[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Mitchell) wrote on 03.05.06 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
To make this work, we have to be careful not to generate as much garbage
as we presently do, as we'll needlessly waste space in these pools.
Right now, we're using GC partly to compensate for things like using
trees to
I'm experiencing ACATS failures that manifest in
splitting
/abuild/rguenther/obj4/gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/tests/a/ada101a.ada into:
ada101a.adb
BUILD
FAIL: ada101a
BUILD
FAIL: c760009
splitting
/abuild/rguenther/obj4/gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/tests/cd/cd2a22i.ada into:
Hi,
i am looking for a way to support fixedpoint operations in gcc in order
to produce efficient code for a dsp core.
The only obvious solution i am aware of would be to add support for a
language extension like DSP-C (www.dsp-c.org) or Embedded-C
(www.embedded-c.org) to the compiler.
Is anybody
Manfred von Willich [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| | I'd encourage you to work up a solid proposal for ISO/ANSI and
| | propose it there.
|
| Being a newbie, I'd appreciate contact/site details for submissions to the
| ISO/ANSI standardisation forum (do I email [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
Dear GCC community
We have several fortran programs developed under MS' Visual Studio and
would like to convert them to be GCC/G77 compatible.
Short of converting the programs manaully, is anyone aware of a conversion
package capable of doing the conversion automagically?
Thank you in advance
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The topic of our internal data structures comes up every so often and it
will become particularly important now that we are planning to add
link-time and dynamic optimizations to GCC.
I would like to get started on some initial cleanups that should
Andrew Haley a écrit :
Richard Henderson writes:
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 01:23:56PM +0200, jacob navia wrote:
Is there an equivalent API for linux?
__register_frame_info_bases / __deregister_frame_info_bases.
Are these an exported API?
I metioned the existence of these entry points
* Introduce the notion of GIMPLE statements and GIMPLE
expressions. Each has attributes that the other does not need. A
statement will have location information and no type, while an
expression will have type and no location information.
Expressions need locations too for proper
Richard Henderson writes:
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 01:23:56PM +0200, jacob navia wrote:
Is there an equivalent API for linux?
__register_frame_info_bases / __deregister_frame_info_bases.
Are these an exported API?
I metioned the existence of these entry points in a reply to Jacob on
jacob navia writes:
Andrew Haley a écrit :
Richard Henderson writes:
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 01:23:56PM +0200, jacob navia wrote:
Is there an equivalent API for linux?
__register_frame_info_bases / __deregister_frame_info_bases.
Are these an exported API?
I
Hi,
nice that you are going to look into it. I am quite interested to help
here as you can probably guess ;) The overall plan looks good to me.
(and is pretty compatible with what I believe is needed) There are a
lots of details however
Anything else I may have missed? There are other
On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 03:05:26PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On 4/25/06, Momchil Velikov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why does GCC emit multiple calls to __gcov_init, via mulitple (two)
entries in
the ctors table? For example int foo () { return 0; } compiled with
gcc -S
The patches for SEE have been committed today.
The minor style corrections requested by you in the
final review approval will be in a follow-up patch
to be submitted the next week.
Mircea
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi there
i have a few questions on the optimizations for the MIPS target,
mostly regarding load/store instructions.
1. In the code generated for global symbols (e.g. arrays), the
alignment is always at 4-byte boundary and not at 1-byte boundary
Michael Staudenmaier wrote:
Hi,
i am looking for a way to support fixedpoint operations in gcc in order
to produce efficient code for a dsp core.
The only obvious solution i am aware of would be to add support for a
language extension like DSP-C (www.dsp-c.org) or Embedded-C
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jan Hubicka wrote on 05/04/06 08:36:
If you are interested in some sort of integration of changes in IPA
branch (IE whole program in SSA form), I can probably prepare sort of
merge patches for review (pretty much as I intend to finally do in next
-We have several fortran programs developed under MS' Visual Studio and
-would like to convert them to be GCC/G77 compatible.
-Short of converting the programs manaully, is anyone aware of a conversion
-package capable of doing the conversion automagically?
if you are willing to move to the 3.X
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jan Hubicka wrote on 05/04/06 08:36:
If you are interested in some sort of integration of changes in IPA
branch (IE whole program in SSA form), I can probably prepare sort of
merge patches for review (pretty much as I intend to finally do
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 03:25:22PM +0200, Mircea Namolaru wrote:
The patches for SEE have been committed today.
The minor style corrections requested by you in the
final review approval will be in a follow-up patch
to be submitted the next week.
