On 06/03/2010 09:47 PM, Robert Dewar wrote:
Andrew Haley wrote:
Right, but I didn't think there was any plan to convert en masse to
C++ -- just to allow people to use it where appropriate. Apart from
anything else, there's always a nonzero probablility of breaking
something.
It's the
Hi :
I found the temp register used for saving registers when expanding
prologue is defined by
macro MIPS_PROLOGUE_TEMP_REGNUM on mips target, like:
#define MIPS_PROLOGUE_TEMP_REGNUM \
(cfun-machine-interrupt_handler_p ? K0_REG_NUM : GP_REG_FIRST + 3)
I don't understand why using registers
Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com writes:
I'm investigating, which current assemblers are broken, since my
assembler from binutils-2.20 happily assembles:
addl x...@gotoff(%ebx), %eax
in 32bit mode, as well as
addq x...@gotpcrel(%rip), %rax
in 64bit mode.
Looking into gcc install
On 06/03/10 14:39, Steinar Bang wrote:
Larry Evans cppljev...@suddenlink.net:
claims that switch statements are faster than virtual function calls.
That's not really interesting, is it? The overhead and downsides of
virtual functions are well known.
The upside is the possibility to use
Hi.
This morning's i386 build fails with the following error:
libbackend.a(sol2.o): In function `solaris_output_init_fini':
/home/ahaas/gnu/gcc.git/gcc/config/sol2.c:109: undefined reference to
`print_operand'
/home/ahaas/gnu/gcc.git/gcc/config/sol2.c:116: undefined reference to
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 01:44:02PM +, Art Haas wrote:
This morning's i386 build fails with the following error:
libbackend.a(sol2.o): In function `solaris_output_init_fini':
/home/ahaas/gnu/gcc.git/gcc/config/sol2.c:109: undefined reference to
`print_operand'
Amker.Cheng amker.ch...@gmail.com writes:
I found the temp register used for saving registers when expanding
prologue is defined by
macro MIPS_PROLOGUE_TEMP_REGNUM on mips target, like:
#define MIPS_PROLOGUE_TEMP_REGNUM \
(cfun-machine-interrupt_handler_p ? K0_REG_NUM : GP_REG_FIRST +
Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com writes:
* config/i386/i386-protos.h (ix86_print_operand): Declare.
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_print_operand): Make non-static.
* config/i386/sol2.h (ASM_OUTPUT_CALL): Call ix86_print_operand.
* rtl.h (output_operand): Declare.
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 07:45:20AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com writes:
* config/i386/i386-protos.h (ix86_print_operand): Declare.
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_print_operand): Make non-static.
* config/i386/sol2.h (ASM_OUTPUT_CALL): Call
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 13:42, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
I'll turn that into a question: does any GCC maintainer intend to convert
working code into C++, with no substantive changes?
Not me. Mostly new code and re-engineer only those parts where the
value of C++ is a clear advantage.
Hi,
What's about the friends in C++.. I think it should be forbidden by
C++ coding-style, as it is mainly a sign of weak OO design to use
them.
Kai
| (\_/) This is Bunny. Copy and paste
| (='.'=) Bunny into your signature to help
| ()_() him gain world domination
Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com writes:
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 07:45:20AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com writes:
* config/i386/i386-protos.h (ix86_print_operand): Declare.
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_print_operand): Make non-static.
*
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
I would even imagine that later, one could configure GCC to have only a
C++ front-end, but no more a C one. That probably would be unusual,
since many important applications which want to be compiled by GCC (I am
thinking of the Linux kernel)
On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, Artem Shinkarov wrote:
This is a reworked patch of Andrew Pinski Subscripting on vector
types in terms of GSoC 2010 [Artjoms Sinkarovs].
We can't consider it without a copyright assignment.
