Fedora 26 x86_64
r247595
~/src/gcc_current/configure --prefix=/usr/local/gcc_current
--enable-static --enable-checking=no --enable-languages=c,c++,lto
--enable-plugin --disable-multilib
make[3]: Leaving directory '/home/dimhen/build/gcc_current'
Comparing stages 2 and 3
Bootstrap comparison
clang' build is broken for me the same way
Dmitry
2013/12/5 Tobias Burnus tobias.bur...@physik.fu-berlin.de:
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 02:06:52PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
Another libsanitizer merge from upstream, r196489
(Quick follow up after the r196090 merge)
That commit
s/Eanble/Enable/
Thanks,
Dmitry
2012/12/9 Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com:
Hello!
I noticed in prologue/epilogue, GCC prefers to use MOVs followed by a
SP adjustment instead of a sequence of pushes/pops. The preference to
the MOVs are good for old CPU micro-architectures (before pentium-4,
Done. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44535
Thanks.
Dmitry
2010/6/14 Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com:
Дмитрий Дьяченко dim...@gmail.com writes:
Trunk g++/x86/160655 with -O0 compile test w/o errors, but with
-O[123] generates undefined symbol
Need i file a PR?
It certainly
Trunk g++/x86/160655 with -O0 compile test w/o errors, but with
-O[123] generates undefined symbol
-- cat 2010_06_13.cpp
namespace FOO {
template typename T
class A
{
public:
A(char *pMemMgr = 0);
void Enum();
virtual void OnProv() = 0;
virtual ~A() { }
};
typedef Achar B;
Thank You, Manual and Joel
I'll try to choose smth appropriate to start.
I am a little confused by the term:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm#How_to_Get_Involved.3F
3. AND at least one free software project you are a contributor of.
I have accepted patches (well, very small and very
I have no hardware to test patches, small free time to work and my
english is bad.
But sometimes i submit bug reports :)
2010/4/23 Manuel López-Ibáñez lopeziba...@gmail.com:
This seems to be the question running around the blogosphere for
several projects. And I would like to ask all people
Hello,
current (gcc version 4.5.0 20090727 (experimental) [trunk revision
150136] (GCC))
for code
#include map
class a;
class b;
class c {
public:
b *p;
bool isNull() const { return p == 0; }
};
class d : public c {
virtual ~d() {};
};
std::mapb*, a* z;
void foo(d x) {
You are right. In rev.150316 there are no ICE.
Thanks,
Dmitry
2009/7/31 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 9:53 AM, Дмитрий Дьяченкоdim...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
current (gcc version 4.5.0 20090727 (experimental) [trunk revision
150136] (GCC))
for code
The following code
int bar(int *global)
{
int local;
if(local != global)
return 0;
return local;
}
compiled with gcc/x86/Linux version 4.4.0 20090204 (experimental)
[trunk revision 143938]
trigger warning:
# g++ -Wall -O2 -c test4.cpp
test4.cpp: In function 'int bar(int*)':
Thanks,
Sorry, but I don't understood - is it impossible to fix, so there are
no needs in bug report?
Or PR about this issue already exists?
Or it's not a bug?
Dmitry
2009/2/5 Andrew Pinski pins...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Дмитрий Дьяченко dim...@gmail.com wrote
Hello, g++-current ( [trunk revision 143790] ) produce incorrect
warning. Need I file bug-report?
# g++ -Wall -O2 -c test3.cpp
test3.cpp: In function 'void bar()':
test3.cpp:16: warning: dereferencing pointer 'anonymous' does break
strict-aliasing rules
g++-current generates messages which
1) contains compiler generated symbols
2) refers to gcc internal header (stl_tree.h)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] gcc_err]# g++ -Wall -c -O3 test.cpp
test.cpp: In member function 'void
test::bar(std::_List_iteratorKeyPairPtrint, int )':
test.cpp:14: warning:
done PR #38477.
I only was trying accuratly report. The message was readable but looks unusual.
Dmitry
2008/12/10 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Дмитрий Дьяченко [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
g++-current generates messages which
1) contains compiler generated
14 matches
Mail list logo