I didn't see you have addressed the
jacob == jacob navia [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Unfortunately things are also worse for libgcj, in that we need to be
able to generate stack traces as well, and the trampoline function
approach won't work there.
jacob ? Sorry I do not follow here
The java runtime needs to be able to
I thought that you or others at Intel were going to extend the SEE
infrastructure to better support x86. The x86 port can turn off SEE in
override_options or XFAIL the tests for x86 until that work is committed.
David
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 11:15:27AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
I thought that you or others at Intel were going to extend the SEE
infrastructure to better support x86. The x86 port can turn off SEE in
override_options or XFAIL the tests for x86 until that work is committed.
Some of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Richard Kenner wrote on 05/04/06 08:19:
* Introduce the notion of GIMPLE statements and GIMPLE
expressions. Each has attributes that the other does not need. A
statement will have location information and no type, while an
On May 4, 2006, at 8:37 AM, H. J. Lu wrote:
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 11:15:27AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
I thought that you or others at Intel were going to extend the SEE
infrastructure to better support x86. The x86 port can turn off
SEE in
override_options or XFAIL the tests
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 08:39:58AM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On May 4, 2006, at 8:37 AM, H. J. Lu wrote:
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 11:15:27AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
I thought that you or others at Intel were going to extend the SEE
infrastructure to better support x86. The x86
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 09:45:31AM -0400, Attila Horvath wrote:
I searched online but can't seem to find an 'official'
source for 'f2c' converter.
That program has nothing to do with gcc, so you are on the
wrong list.
But how hard did you search? Type f2c into Google and follow
the top link.
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 04:31:15PM +0300, Nikolaos Kavvadias wrote:
My question here is: culdn't -Os optimization option force .align 0
alignment? Is there any way to use the minimal data memory
requirements for global symbols possible?
While it could, I hope that it does not go so far as to
Joe Buck wrote:
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 04:31:15PM +0300, Nikolaos Kavvadias wrote:
My question here is: culdn't -Os optimization option force .align 0
alignment? Is there any way to use the minimal data memory
requirements for global symbols possible?
While it could, I hope that it does
On Wed, 2006-05-03 at 20:35 -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Laurynas Biveinis wrote:
2006/5/3, Daniel Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The number of *host* systems we support that don't have mmap is
approaching 0, if it is not there already :)
Uhm, at least DJGPP as a GCC host system is alive
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Daney wrote:
Joe Buck wrote:
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 04:31:15PM +0300, Nikolaos Kavvadias
wrote:
My question here is: culdn't -Os optimization option force
.align 0 alignment? Is there any way to use the minimal data
memory
Diego == Diego Novillo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Diego Yes, another thing that I now see that is implicit with the removal of
Diego on-the-side data structures is the gradual removal of language hooks, or
Diego the inclusion of enough original language information to recover from a
Diego stream.
BUILD alone means that the sequence
gnatchop x
ls * tmp
main=`tail -1 tmp`
echo BUILD $main
got an empty tmp file.
I see that from time to time, more on SMP/dual core machines, if you add
sync or sleep it goes away but the run is slower. I've always assumed
it's some kind of process/kernel/fs
On Thu, 4 May 2006, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
BUILD alone means that the sequence
gnatchop x
ls * tmp
main=`tail -1 tmp`
echo BUILD $main
got an empty tmp file.
I see that from time to time, more on SMP/dual core machines, if you add
sync or sleep it goes away but the run is slower.
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 12:49:03PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
Are these an exported API?
Inasmuch as we've got to support them forever for binary
compatibility, I don't see why not.
r~
Before I open a bug report, I will ask it here:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]$ cat foo.c
typedef struct A A;
A *a;
typedef struct A
{
int x;
} A;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]$ gcc -c foo.c
foo.c:7: error: redefinition of typedef 'A'
foo.c:1: error: previous declaration of 'A' was here
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Before I open a bug report, I will ask it here:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]$ cat foo.c
typedef struct A A;
A *a;
typedef struct A
{
int x;
} A;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]$ gcc -c foo.c
foo.c:7: error: redefinition of typedef 'A'
foo.c:1: error: previous declaration of 'A' was here
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 08:26:52PM +0300, Leehod Baruch wrote:
Please, lets be more precise.
All the problem you have listed here are problems that relates x86.
There is no problem on PPC and as far as I know there is no problem
on other platforms (at least no one complained about it).