The documentation was not changed. May be there could be some more
ideas to
The FSF has approved the inclusion of automatically generated
cross-reference information (such as that generated by Doxygen,
Synopsis, or JavaDoc) in GCC, using GPLv3 for that documentation, rather
than the GFDL. There was no license issue in this regard; the question
was a policy question. In
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 08:32:26AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com writes:
Looking at things a little more closely, output_address is exported in
output.h. I suppose output_operand should be exported there as well?
Yes, put the declaration there, by
On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, Richard Guenther wrote:
I'd like us to stick with C comments only. I defintely do not like
a mix of both styles and I can't see an advantage of C++ comments.
Agreed. Moving code between bits of the compiler should not mean creating
ugly inconsistencies of formatting and
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Mark Mitchell wrote:
This explicit permission re. cross-references does not resolve the
question of auto-generating parts of GFDL manuals, such as those
containing documentation about target hooks or about command-line
options. (For target hooks, we might wish to consider
On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, Michael Meissner wrote:
You and Richard are correct. I've forgotten that I needed -d on cvs to add
directories after using svn for a few years. I recall there were tools to
convert cvs to svn (such as cvs2svn), but I haven't used them personally.
The issue is not and
On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, Mark Mitchell wrote:
For API documentation, or, in general, for new manuals, I have no
opinion. My guess, though, is that the FSF would want the same
invariant sections and such as are on the existing manuals.
The standard rules for Cover Texts and inclusion of Invariant
On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
Converting to C++ is a major change. Does that justify to have a major
release (5.0.0)?
No. It's not in any way user-visible. In principle I agree with what
Zack said in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-06/msg00243.html on version
numbers; certainly
On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, Richard Guenther wrote:
I also notice that all cc1 binaries are dynamically linked against
libstdc++ - didn't we want to use -static-libstdc++ and link against
the libstdc++ we bootstrap?
Yes, that is stated in Ian's slides. There are a series of related
configure
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
I have written a proposed set of C++ coding conventions on the wiki at
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CppConventions
This is only a preliminary proposal. It requires fleshing out and
discussion. Comments welcome.
I think the coding style warning
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Richard Guenther wrote:
The mark_addressable_vector change was at least semi-ugly. I think
it is reasonable to require a constant index for register qualified vectors.
What does the Cell document describing the extension being implemented by
the original patch say here?
Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com writes:
On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
Converting to C++ is a major change. Does that justify to have a major
release (5.0.0)?
No. It's not in any way user-visible. In principle I agree with what
Zack said in
Hi.
The patch resolves the build failures.
Thanks.
Art Haas
-Original Message-
From: Nathan Froyd [mailto:froy...@codesourcery.com]
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 12:29 PM
To: Ian Lance Taylor
Cc: Arthur Haas; gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Bootstrap failed for i386-pc-solaris2.10 and
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com writes:
I think we should change the gcc major release to 5 when we change the
libstdc++.so major version number to 7.
seconded.
-- Gaby
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Artem Shinkarov
artyom.shinkar...@gmail.com wrote:
+ error_at (loc, index value is out of bound);
That is wrong. The Cell C/C++ language document says out of bounds
accesses are undefined (that is at runtime).
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
On 4 June 2010 21:55, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
I think we should change the gcc major release to 5 when we change the
libstdc++.so major version number to 7.
I don't speak for the other libstdc++ maintainers, but I think that's
a great idea.
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
I repeat my request from the RM QA for a guide for reviewers on how to
detect hidden overhead in the presence of C++ features. When will a
structure/class/union be larger than might be expected in C? When will
C++ statements involve runtime overhead that might not
On 06/04/10 18:48, Mark Mitchell wrote:
In C++, you can of course make what looks like
simple code do something expensive; for example, you can make a + b be
arbitrarily complex if a and b are instances of class types and you
have overloaded +.
And, in general, we are trying to avoid
Jeff Law wrote:
In C++, you can of course make what looks like
simple code do something expensive; for example, you can make a + b be
arbitrarily complex if a and b are instances of class types and you
have overloaded +.
