If one writes a bit of code like this:
int foo( void )
{
register int x asm( Rn );
asm volatile ( INSN_A %0 \n\t : =r (x) );
bar();
asm volatile ( INSN_B %0,%0 \n\t : =r (x) : 0 (x) );
return x;
}
and Rn is a register not saved over function calls, then gcc does not save it
but allows
Please see the whole E-mail Please send a GCC for
windows. Language:Chinese or English. I'm a Chinese student,now I'm
studing C++.I want a GCC(For Windows,Chinese),but my English isn't very
good,and I can't find GCC. So,please send me a GCC,for tomorrow of
The test fails with a link error, as 'round' and 'rint' are only C99.
Fixed thusly, tested on SPARC/Solaris 8, applied on the mainline as obvious.
2011-10-13 Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com
* gcc.dg/builtins-67.c: Guard iround and irint with HAVE_C99_RUNTIME.
--
Eric Botcazou
On 10/13/2011 12:26 AM, Zoltán Kócsi wrote:
So I don't know if it is a bug (i.e. the compiler is supposed to protect local
reg vars) or just misleading/omitted information in the info page?
It's the documentation that could perhaps be improved.
Local register variables are not protected from
Hi
I would like to share some plans about improving the situation with
vector alignment tracking. First of all, I would like to start with a
well-known bug: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50716.
There are several aspects of the problem:
1) We would like to avoid the quiet
Artem Shinkarov artyom.shinkar...@gmail.com writes:
1) Currently in C we cannot provide information that an array is
aligned to a certain number. The problem is hidden in the fact, that
Have you considered doing it the other way round: when an optimization
needs something to be aligned, make
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Andi Kleen a...@firstfloor.org wrote:
Artem Shinkarov artyom.shinkar...@gmail.com writes:
1) Currently in C we cannot provide information that an array is
aligned to a certain number. The problem is hidden in the fact, that
Have you considered doing it the
Or I am missing someting?
I often see the x86 vectorizer with -mtune=generic generate a lot of
complicated code just to adjust for potential misalignment.
My thought was just if the alias oracle knows what the original
declaration is, and it's available for changes (e.g. LTO), it would be
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 06:57:47PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
Or I am missing someting?
I often see the x86 vectorizer with -mtune=generic generate a lot of
complicated code just to adjust for potential misalignment.
My thought was just if the alias oracle knows what the original
From: Richard Henderson r...@redhat.com
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:49:19 -0700
There's a code sample 7-1 that illustrates a 16x16 multiply:
fmul8sux16 %f0, %f1, %f2
fmul8ulx16 %f0, %f1, %f3
fpadd16%f2, %f3, %f4
Be wary of code examples that don't even assemble (even
From: David Miller da...@davemloft.net
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 14:26:36 -0400 (EDT)
product = src1 * src2;
scaled = (product 0x0000) 8;
if (product 0x80)
scaled++;
In fact, all of the partitioned multiply instructions scale the result
by 8 bits with
On 10/13/2011 11:26 AM, David Miller wrote:
Therefore, I think this 16 x 16 multiply operation isn't the kind
you think it is, and it's therefore not appropriate to use this in the
compiler for vector multiplies.
Ah, I see the magic word in the docs now: fixed point.
I.e. class MODE_ACCUM not
From: Richard Henderson r...@redhat.com
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:49:19 -0700
The comment for fpmerge_vis is not correct.
I believe that the operation is representable with
(vec_select:V8QI
(vec_concat:V8QI
(match_operand:V4QI 1 ...)
(match_operand:V4QI 2 ...)
On 10/13/2011 12:55 PM, David Miller wrote:
-(define_insn vis3_addsub_ss_insnvbits_vis
+(define_insn vis3_addsub_ss_patnamemode
Missing a 3 on the end. Otherwise these look ok.
Unfortunately, that would involve some ABI changes for the VIS
builtins. I'm trending towards considering just
From: Richard Henderson r...@redhat.com
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 13:06:19 -0700
On 10/13/2011 12:55 PM, David Miller wrote:
-(define_insn vis3_addsub_ss_insnvbits_vis
+(define_insn vis3_addsub_ss_patnamemode
Missing a 3 on the end. Otherwise these look ok.
Thanks for finding that.
Unfortunately, that would involve some ABI changes for the VIS
builtins. I'm trending towards considering just changing things
anyways since the VIS intrinsics were next to unusable beforehand.
Could you elaborate? The calling conventions for vectors (like for the other
classes) shouldn't
Snapshot gcc-4.5-20111013 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.5-20111013/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.5 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
From: Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:41:42 +0200
Unfortunately, that would involve some ABI changes for the VIS
builtins. I'm trending towards considering just changing things
anyways since the VIS intrinsics were next to unusable beforehand.
Could you
Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com writes:
This email is in reference to the default_elf_asm_named_section
function in the varasm.c file.