*ALL*
H J Lu writes:
This is case for all extensions for i386. For x86-64, only
zero_extendsidi2 won't clobber CC.
Again, for x86.
HJ But SEE doesn't provide a way to deal with it.
Um, so extend SEE to better support your needs?
David
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 02:53:38PM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
H J Lu writes:
This is case for all extensions for i386. For x86-64, only
zero_extendsidi2 won't clobber CC.
Again, for x86.
HJ But SEE doesn't provide a way to deal with it.
Um, so extend SEE to better
On May 4, 2006, at 5:05 AM, jacob navia wrote:
Well, I searched for those and found some usage examples in the
source of Apple Darwin gcc code for the startup. But then... is
that current?
This question lacks any detail that would allow me to answer it.
With enough detail, I could.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tom Tromey wrote on 05/04/06 12:58:
I've got a java-specific case or two that stress this idea a bit.
Where should I file these?
The GCC wiki should be a good place for now. Some of the ideas
discussed in this thread are sprinkled throughout,
H. J. Lu wrote:
export BOOT_CFLAGS=-g -O2 -fsee CXXFLAGS=-g -O2 -fsee FCFLAGS=-g -O2
-fsee GCJFLAGS=-g -O2 -fsee SYSROOT_CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET=-g -O2 -fsee
# /configure
# make BOOT_CFLAGS=-g -O2 -fsee CXXFLAGS=-g -O2 -fsee FCFLAGS=-g -O2
-fsee GCJFLAGS=-g -O2 -fsee
I used gcc-2.96 to compile gcc-3.4.6 core with the c++ libraries added.
It took almost if not two hours to compile and that was with these options:
make CFLAGS='-O' LIBCFLAGS='-g -O2'
LIBCXXFLAGS='-g -O2 -fno-implicit-templates' bootstrap
This is supposed to save space. I want to cut
On May 4, 2006, at 2:17 PM, Bill Cunningham wrote:
I used gcc-2.96 to compile gcc-3.4.6 core with the c++
libraries added.
It took almost if not two hours to compile and that was with these
options:
make CFLAGS='-O' LIBCFLAGS='-g -O2'
LIBCXXFLAGS='-g -O2 -fno-implicit-templates'
2006/5/4, Mike Stump [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On May 4, 2006, at 2:17 PM, Bill Cunningham wrote:
I used gcc-2.96 to compile gcc-3.4.6 core with the c++
libraries added.
It took almost if not two hours to compile and that was with these
options:
make CFLAGS='-O' LIBCFLAGS='-g -O2'
On May 4, 2006, at 2:45 PM, Gary Funck wrote:
I've been looking at how GCC 4.0 handles volatile internally,
and may have a question/two on that later, but in the meantime,
I noticed some interesting differences in generated code that I
thought were a bit unusual, and was wondering if someone
Hi Grabiel,
On 26 Apr 2006 20:36:27 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I hope that does not fire up warnings for the following case and variants
struct A { /* ... */ };
struct B { /* ... */ };
struct C : A, B { /* ... */ };
void f(B*);
C c;
f(c);
as the call to
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 06:29 ---
Subject: Bug 27359
Author: jakub
Date: Thu May 4 06:29:16 2006
New Revision: 113513
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113513
Log:
PR c++/27359
* parser.c (cp_parser_omp_for_loop):
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 06:34 ---
Subject: Bug 27388
Author: jakub
Date: Thu May 4 06:34:06 2006
New Revision: 113514
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113514
Log:
PR middle-end/27388
* gimplify.c (omp_is_private):
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 06:40 ---
Subject: Bug 27285
Author: jakub
Date: Thu May 4 06:40:15 2006
New Revision: 113515
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113515
Log:
PR tree-optimization/27285
Backport from
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 06:40 ---
Subject: Bug 25985
Author: jakub
Date: Thu May 4 06:40:15 2006
New Revision: 113515
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113515
Log:
PR tree-optimization/27285
Backport from
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 06:44 ---
Subject: Bug 27285
Author: jakub
Date: Thu May 4 06:43:50 2006
New Revision: 113516
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113516
Log:
PR tree-optimization/27285
*
Hi,
I just pulled from SVN and tried to build for IA64, and it fails with
Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: ./cc1-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap comparison failure!
./varasm.o differs
./gcc.o differs
--- /tmp/gcc-stage2.dump2006-05-04 16:39:19.0 +1000
+++ /tmp/gcc-stage3.dump
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 06:52 ---
As I see it, some part of ia64.c (or the stack displacement code) is being
miscompiling giving the different answers in the stack misplacement.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #10 from anlauf at gmx dot de 2006-05-04 07:22 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
Fixed by the additional of -fall-intrinsics option.
