--- Additional Comments From olh at suse dot de 2005-05-11 06:17 ---
Is there an attribute to declare a function as 'will never return NULL'?
In this case it is true, the called function dereferences the pointer
to return before returning to the caller.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-11
05:57 ---
Subject: Bug 21471
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-11 05:57:07
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : Change
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-11
05:56 ---
Subject: Bug 21471
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-11 05:56:20
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
libgfortran: C
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
||debian dot org
Known to fail|
seen with CVS 20050508
./xgcc -B./ -B/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/m68k-linux/bin/ -isystem
/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/m68k-linux/include -isystem
/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/m68k-linux/sys-include
-L/home/doko/gcc-snapshot-20050508/build/gcc/../ld -O2 -DIN_GCC-W -Wall
-Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmis
--- Additional Comments From smelkov at mph1 dot phys dot spbu dot ru
2005-05-11 05:09 ---
Excuse me. The following is unconditionally offtopic, but
is there a way to use whole base namespace, say something like
template
struct A { ... }
template
struct B : A
{
using A::
--- Additional Comments From veksler at il dot ibm dot com 2005-05-11
03:53 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19699 ***
Shouldn't it be marked as a duplicate of 19583 instead, and 19583 be reopened?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
--- Additional Comments From veksler at il dot ibm dot com 2005-05-11
03:52 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19699 ***
Shouldn't it be marked as a duplicate of 19583 instead, and 19583 be reopened?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-05-11 03:04
---
I've got a patch in testing.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-11
02:25 ---
Re-opening. A re-organization of the tree optimizers is causing us to
misdiagnose this test case once again. I am going to work on a better warning
implementation that doesn't get confused so easily.
See
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-11
01:16 ---
I want to say the change in the inline heuristics caused this so really it was
a latent bug.
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-11
01:04 ---
No feedback in 3 months.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-11 00:05
---
I can confirm that the patch in comment #3 fixes bootstrap on powerpc64-linux.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21481
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at redhat dot com 2005-05-10 23:33
---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] Not copy propagating single-argument PHIs
causes out-of-ssa coalescing failure
On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 11:27:17PM -, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> --- Ad
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
23:27 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Be more specific:
>
> 1- What exactly is being "messed up".
Read Zdenek's comment about renaming them.
> 2- Why is it wrong?
Because now we have "unresolvable overlapping live
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at redhat dot com 2005-05-10 23:21
---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] Not copy propagating single-argument PHIs
causes out-of-ssa coalescing failure
On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 11:07:24PM -, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> --- Ad
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
23:19 ---
I hear from a person this patch also fixes powerp64-linux-gnu bootstrap too.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21481
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
23:07 ---
Both DOM and copyprop are messing this up.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21488
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
22:42 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--
Bug 21503 depends on bug 18081, which changed state.
Bug 18081 Summary: [3.4 regression] Infinite memory allocation on -O3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18081
What|Old Value |New Value
---
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
22:42 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
22:31 ---
*** Bug 21505 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
22:31 ---
Already fixed in 4.0.1.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21173 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
22:28 ---
Actually, ivopts do not produce any "unresolvable overlapping live ranges".
It does not change life range of j_8 at all, and only replaces the variable
i by more suitable strength reduced version ivtmp.6. N
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10 22:23
---
Fixed on the mainline. I will commit this to the branch after the obligatory
testing and the necessary changes (unfortunately -fsecond-underscore became the
default on the branch).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bu
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
22:07 ---
Subject: Bug 20178
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-10 22:06:55
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog gfortran.h invoke.texi lang
--- Additional Comments From pbriggs at clinitech dot net 2005-05-10 21:54
---
Created an attachment (id=8857)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8857&action=view)
Preprocessed file that produces the error
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pbriggs at clinitech dot net 2005-05-10 21:45
---
Created an attachment (id=8856)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8856&action=view)
Preprocessed file that produces the error
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21505
Host: HP-UX 11.00
Output of gcc -v:
Using built-in specs.