And, in general, we are trying to avoid situations where
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:55 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
On 06/04/10 18:48, Mark Mitchell wrote:
In C++, you can of course make what looks like
simple code do something expensive; for example, you can make a + b be
arbitrarily complex if a and b are instances of class types and you
On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 16:23:29 +0200, Manuel López-Ibáñez
lopeziba...@gmail.com wrote:
Great! Go ahead, please. The wiki is easy to edit.
Finally I got around to do it.
Editing is easy ... kind of :) Creating the Links was easy but I
failed do discover how I could actually make them point to
--- Comment #17 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 06:50
---
Subject: Bug 34670
Author: tkoenig
Date: Fri Jun 4 06:50:11 2010
New Revision: 160253
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160253
Log:
2010-06-04 Thomas Koenig tkoe...@gcc.gnu.org
PR
--- Comment #18 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 06:51
---
Fixed (finally).
Closing.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 07:06 ---
After the discussion, I think we can close this as WONTFIX.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 07:15 ---
Can we close this?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40452
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 07:45 ---
AFAIU, you can't randomly change signed to unsigned, due to different overflow
semantics, which is why IVOPTS doesn't make this change itself. Imagine you
enter the loop with count = 0, and with a second counter
--- Comment #30 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 09:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=20833)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20833action=view)
rh598310.i.bz2
Another testcase from wine,
./cc1 -m32 -fPIC -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 rh598310.i -quiet
takes
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 09:08 ---
If the result of the conversion is only used in an exit equality test against a
constant it can be dropped. This could also happen in a following
forwprop run which is our single tree-combiner (though that
--- Comment #31 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 09:24 ---
Created an attachment (id=20834)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20834action=view)
limit-depth.patch
Quick patch that brings the time down to 1 minute 15 sec.
From the callgrind dump on this
--- Comment #32 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 09:30 ---
Created an attachment (id=20835)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20835action=view)
hack
Hack that shows that the maximum depth is 3 even for the found == NULL cases.
Alex tells me on IRC he has
--- Comment #33 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 09:51 ---
Mine
--
aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned
--- Comment #2 from doko at ubuntu dot com 2010-06-04 09:51 ---
having an objdump which supports both the host and the target works around this
issue.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43847
--- Comment #4 from doko at ubuntu dot com 2010-06-04 09:53 ---
this is fixed on the trunk
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43759
--- Comment #34 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 10:03 ---
Created an attachment (id=20836)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20836action=view)
Patch that fixes the bug and verifies recursion is bounded as expected
This patch (except for comments and
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 11:00 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 11:00 ---
Subject: Bug 41584
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jun 4 11:00:09 2010
New Revision: 160258
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160258
Log:
2010-06-04 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
PR
--- Comment #35 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 11:03
---
Created an attachment (id=20837)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20837action=view)
bnc611650
Another testcase from open-office this time, on i?86-linux only.
$ time g++ -c -g -Os
--- Comment #36 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 11:15 ---
With Alex' patch with checking guarded with #ifdef ENABLE_CHECKING (currently
bootstrapping/regtesting that) I see on x86_64 on the trunk:
time ./cc1plus -m32 -quiet -g -Os -fomit-frame-pointer bug-611650_analysis.ii
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:03 ---
More complete testcase:
// PR c++/44412
// { dg-do compile }
// { dg-options -Wunused }
struct S
{
static const int a = 3;
static int b;
int c;
};
const int S::a;
int S::b = 4;
int
f1 ()
{
S s;
return
This code:
#include string
int foo(const std::string a, const std::string b) { return a.compare(b); }
compiles to code like this on x86-64:
[...]
subq%rdx, %r8
movl$2147483647, %eax
cmpq$2147483647, %r8
jg .L2
movl$-2147483648, %eax
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:22 ---
Yes, we can CLOSE the bug as FIXED.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
When I recently needed to use htab_* functions from libiberty's hashtab.h, I
found
that they are completely undocumented: the comments in the header aren't enough
to use them, so I had to look at both the implementation and other uses to
figure
things out.