Steve,
the -fall-intrinsics option does not work when
in addition -Wall is specified.
The original code the leads to:
In file iargc.f90:4
--- Comment #21 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 07:45
---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #22 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 07:45
---
Subject: Bug 26447
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu May 4 07:44:37 2006
New Revision: 113517
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113517
Log:
2006-05-04 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 09:34 ---
Fixed in SVN.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 09:35 ---
Fixed in SVN.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from P dot Schaffnit at access dot rwth-aachen dot de
2006-05-04 09:38 ---
Hi!
My (not reduced) code compiles again!
Sorry for the delay, but compiling the whole does take some time...
Thanks a lot!
Philippe
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27392
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 09:38 ---
Subject: Bug 27404
Author: paolo
Date: Thu May 4 09:37:56 2006
New Revision: 113519
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113519
Log:
2006-05-04 Douglas Gregor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
void
foo (void)
{
int i = 0;
#pragma omp parallel
#pragma omp for firstprivate (i)/* { dg-error predetermined iteration
var i must not be firstprivate } */
for (i = 0; i 10; i++)
;
}
void
bar (void)
{
int i = 0;
#pragma omp parallel for firstprivate (i) /* { dg-error
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-05-04 09:40 ---
Fixed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #2 from paul dot thomas at jet dot uk 2006-05-04 09:50 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Confirmed, this is a front-end issue.
we have:
struct calc_signal_type D.904;
D.904 = (*(struct calc_signal_type[0:] *)
outputs-data)[outputs-dim[0].stride *
void
foo (void)
{
int i = 0, j = 0;
#pragma omp for firstprivate (j)/* { dg-error j is private in outer
context } */
for (i = 0; i 10; i++)
j++;
}
int
bar (void)
{
int i, j;
#pragma omp for lastprivate (j) /* { dg-error j is private in outer
context } */
for (i = 0; i
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 10:22
---
David, do you plan on proceeding with your suggestion of disabling the power
multilib for 4.1.1? The compiler still cannot be bootstrapped on AIX 5.1.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
inline float quickBinaryToFloat( unsigned const in )
{
return reinterpret_cast float const ( in ) ;
}
float foo( unsigned x )
{
unsigned y = ( x * 2 ) + 1;
return quickBinaryToFloat( y );
}
[ wrong-code generated ]
$ i486-gnu-linux-g++ bin2float.cpp -Wall -O2 -c
--- Comment #9 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 10:49 ---
Fixed.
--
rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 11:58 ---
This missed diagnostic is known, as enabling a warning here would cause too
much false positives. But yes, you are violating strict-aliasing rules here.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27417
--- Comment #2 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-05-04 12:08 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
This missed diagnostic is known, as enabling a warning here would cause too
much false positives.
but what about -Wstrict-aliasing=2?
it doesn't report anything, so how can i check possible
-in specs.
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: /USER/philippe/Irix/Gcc_Sources/configure
--prefix=/WORK/philippe/Tools/Gcc --enable-languages=c,fortran
--with-mpfr=/WORK/philippe/Tools/Mpfr --with-gmp=/WORK/philippe/Tools/Gmp
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.2.0 20060504 (experimental)
PPS
--- Comment #5 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 12:43 ---
Subject: Bug 25962
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu May 4 12:42:55 2006
New Revision: 113522
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113522
Log:
PR middle-end/25962
* cgraphunit.c
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-05-04 13:15 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
Hi!
I would be interested in having the gcc libraries statically linked to my
binary, but still use one shared-object (a commercial library for which no
static version is available), so
--- Comment #3 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-05-04 13:21 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
$ ldd ./libfoo.so
/lib/libNoVersion.so.1 = /lib/libNoVersion.so.1 (0x40003000)
libc.so.6 = /lib/i686/libc.so.6 (0x40015000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 =
--- Comment #2 from P dot Schaffnit at access dot rwth-aachen dot de
2006-05-04 13:27 ---
Hi!
Thanks a lot!
That's exactly what I was looking for: I don't seem to be able to do the same
with libgfortran, though... have I missed something, or should request that?
Thanks!