Target: hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/opt/gcc-4.0.0 --with-gnu-as --with-
as=/opt/binutils/bin/as --enable-languages=c,c++,objc
Thread model: single
gcc version 4.0.0
output of /opt/binutils/bin/as -v:
GNU
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2005-05-10 21:35 ---
BTW, the gcc-patch mailing list archive web interface for 2004-02 is broken.
You have to download the whole mailbox to see Kenner's patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18081
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2005-05-10 21:32 ---
The patch is incomplete. I posted the rest of Kenner patch on 2004-02-12 at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-05/msg00923.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18081
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2005-05-10 21:30 ---
A patch is posted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-05/msg00923.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21503
--- Additional Comments From wanderer at rsu dot ru 2005-05-10 21:10
---
i386
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21481
--- Additional Comments From sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot
edu 2005-05-10 21:06 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] Bootstrap is broken of FreeBSD by changes to
crtstuff.c
On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 08:57:12PM -, wanderer at rsu dot ru wrote:
>
> --- Additional Comme
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
21:03 ---
Fix checked in.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOL
--
Bug 12725 depends on bug 19285, which changed state.
Bug 19285 Summary: Interfaces not initialized by static field access
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19285
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
21:01 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 20364 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
21:01 ---
*** Bug 21504 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From wanderer at rsu dot ru 2005-05-10 20:57
---
Hm...
I bootstrap GCC day ago (2005.05.09) using FreeBSD system compiler at FreeBSD
5.3 withou problems. It installed and work (gcc version 4.1.0 20050509
(experimental))
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
Running gcc or g++ with the -Wp,dM option on an empty source file generates an
internal compiler error.
$ gcc -Wp,dM foo.c
cc1: internal compiler error: Abort trap: 6
$ g++ -Wp,dM foo.c
cc1plus: internal compiler error: Abort trap: 6
--
Summary: cc1/cc1plus internal error with the -
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
20:33 ---
Anyways here is a testcase which should not produce a constant after the loop:
int bar (unsigned int);
unsigned int
foo (void)
{
unsigned int i, j;
for (i = 1; i < 30; i++)
{
j = 2 + 3*i;
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||schwab at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21503
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
20:32 ---
Shouldn't we know what value j has at this point?
# j_3 = PHI ;
:;
return j_3;
92 - 3?
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-05-10 20:22
---
Just checked in a patch.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
20:21 ---
Subject: Bug 21170
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-10 20:21:29
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree-ssa-dom.c
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2005-05-10 20:04 ---
FYI, the same thing also happen on Linux/ia32.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21503
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
20:03 ---
IV-OPTS does nothing to this testcase, it does not even change the trees. This
is just a ra issue.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
19:33 ---
This started to fail after "3.5.0 20040909" but before "4.0.0 20050225".
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21491
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||18081
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21503
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
19:29 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> Andreas, do you have time to look further into this? That assertion is
> coming from a failed call to validate_replace_rtx; I wonder if there's
> something wrong with the IA64
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21503
This patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-05/msg00689.html
caused
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 3.4.4 20050510 (prerelease) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) GCC error:|
| in fixup_var_refs_1, at function.c:1876
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
19:13 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10 19:10
---
This affects 4.0 as well, and it prevents ia64 bootstrap.
--
What|Removed |Added
Sever
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
18:38 ---
I almost think this was caused by:
2005-05-09 Richard Earnshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* arm.c (arm_gen_constant): Add new heuristic for generating
constant integers that can be expressed as t
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||richard dot earnshaw at arm
||dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10 18:36
---
Unable to reproduce on FC3/gcc-3.4.3. I'm closing this as WONTFIX, because
NOTABUG has been removed from the options. This looks to be an issue with
user's host os.
-benjamin
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
18:35 ---
No the code is invalid, please read the changes page for 3.4.x.
--
What|Removed |Added
extern const char f[];
const char f[] = "";
char g(void) { return f[0]; }
In 4.0, we put f in .sdata; as of 20050510 we put it in .rodata but are still
emitting a gprel relocation. The problem is that by the time we
assemble_variable
on f, the type of f has been reset to the indetermi
compile this with -O1 (note testcase reduced from real.c):
---
int foo (int u)
{
u = u - 67108864 - 128;
return u;
}
---
compiler output:
bug
--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10 18:33
---
In mainline, gcc-4.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RES
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21251
--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10 18:32
---
Adding 16612.
