--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-09-22 03:29 ---
Subject: Re: s-taprop.adb:69:06: warning: cannot depend on
"Interrupt_Operations" (wrong categorization)
This bug is also present on the 4.0 branch. This is a regression
from 4.0.0
Dave
--
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22
00:12 ---
Fixed in 4.0.2.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESO
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22
00:11 ---
Subject: Bug 23993
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-22 00:11:23
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog init.c
gcc/testsui
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22
00:11 ---
Subject: Bug 23993
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-22 00:10:45
Modified files:
gcc/cp : Change
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||uttamp at us dot ibm dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23785
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-22
00:09 ---
Subject: Bug 23993
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-22 00:09:42
Modified files:
gcc/cp : init.c
Take the following example:
extern float a, b;
float BG_SplineLength ()
{
float result27;
float result;
float lastPoint;
float vec1;
float vec0;
float dist;
float i;
vec0 = a;
vec1 = b;
result = vec1 - vec0;
i = 9.9977648258209228515625e-3f;
dist = 0.0;
do {
result2
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-09-21 23:02 ---
Subject: Re: collect2: ld terminated with signal 10 [Bus error] linking
libstdc++.sl.6
> The Ada bug number in the previous comment should be PR 23957, not 2397.
The enclosed patch fixes the link
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21 22:45
---
GDB suggests that we are passing a NULL pointer to strcmp. Here's the
backtrace.
#0 0x000200dda110 in strcmp () from /lib/libc.so.6
#1 0x00419c0b in check_interface1 (p=0xbb6680, q=0xbb66a0,
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21 22:44
---
The code checker at www.lahey.com come shows
Compiling program unit y at line 1:
Compiling program unit z at line 17:
2278-W: "SOURCE.F90", line 22: Specific procedures (f) and (f) do not ensure
that generi
The mpfun90 package will cause gfortran to seg fault during
compilation. The problem appears to be due to an ambiguous
interface. I'll attach a cutdowen version of the code.
--
Summary: Ambiguous INTERFACE leads to seg fault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21 22:41
---
Created an attachment (id=9788)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9788&action=view)
ambiguous INTERFACE code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24005
--- Additional Comments From sje at cup dot hp dot com 2005-09-21 22:38
---
The Ada bug number in the previous comment should be PR 23957, not 2397.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24004
$ cat /etc/fedora-release
Fedora Core release 4 (Stentz)
$ uname -a
Linux host 2.6.13.1 #4 Sat Sep 17 10:57:37 PDT 2005 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64
GNU/Linux
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-redhat-linux
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-09-21
20:36 ---
Patch posted to the mailing list here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg01359.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23843
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra
||dot nyu dot edu
Summary|A
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-09-21 20:26
---
"but in original test case it was not the case": I missed but there's also a
call to system.arith_64.scaled_divide in the original test case, so this is the
likely miscompiled function.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-09-21 20:16
---
Created an attachment (id=9787)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9787&action=view)
-fdump-tree-all
Andrew request.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24003
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-09-21 20:11
---
Here is a reduced Ada testcase. -gnatdg show use of 64 bits, but in original
test case it was not the case, so it might be a slightly different bug.
$ cat > p.adb
procedure P is
type T is delta 1.0 / (2 ** 32
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2005-09-21 19:30 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression]: Gcc failed to build on ia64
Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sep 21, 2005, at 3:20 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> > Joern RENNECKE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> 2
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23971
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2005-09-21
19:24 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression]: Gcc failed to build on ia64
On Sep 21, 2005, at 3:20 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Joern RENNECKE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> 2005-09-21 J"orn Rennecke <[EMAIL PRO
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2005-09-21 19:21 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression]: Gcc failed to build on ia64
Joern RENNECKE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2005-09-21 J"orn Rennecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * final.c (get_attr_length_1): In !HAVE_ATTR_length ca
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
19:20 ---
Fixed on the mainline.
--
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|4.0.0 4.0.1 4.1.0
--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21 18:54
---
Hey Ian. I haven't looked at this in a bit.
The problem with the posted patch is that we should not be exporting the mutex
objects. See the rest of the libstdc++ code for suggested usage.
-benjamin
--
--- Additional Comments From sje at cup dot hp dot com 2005-09-21 18:43
---
The compile failures appear to be gone but I get an execution failure on IA64
HP-UX. There is a second PR (PR 23188) that looks like a duplicate of this and
I *think* this might be the same bug as PR 23240, a li
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
18:39 ---
Subject: Bug 22585
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-21 18:39:10
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/i386: i
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-09-21 18:24
---
no ICE on x86 and x86_64, must be sparc specific.
--
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Additional Comments From sje at cup dot hp dot com 2005-09-21 18:09
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> does this ia64 reduction testcase failure still occur?