This function is defined like this:
void
default_elf_asm_named_section (const char *name, unsigned int flags,
花儿对我笑 870523...@qq.com writes:
Please see the whole E-mail Please send a GCC
for windows. Language:Chinese or English. I'm a Chinese student,now
I'm studing C++.I want a GCC(For Windows,Chinese),but my English isn't very
good,and I can't find GCC.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50350
--- Comment #4 from Matthias Klose doko at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
06:21:36 UTC ---
still seen on the 4.6 branch with 20111012
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50684
--- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
07:18:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
Well, comment #5 is 'equivalent' to comment #3: Both have a non-pointer intent
(which is what you suggested in your initial comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50703
--- Comment #3 from hoenle2...@kayser-threde.com 2011-10-13 07:56:47 UTC ---
I will try libstdc++ 4.6.x or 4.5.x. Question: May I use this new library with
the relatively old compiler I am currently utilizing or do I need to upgrade to
a newer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40825
jbeulich at novell dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50703
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
08:11:42 UTC ---
You cannot use libstdc++ separately from the GCC version it ships with, so to
use libstdc++ 4.6.1 you must use G++ 4.6.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50711
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
08:18:07 UTC ---
See http://lwg.github.com/issues/lwg-defects.html#1225 and also 1270
result_of cannot be used for SFINAE, it requires that its arguments be a valid
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50711
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
08:19:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
result_of cannot be used for SFINAE, it requires that its arguments be a valid
expression
Should read: it requires that its
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50364
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50698
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50698
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
09:00:17 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Oct 13 09:00:01 2011
New Revision: 179895
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179895
Log:
2011-10-13 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50713
Bug #: 50713
Summary: SLP vs loop: code generated differs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50708
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50709
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50712
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50711
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38174
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-10-13
09:38:57 UTC ---
Thanks Jason, I thought we had to purely *add* overloads. Therefore we'll have
to refactor the code a bit I guess, to always have a single call at the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50713
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49777
Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50712
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
10:06:04 UTC ---
Reduced testcase (suspicious because of address-taking of a valist):
typedef __builtin_va_list __va_list;
typedef __va_list __gnuc_va_list;
typedef
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50712
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49777
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50702
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50712
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
10:44:12 UTC ---
I have a patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50705
--- Comment #4 from SK santoshkumar.a at gmail dot com 2011-10-13 10:46:32
UTC ---
Please download the full dump(14MB)from ftp0.lsil.com by following below
commands
login:
user: ftp,
password: anonymous,
cd pub
binary #
get
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50589
--- Comment #1 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
10:54:23 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Thu Oct 13 10:54:19 2011
New Revision: 179911
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179911
Log:
PR ada/50589
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50589
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50527
--- Comment #12 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13 11:10:06 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Thu Oct 13 11:10:01 2011
New Revision: 179916
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179916
Log:
Fix PR middle-end/50527 ChangeLog entry
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50527
--- Comment #13 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13 11:18:14 UTC ---
Author: vries
Revision: 179655
Modified property: svn:log
Modified: svn:log at Thu Oct 13 11:18:09 2011
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50714
Bug #: 50714
Summary: codecvt_byname::codecvt::_M_c_locale_codecvt not
initialized by destroyed
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50714
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50703
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
12:01:56 UTC ---
was gcc built with a non-default value for --enable-clocale ?
what locale is being used by the application?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50714
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50712
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
12:07:49 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Oct 13 12:07:44 2011
New Revision: 179919
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179919
Log:
2011-10-13 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50714
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
12:07:57 UTC ---
(Bah, I didn't actually mean to change the status, my browser did it for me!)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50714
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-10-13
12:10:50 UTC ---
If you want, you can do that, but in practice nothing will work anyway... Up to
you, I wont be able to do any serious QoI work on these features for a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50714
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
12:13:07 UTC ---
Richard, could you attached the testcase you referred to?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50714
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-10-13
12:16:26 UTC ---
Richard knows - we exchanged some messages off-Bugzilla - that the real issue
with the original bug report he is handling is that no codecvt specs are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50703
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-10-13
12:22:45 UTC ---
Note that in case problems persist, a testcase is *required* for anything
concrete to happen. It's impossible to diagnose in any serious detail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50684
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13 12:27:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
I think the comments of the following program are correct; however, the
compilers I tested either rejected all - or they compiled it without
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50684
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13 12:31:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
call move_alloc (x%a, a) ! Invalid (2)
This one corresponds to the original test case.
Sorry, of course I meant this one:
call
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50714
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
12:42:04 UTC ---
Created attachment 25482
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25482
testcase
Here.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50712
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50354
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50644
--- Comment #5 from Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2011-10-13
13:22:40 UTC ---
Note I need to keep reverting this patch to do any substantial builds.
I hear it's also failing for other too.
