-10 Steven G. Kargl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 20:10 ---
Fixed on 4.1 and trunk.
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 20:13 ---
Fixed on 4.1 and trunk by the patch committed for pr 20858.
troutmask:sgk[226] cat ptr.f90
INTEGER, POINTER, DIMENSION(:,:) :: i
INTEGER, POINTER, DIMENSION(:) :: a
a=NULL(i)
END
troutmask:sgk[227] gfc41 -c ptr.f90
--- Comment #5 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 20:14 ---
Fixed by my patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00843.html,
pending review.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 20:16 ---
Fixed by my patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00843.html,
pending review. I add a config/os/uclibc directory as suggested in comment#4.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 20:18 ---
Not all the targets have the luxury of spare register slots.
So the current proposal is to add a new CIE augmentation that will signify
a signal frame.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26208
--- Comment #2 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 20:20 ---
Fixed by my patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00843.html,
pending review.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from law at redhat dot com 2006-02-10 20:24 ---
This is a bug in the vectorizer and has absolutely nothing to do with PR26169.
The vectorizer is twiddling things such that the set of virtual operands
changes
for the statement in question. ie, if you look at the
--- Comment #2 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 20:25 ---
My uClibc support patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00843.html addresses this issue
for MIPS; the other targets still need similar changes (not yet done) to
support uClibc within the framework of my
--- Comment #5 from uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 20:34
---
(In reply to comment #4)
Not all the targets have the luxury of spare register slots.
I guess we were lucky here ;-)
So the current proposal is to add a new CIE augmentation that will signify
a signal frame.
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 20:58 ---
Subject: Bug 25864
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Feb 10 20:58:33 2006
New Revision: 110851
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110851
Log:
PR target/25864
Backport from mainline
--- Comment #13 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 22:11 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
This code is exactly the same as the correct code I saw
for cris-axis-linux-gnu with the patch in comment #9, so I can confirm that
the emitted code is correct by visual inspection. On the
--- Comment #45 from david dot moore at intel dot com 2006-02-10 22:34
---
The (C99) standard says:
6.7.2.1 (10) An implementation may allocate any addressable storage unit large
enough to hold a bitfield.
and
6.7.2.1 (11) As a special case, a bit-field structure member with a width
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from pierre42d at 9online dot fr 2006-02-10 23:04 ---
../configure --enable-libada --enable-bootstrap --enable-shared
--enable-threads --enable-tls --enable-nls --with-x --enable-java-awt=gtk,xlib
--enable-gtk-cairo --enable-java-gc
--
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 23:06 ---
--enable-bootstrap is not supported on 4.0.x or 4.1.x.
Can you try without that flag?
Anyways without that flag this is still an issue.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libgcj |java
Summary|warnings in libgcj |[4.0 only]
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 23:08 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 23:08
---
Fixed now in 4.1.0 also.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 23:09 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #12 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 23:20 ---
Subject: Bug 25756
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Feb 10 23:20:10 2006
New Revision: 110856
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110856
Log:
2006-02-10 Steven G. Kargl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #13 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-10 23:21 ---
Fixed on 4.1, too.
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #46 from david dot moore at intel dot com 2006-02-11 00:14
---
(Note - I had not realized the importance of pragma pack to this problem. The
fact that without it the behavior has not changed weakens my case, although it
probably weakens the case that it should be restored
--- Comment #12 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-11 00:19 ---
Subject: Bug 25979
Author: jason
Date: Sat Feb 11 00:19:30 2006
New Revision: 110864
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110864
Log:
PR c++/25979
* tree.def: Elaborate on difference
--- Comment #14 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-11 00:19 ---
Subject: Bug 22439
Author: jason
Date: Sat Feb 11 00:19:30 2006
New Revision: 110864
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110864
Log:
PR c++/25979
* tree.def: Elaborate on difference
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-11 00:36 ---
fixed by the dataflow branch merge bits.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-11 00:41 ---
Subject: Bug 26204
Author: tromey
Date: Sat Feb 11 00:41:08 2006
New Revision: 110866
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=110866
Log:
PR java/26204:
* jcf-write.c
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-11 00:42 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-11 00:48 ---
Fixed with the 2nd VRP pass Jeff added recently:
2006-02-07 Jeff Law law at redhat dot com
* tree-vrp.c (find_conditional_asserts): Update comments.
(simplify_stmt_for_jump_threading): New.
--- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-11 00:51
---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-11 00:52 ---
GCC: (GNU) 4.2.0 20060210 (experimental) produces this
(at -O2 -march=pentium4):
foo:
movla, %eax
addl$1, %eax
movl%eax, a
testl %eax, %eax
je .L4
--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-11 00:54 ---
All tests for library stuff have been going into the compiler test suite. I
guess this is OK. Unlike C/C++, Fortran without its runtime library is not
usable, so testing it as a single product sort-of makes sense.
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-11 00:55 ---
Fixed with Jeff's 2nd VRP pass:
2006-02-07 Jeff Law law at redhat dot com
* tree-vrp.c (find_conditional_asserts): Update comments.
(simplify_stmt_for_jump_threading): New.
(etc.)
--
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-11 00:59 ---
The problem with this one after Jeff's recent patches is that we have:
L13:;
D.1402_17 = 0;
if (D.1402_17 == 1) goto L15; else goto L14;
L15:;
x_18 = 1;
# x_19 = PHI 0(2), 0(3), x_18(4);
L14:;
Which
1 - 100 of 106 matches
Mail list logo