>
I still see these failures in my nightly runs.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
2005-09-21 17:43 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> Instead of the above check, change it to:
> if (local_regparm == 3 && DECL_STRUCT_FUNCTION (fn)->static_chain_decl)
> local_regparm = 2;
D
They all fail at runtime on x86-linux only (work on x86_64-linux), it happened
between
LAST_UPDATED: Fri Sep 16 18:47:13 UTC 2005
LAST_UPDATED: Tue Sep 20 19:42:32 UTC 2005
It looks like it's all fixed point or decimal artihmetic that gets wrong code
generated. One example
,.,. C45532J ACATS 2.5
--- Additional Comments From dalej at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21 17:23
---
I agree with Paolo.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19653
--- Additional Comments From janis187 at us dot ibm dot com 2005-09-21
17:07 ---
Reghunt found this patch from nathan:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2004-08/msg01511.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
17:05 ---
Subject: Bug 19929
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-21 17:05:28
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: trans-stmt.c ChangeLog
gcc/t
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-09-21 17:02 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] loop problem / testcase takes very long time to
compile
> Random break stops things typically somewhere inside 140 nested calls in scev
> (follow_ssa_edge and frie
--- Additional Comments From kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21 16:50
---
Just checked in a patch.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
16:48 ---
Subject: Bug 23971
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-21 16:47:47
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
Log message:
PR m
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
16:32 ---
Try with -Os and you will see it is eliminated.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24001
--- Additional Comments From xhliu at mc dot com 2005-09-21 16:22 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Note most poeple don't use little endian PPC.
Yes, it is true. But Mercury supports little-endian PPC, and this is a bug in
GCC 3.x and 4.x.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21 16:14
---
*** Bug 23990 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21 16:14
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 6702 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
St
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
16:13 ---
Note most poeple don't use little endian PPC.
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|c
--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21 16:13
---
Paolo is right: wchar_t specializations are only supported on solaris starting
with gcc-3.4.0.
I would suggest using either
gcc-3.4.4
gcc-4.0.2
-benjamin
--
What|Removed
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21 16:09
---
I suspect this is an oversight from early patches of PR 17780. I'll look at
this.
-benjamin
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23956
For this code:
int f(int *ptr, int t) {
if (t)
return *ptr;
else
return *ptr;
}
the jump is not eliminated:
f: beq $17,$L2
ldl $0,0($16)
ret
$L2:ldl $0,0($16)
ret
This used to work with 2.95 (not sure whether that still counts as
regre
vector constants are allocated in reversed order when building the test program
for a PowerPC little-endian executable.
Test case code, altivec_test.c
--
#include
#if __GNUC__ >= 3
#include
#endif
int main(void)
{
#if __GNUC__ >= 3
vector signed char vs
--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
15:41 ---
Fixed on mainline and the 3.4 branch.
Waiting for 4.0 branch to unfreeze.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
15:40 ---
Subject: Bug 23965
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-21 15:39:53
Modified files:
gcc/cp : Change
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
15:34 ---
Subject: Bug 23965
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-21 15:34:42
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog call.c
gcc/testsui
--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
15:23 ---
Testcase now also in mainline.
Waiting for 4.0 branch to unfreeze.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17609
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
15:21 ---
Subject: Bug 17609
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-21 15:21:00
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
Added files:
gcc/t
Inserting the following code into get_inner_reference before if (size_tree !=
0), causes bootstrap failures where DECL_SIZE is NULL but shouldn't be
gcc_assert (size_tree != 0 || (TREE_CODE (exp) != COMPONENT_REF && TREE_CODE
(exp) != BIT_FIELD_REF));
--
Summary: DECL_SIZE set to NU
--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
15:12 ---
This is now fixed in GCC 3.4.5.
The new testcase g++.dg/lookup/error1.C will be added to mainline
and the 4.0 branch. In the meantime I'll keep the PR open.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
15:08 ---
Subject: Bug 17609
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-21 15:08:00
Modified files:
gcc/cp : Change
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
15:02 ---
Let's fix this.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |steve
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
14:44 ---
Fixing like the following, but inserting onto the right edge(s) -
single_succ_edge actually doesn't work here.
diff -c -3 -p -r2.5 tree-ssa-math-opts.c
*** tree-ssa-math-opts.c9 Aug 2005 03:28:32 -0
--- Additional Comments From paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch
2005-09-21 14:33 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] internal compiler
error: verify_stmts failed
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
>1
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
14:32 ---
: Search converges between 2004-08-30-trunk (#529) and 2004-08-31-trunk (#530).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23984
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
14:29 ---
I had to make the methods in B and C public in order
to compile.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23620
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23989
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
14:23 ---
*** Bug 23997 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23989
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
14:23 ---
Oh, this is a dup. I missed the bug number change.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 23989 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
14:18 ---
We insert the reciprocal computation correctly after the call to
double prrs = potentially_runnable_resource_share();
but as this call may trap and is the last instruction in the basic block,
inserting th
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
14:12 ---
Can you attach the preprocessed source?
But from the looks of it, this is a bug in the headers of HPUX.
Also can you try a newer GCC since 2.95.3 is 4 years old.
--
What|Removed
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-09-21
14:07 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression]: Gcc failed to build on ia64
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
>11:28 ---
>Confirmed,
--
Bug 18131 depends on bug 21418, which changed state.