--
Summary: hashtab.h
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:32 ---
libiberty has documentation in source libiberty/hashtab.c.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
The recent introduction of this patch
2010-05-29 Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net
* configure.ac: Add multilib support for gmp. Proper -I and -L
flags for gmp are added.
broke bootstrap on i386-pc-solaris2.11 and almost certainly at least all
Solaris 2
platforms with a static
--- Comment #7 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:44 ---
Subject: Bug 42502
Author: bernds
Date: Fri Jun 4 12:44:01 2010
New Revision: 160260
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160260
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/39871
PR
--- Comment #6 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:44 ---
Subject: Bug 42500
Author: bernds
Date: Fri Jun 4 12:44:01 2010
New Revision: 160260
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160260
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/39871
PR
--- Comment #24 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:44 ---
Subject: Bug 39871
Author: bernds
Date: Fri Jun 4 12:44:01 2010
New Revision: 160260
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160260
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/39871
PR
--- Comment #7 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:44 ---
Subject: Bug 40615
Author: bernds
Date: Fri Jun 4 12:44:01 2010
New Revision: 160260
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160260
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/39871
PR
--- Comment #37 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:45
---
Subject: Bug 41371
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jun 4 12:44:41 2010
New Revision: 160261
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160261
Log:
2010-06-04 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44415
--- Comment #16 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:53 ---
Confirmed: fails for 32-bit and Solaris 10+, unsupported on Solaris 8 and 9.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:58 ---
This is not proper documentation: most part of libiberty use comments which
can be extracted and put into the .texi files, while hashtab.c does not.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 13:08 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Because our tree reassoc doesn't re-associate them.
The tree reassoc pass makes it slower:
[...@gnu-6 44382]$ cat x.i
extern int a, b, c, d, e, f;
void
foo ()
{
a = (b * c) * (d * e);
--
fabien at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |fabien at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 13:21 ---
Yes, reassoc linearizes instead of building a tree (saves one (or was it two?)
registers at best).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44382
On Linux/x86-64, revision 160243 failed to
build 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006 at -O2 and -O3:
g++ -c -o block_vector.o -DSPEC_CPU -DNDEBUG -Iinclude -DBOOST_DISABLE_THREADS
-Ddeal_II_dimension=3 -O3 -ffast-math -funroll-loops -DSPEC_CPU_LP64
block_vector.cc
In file included from
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44416
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 13:26 ---
It may be caused by revision 160231:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-06/msg00144.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 13:42
---
I do not have access to those benchmarks. Whoever has, should check that
ptrdiff_t is used properly, either after including cstddef, then it can be
used both qualified with std:: and unqualified together with
make check-target-libstdc++-v3 fails because ptrdiff_t is undefined.
std::ptrdiff_t works.
Maybe this bug is related to the Linux system run on. I have openSuse 11.1
running.
configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --program-suffix=-rep
--prefix=$HOME/gcc/install_trunk_1
In file included from
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 13:49
---
I can't reproduce this. I booted and tested many times on various linux systems
and HJ already reported many succesfull testresults since. Please remove
everything from the build dir, gave everything fresh and
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 13:56 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Yes, reassoc linearizes instead of building a tree (saves one (or was it two?)
registers at best).
Should we always build a tree? It may increase register pressure.
--
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 14:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=20838)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20838action=view)
gcc46-pr44412.patch
Untested patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44412
--- Comment #2 from singler at kit dot edu 2010-06-04 14:16 ---
I had cleaned the builddir already.
Adding
#include cstddef
solves the problem.