Philippe
--- Comment #12 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 13:52 ---
Subject: Bug 26481
Author: dje
Date: Thu May 4 13:52:45 2006
New Revision: 113525
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113525
Log:
PR target/26481
* config/rs6000/rs6000.md
--- Comment #11 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 13:54 ---
Subject: Bug 26858
Author: aph
Date: Thu May 4 13:54:15 2006
New Revision: 113526
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113526
Log:
2006-05-04 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR java/26858
--- Comment #13 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 13:55 ---
I was waiting for feedback from the original reporter, which never was
supplied. I have committed the patch on mainline to the 4.1 branch. I do not
have access to an AIX 5.1 system and without more details, it is
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 13:57
---
Subject: Bug 27090
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu May 4 13:56:52 2006
New Revision: 113527
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113527
Log:
2006-05-04 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 13:57 ---
Subject: Bug 19792
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu May 4 13:56:52 2006
New Revision: 113527
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113527
Log:
2006-05-04 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 13:57 ---
Subject: Bug 21608
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu May 4 13:56:52 2006
New Revision: 113527
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113527
Log:
2006-05-04 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 13:57
---
Subject: Bug 14844
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu May 4 13:56:52 2006
New Revision: 113527
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113527
Log:
2006-05-04 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #13 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 13:57
---
Subject: Bug 14287
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu May 4 13:56:52 2006
New Revision: 113527
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113527
Log:
2006-05-04 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 14:00 ---
You cannot. Though you can try extending c-common.c:strict_aliasing_warning
and
cp/typeck.c:build_reinterpret_cast_1 to warn in this case.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27417
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 14:21 ---
Wording of 6.5.6/8 and /9 suggests that array objects larger than the maximum
value that fits in ptrdiff_t (which needs to be signed) invoke undefined
behavior,
not last because of the expression ((Q)+1)-(P) has the
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 14:47 ---
Confirmed. The problem is that the C++ frontend emits
unused_tmp = toLocal8Bit();
for the call. At least it has DECL_IGNORED set, so maybe I have a patch for
this.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #9 from rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz
2006-05-04 14:56 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] Unable to determine # of iterations for a
simple loop
Wording of 6.5.6/8 and /9 suggests that array objects larger than the maximum
value that fits in
The C frontend ICEs (since at least GCC 2.95.3) on the following
invalid code snippet:
==
void foo();
void foo(struct A a) {}
==
bug1.c:2: warning: 'struct A' declared inside parameter list
bug1.c:2: warning: its scope is only this
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 15:01
---
Testcase in comment #4 is fixed, for the original testcase the folding
missed-optimization still holds. But that's for another bug.
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 15:04 ---
bar is now fixed.
;; Function foo (foo)
Analyzing Edge Insertions.
foo (t)
{
bb 2:
return size_lookup[(int) t] == size_lookup[t];
}
;; Function bar (bar)
Analyzing Edge Insertions.
bar (t)
{
bb 2:
return
The C frontend ICEs on the following invalid code snippet:
==
struct A
{
int i;
void x[1];
};
void foo(struct A a) {}
==
bug.c:4: error: declaration of 'x' as array of voids
bug.c: In function 'foo':
bug.c:7: internal compiler
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 15:07 ---
Fixed.
;; Function bar (bar)
Analyzing Edge Insertions.
bar (f)
{
bb 2:
return (int) f;
}
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
The C++ frontend ICEs on the following invalid code snippet since GCC 3.0:
==
void foo(void i);
void bar() { foo(0); }
==
bug.cc:1: error: 'i' has incomplete type
bug.cc:1: error: invalid use of 'void'
bug.cc: In function 'void bar()':
--- Comment #14 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 15:13
---
Fixed.
after 034.t.fre:
;; Function foo (foo)
foo (a)
{
long int c;
short int b;
short int D.1528;
short int D.1527;
bb 2:
D.1527_2 = (short int) a_1;
b_3 = D.1527_2 3;
c_4 = (long int) b_3;
The C++ frontend accepts the following invalid code snippet since at least
GCC 2.95.3:
==
void foo(void = 0);
void bar() { foo(); }
==
--
Summary: Default argument for void parameter accepted
Product: gcc
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 15:21 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 15:22 ---
Configure GCC with --disable-shared instead.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from P dot Schaffnit at access dot rwth-aachen dot de
2006-05-04 15:25 ---
I hadn't thought about that...
Thanks a lot for your help!
Philippe
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27419
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 15:25 ---
I'm handling this.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 15:25 ---
The problem with 4.0 is that the CALL_EXPR uses the return slot address to
return, but we don't honour that.
Index: c-common.c
===
*** c-common.c
1 - 100 of 192 matches
Mail list logo