This is a higher-priority enhancement request. We need a shared_memory
allocator, a lot of people want it, it would be cool and useful, etc.
The one in 16612 is not going to work. We don't and
This should compile but doesn't in g++ 3.4.2 (it works in 3.3):
template
class Base {
protected:
T m_member;
};
template
class Derived : public Base {
public:
Derived(T val) { m_member = val; }
};
test.cpp:11: error: `m_member' undeclared (firs
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
18:24 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From papadopo at shfj dot cea dot fr 2005-05-10
18:02 ---
Ah OK. I was referring to the non-integral case (which apparently does need to
be diagnosed), not the integral case.
Anyway, this is indeed a duplicate.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:58 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I don't understand.
>
> If it is a problem, how does the standard not require to diagnostic?
>
> At least the Stroustrup book is very clear about this. Anyway...
No what I mean
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:54 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||janis at g
--- Additional Comments From papadopo at shfj dot cea dot fr 2005-05-10
17:53 ---
I don't understand.
If it is a problem, how does the standard not require to diagnostic?
At least the Stroustrup book is very clear about this. Anyway...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?i
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10 17:51
---
Created an attachment (id=8855)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8855&action=view)
something in auto-host.h is needed to compile crtstuff.c
Here is the auto-host.h file that GCC generates.
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:50 ---
This started to happen after "3.5.0 20040909".
--
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|200
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:49 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:48 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Confirmed, reduced testcase:
Forgot to say only -ftrapv -O2 is needed to reproduce the bug.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:48 ---
Confirmed and has been a bug since "3.5.0 20040909".
--
What|Removed |Added
Stat
--- Additional Comments From sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot
edu 2005-05-10 17:45 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] Bootstrap is broken of FreeBSD by changes to
crtstuff.c
On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 05:28:57PM -, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> --- Addition
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:44 ---
*** Bug 21499 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:44 ---
> It's a good idea to flag this error to avoid errors that are more difficult to
> catch at link-time. Apparently GCC does not require integral member constants
> to
> be defined, but it does require other
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:42 ---
And I was right, there was a bug about this already, see PR 14258 which I am
going to mark this bug as
a dup of.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 14258 ***
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:42 ---
*** Bug 21484 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
The following code doesn't emit an error:
class Curious {
public:
static const float c5 = 7.0;
};
The above code is illegal according to the following references. The compiler
does not emit an error (instead the error is caught at link-time if the member
consta
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:36 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19699 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:36 ---
*** Bug 21483 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:32 ---
*** Bug 21482 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:32 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21173 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:28 ---
Is this fixed now?
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||bu
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:20 ---
Confirmed, reduced testcase:
class vtkLargeInteger
{
vtkLargeInteger& operator<<=(int n);
vtkLargeInteger& operator>>=(int n);
};
vtkLargeInteger& vtkLargeInteger::operator<<=(int n)
{
int i;
if (n
--
What|Removed |Added
CC|dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot |dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot
|org |org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
17:02 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
16:57 ---
Here is the backtrace:
#0 compare_values (val1=0x0, val2=0xb7bf1a08) at
/home/peshtigo/pinskia/src/gnu/gcc/src/gcc/
tree-vrp.c:300
#1 0x084db1ae in extract_range_from_unary_expr (vr=0xbfe9b994, expr=0xb69
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
16:52 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
16:41 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
16:41 ---
Fixed for 4.0.1.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESO
--- Additional Comments From jifl-bugzilla at jifvik dot org 2005-05-10
16:38 ---
As the bug reporter, I'm fine with that, although I can't really change the bug
to "VERIFIED" since I haven't.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19781
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Known to fail||4.0.0 4.1.0
Known to work|
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
16:35 ---
Your first example is valid code.
And the second.
And the third.
But the fourth is invalid code and ICC in strict mode also rejects it.
Confirmed, based on the first example, this comes down to using sema
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
16:31 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
16:27 ---
*** Bug 21497 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
1 - 100 of 178 matches
Mail list logo