The crucial file seems to be
lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.6.0/include/stddef.h
Only if it is (indirectly) included, ptrdiff_t is
--- Comment #3 from singler at kit dot edu 2010-06-04 14:19 ---
Bug 44417 is very likely to have the same cause, but here, we can reproduce it
more easily, using the testsuite.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 44417 ***
--
singler at kit dot edu changed:
--- Comment #3 from singler at kit dot edu 2010-06-04 14:19 ---
*** Bug 44416 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
singler at kit dot edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 14:23
---
To be clear: does a normal 'make check' (either from the root of the build dir
or from inside the library build dir) work? Because it works here and fo
everybody else on the testresult mailing list, also for
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 14:28
---
Hey, 44416 is *not* a duplicate! Please re-open it immediately.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44417
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 14:29
---
Not a duplicate, another issue.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #49 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 14:33 ---
Subject: Bug 42776
Author: ro
Date: Fri Jun 4 14:32:19 2010
New Revision: 160269
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160269
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2010-04-27 Dave Korn
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 14:40 ---
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has
2. Left linearization of the expression trees, so that (A+B)+(C+D)
becomes (((A+B)+C)+D), which is easier for us to rewrite later.
During linearization, we place the operands of
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 14:52
---
Note that cxxabi.h already includes stddef.h and at that line 371 uses
ptrdiff_t unqualified, thus everything is fine. I suspect you simply forgot to
update your compiler, because the current library does not
--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 14:55
---
Closing.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 14:56
---
I don't have the SPEC benchmarks either, but probably deal.II uses ptrdiff_t
unqualified, without explicitly including either cstddef or stddef.h
--- Comment #6 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 15:00
---
certainly true for an older version
http://ganymed.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de/~deal/5.2.0/doxygen/deal.II/block__vector_8h.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44416
--- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 15:16 ---
Subject: Bug 25880
Author: manu
Date: Fri Jun 4 15:15:38 2010
New Revision: 160274
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160274
Log:
2010-06-04 Manuel López-Ibáñez m...@gcc.gnu.org
PR
--- Comment #12 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE 2010-06-04
15:21 ---
Subject: Re: lto-elf.c fails to compile on Solaris
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-03 13:47
---
The problem seems to have vanished, so eventually the fix can be
--- Comment #4 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 15:21 ---
The infrastructure to enable this has been added in GCC 4.6 and some
diagnostics are already making use of it, in particular the one reported here.
So I consider this FIXED.
If anyone finds particular diagnostics
--- Comment #2 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 15:50 ---
I am going to close this as WONTFIX for the following reasons:
* We do not want this because:
a) We have too many options.
b) These options would be of very limited and temporary use but we will have
to support
--- Comment #4 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 15:56 ---
Hi Jay,
-Wuninitialized is quite unreliable in old compilers and also we do not know
what patches Apple applies to its copy of GCC. This is why -Werror is not used
in the first stage of building GCC. We do not see
--- Comment #1 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 15:59 ---
Who is in charge of GCC infrastructure (wiki, mailing lists, bugzilla)?
I am afraid there is no one, so this is not going to be fixed soon. Meanwhile
use Google.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #8 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 16:03 ---
As mentioned in the comments above, there is an easy way to achieve this
already without needing to make the compiler more complex and slower. So I will
close this as WONTFIX.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 16:11 ---
Please fellow GCC maintainers, after checking that a bug is indeed a bug,
please set the status to NEW. What more than 1000 unconfirmed reports!
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #5 from jay dot krell at cornell dot edu 2010-06-04 16:20
---
Then don't use when I -disable-bootstrap..
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44307
--- Comment #6 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 16:22 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Then don't use when I -disable-bootstrap..
Do you mean that -Werror is used when you disable-bootstrap? If so, I think
that is a bug. Or you mean to not use warnings? I think that would be
--- Comment #7 from jay dot krell at cornell dot edu 2010-06-04 16:30
---
I mean -Wuninitialized.
-Werror is already omitted.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44307
--- Comment #7 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 16:36 ---
As the author of the benchmark I can confirm that we apparently forgot
to include the proper header file. So you can call it a defect in 447.dealII.
The question is how to deal with this, of course.
W.
--
bangerth
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