Bug 21418 Summary: Order of source files matters when compiling
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21418
What|Old Value |New Value
-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
14:05 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO||18131
nThis||
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2005-09-21
13:51 ---
Subject: Re: DCE removes a loop when it shouldn't
On Sep 21, 2005, at 9:46 AM, dorit at il dot ibm dot com wrote:
>
> --- Additional Comments From dorit at il dot ibm dot com
> 2005-09-21 13:46
On Sep 21, 2005, at 9:46 AM, dorit at il dot ibm dot com wrote:
--- Additional Comments From dorit at il dot ibm dot com
2005-09-21 13:46 ---
I don't know how this happened - I didn't mean to open this PR again.
This
should be closed.
Daniel opened because there is a latent bug s
--- Additional Comments From dorit at il dot ibm dot com 2005-09-21 13:46
---
I don't know how this happened - I didn't mean to open this PR again. This
should be closed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23997
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
13:45 ---
Subject: Bug 23891
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-21 13:45:22
Modified files:
libjava: ChangeLog
libjava/testsuite/
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
13:41 ---
This is wrong.
As I stated on IRC, that only fixes the problem as a side effect. There is a
real latent bug here. We should be getting the right result regardless of
whether points-to says it points to e o
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
13:34 ---
Subject: Bug 21418
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-21 13:34:29
Modified files:
gcc/java : ChangeLog class.c
Log message:
DCE (.t44.dce3) eliminates the third loop in the testcase below, although the
print loop should be enough to keep it alive:
==
subroutine foo(a,b)
real a,b
type bzz
real d(100)
end type bzz
type (bzz) e
dimension a(100), b(100)
read *,x,y
a=log(x)<--- loop 1
b=log(y)
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-09-21 13:27
---
I'm afraid this is a WONTFIX for gcc3.3.x, which is not maintained anymore. Can
you try a more recent release, like the forthcoming gcc4.0.2? According to the
audit trail of libstdc++/6702, the issue has been fixed
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
13:17 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From dorit at il dot ibm dot com 2005-09-21 13:16
---
Indeed. This bug can be closed now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23989
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mark at codesourcery dot com
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
12:19 ---
I forgot to mention that this worked with "4.0.2 20050826" but failed with
"4.0.2 20050915".
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23993
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
11:32 ---
I got this wrong because I thought from comment one it was accepting the
attribute already but just
ignoring it.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
11:30 ---
This should be fixed by:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg01294.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
11:28 ---
Confirmed, it is kinda of interesting that IA64 is one of the few targets which
does not have the length
attr (or have HAVE_ATTR_length defined).
The easy fix is the following:
int
get_attr_length (rtx in
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
11:26 ---
[in answer to pinskia, who added the keyword accepts-invalid]
Currently, gfortran doesn't accept this code:
$ gfortran -std=f2003 a.f90
In file a.f90:2
REAL,PROTECTED :: temp
1
Error: Syntax error
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
11:24 ---
Confirmed, reduced testcase:
const int data[2][4] = {
{0, 1, 2, 3}
};
template
void t(int k) {
int candidate = data[1][k];
}
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From a_manish at yahoo dot com 2005-09-21 11:21
---
Thanks for replying.
But additing Fwd declaration did not help.
I am still getting the errors :
+=
g++ wofstream.cpp
Undefined first referenced
s
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
11:08 ---
2.95.3 is not really supported any more.
--
What|Removed |Added
GCC target triplet|
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23991
--
What|Removed |Added
GCC target triplet||sparc-sun-solaris2.9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23990
--- Additional Comments From chris at bubblescope dot net 2005-09-21 11:01
---
Hopefully someone with more Solaris knowledge than me may come along (the code
works fine on any
OSes I can get my hands on)
As a temporary fix, you might find putting "template class
char_traits;" in your
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-09-
spr16(568) ~/tmp
> gcc -v -gnatv -c test_gcc_4_0_1.ads
Using built-in specs.
Target: sparc-sun-solaris2.9
Configured with: /usr/local/src/tmp/GCC/4.0/gcc-4.0.1/configure
--prefix=/usr/local/GCC/4.0/1 --enable-threads=posix
--enable-languages=c,ada,c++,f95,java,objc,treelang
--with-gmp=/usr/local/G
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||23994
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20585
Fortran 2003 defines the PROTECTED attribute for variables in modules. Example:
---
MODULE temperature
REAL,PROTECTED :: temp
CONTAINS
SUBROUTINE set_temperature
temp = 0.0
END SUBROUTINE
END MODULE
use temperature
call set_temperature
print *, temp
temp = 4
--- Additional Comments From bdonner at physik dot tu-muenchen dot de
2005-09-21 10:41 ---
Created an attachment (id=9786)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9786&action=view)
Code to reproduce the bug -- correct version
The inline posted version incorrectly shows the 1
The compiler will give the compile-time error: "invalid lvalue in unary '&'"
The following code not only shows the bug, but also the non-template based
implementation that runs and compiles perfectly. The two dimensional array is
essential to observe the problem. The template code will run a
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