Any progress in fixing it? Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50644
--- Comment #6 from Michael Matz matz at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13 14:04:36
UTC ---
See comment #2, you need to help in debugging it. I can't reproduce, the
emutls problem is fixed, and with the information I have I can't speculate
which
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38174
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill jason at redhat dot com 2011-10-13 14:27:12
UTC ---
Just use composite_pointer_type. :)
Jason
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50715
Bug #: 50715
Summary: build with --enable-checking=release fails with linker
error
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50716
Bug #: 50716
Summary: Segmentation fault caused by misaligned vector access
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50659
--- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13 15:04:05 UTC ---
Author: janus
Date: Thu Oct 13 15:03:58 2011
New Revision: 179923
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179923
Log:
2011-10-13 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50709
Serge Belyshev belyshev at depni dot sinp.msu.ru changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50717
Bug #: 50717
Summary: Silent code gen fault with incorrect widening of
multiply
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50717
--- Comment #1 from Matthew Gretton-Dann mgretton at sourceware dot org
2011-10-13 15:49:15 UTC ---
Created attachment 25484
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25484
Single function testcase (not executable)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50717
--- Comment #2 from Matthew Gretton-Dann mgretton at sourceware dot org
2011-10-13 15:49:46 UTC ---
Created attachment 25485
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25485
Correct tree output
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50717
--- Comment #3 from Matthew Gretton-Dann mgretton at sourceware dot org
2011-10-13 15:50:48 UTC ---
Created attachment 25486
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25486
Incorrect tree output
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30282
Peter Bergner bergner at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50326
Steve Ellcey sje at cup dot hp.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50717
Andrew Stubbs ams at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ams at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50718
Bug #: 50718
Summary: [4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE (fold_convert) with
-fcheck=pointer
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44382
--- Comment #9 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
17:30:14 UTC ---
Just adding some status information well after the fact...
We experimented with adding powerpc64 hooks to use the parallel reassociation
support from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50715
--- Comment #1 from Sean McGovern gseanmcg at gmail dot com 2011-10-13
17:46:26 UTC ---
configured thusly:
/SOURCES/gcc-trunk/configure --prefix=/BUILD/gcc/179918
--target=i386-pc-solaris2.10 --enable-checking=release --with-gnu-as
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50715
--- Comment #2 from Sean McGovern gseanmcg at gmail dot com 2011-10-13
17:52:32 UTC ---
Here's a better snippet of what it was up to:
libtool: link: /BUILD/gcc/obj-179918/./gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc
-B/BUILD/gcc/obj-179918/./gcc -nostdinc++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48823
Steve Ellcey sje at cup dot hp.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50618
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
18:01:58 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Oct 13 18:01:51 2011
New Revision: 179934
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179934
Log:
PR c++/50618
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50618
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
18:02:15 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Oct 13 18:02:10 2011
New Revision: 179935
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179935
Log:
PR c++/50618
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50618
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
18:03:13 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Oct 13 18:03:06 2011
New Revision: 179938
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179938
Log:
PR c++/50618
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48035
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48035
--- Comment #12 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
18:03:01 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Oct 13 18:02:53 2011
New Revision: 179937
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179937
Log:
PR c++/48035
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50618
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
18:02:34 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Oct 13 18:02:27 2011
New Revision: 179936
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179936
Log:
PR c++/50618
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50618
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50718
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.2
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50718
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
18:46:33 UTC ---
Untested draft patch:
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c
@@ -3344,2 +3344,4 @@ gfc_conv_procedure_call (gfc_se * se, gfc_symbol *
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49242
Serge Belyshev belyshev at depni dot sinp.msu.ru changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50719
Bug #: 50719
Summary: segmentation fault when attempting to build libav with
gcc trunk
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50437
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50716
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13
19:44:32 UTC ---
I think vec has an alignment requirement which makes the testcase invalid.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50716
Artem Shinkarov artyom.shinkaroff at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50694
--- Comment #1 from Oleg Endo oleg.e...@t-online.de 2011-10-13 19:54:31 UTC
---
As it turns out, this is already handled by the line
#define DRIVER_SELF_SPECS %{m2a:%{ml:%eSH2a does not support little-endian}}
in sh.h.
However, it doesn't
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48823
--- Comment #4 from Jeroen Demeyer jdemeyer at cage dot ugent.be 2011-10-13
20:05:21 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
The difference in results is due to the use of the fma instructions (fused
multiply add). If you don't want the fma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48823
--- Comment #5 from Steve Ellcey sje at cup dot hp.com 2011-10-13 20:16:46
UTC ---
I am not sure any set of flags will guarantee strict IEEE floating point
behavior. See PR37845 for some more information.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50720
Bug #: 50720
Summary: deprecated doesn't work as expected for functions
returning pointer
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.3
Status:
1 - 100 of 281 matches
Mail list logo
