I get the following error when compile the code below:
main.c:47: warning: declaration does not declare anything
main.c:47: warning: no semicolon at end of struct or union
main.c:47: error: syntax error before numeric constant
main.c:49: error: syntax error before '}' token
main.c: In function
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 06:11 ---
Can you attach the preprocessed source because I cannot reproduce using your
code segment. I want to say something is defining block_size to some number.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #2 from pieter at vodacom dot co dot za 2005-10-17 06:55
---
Found the problem - sorry guys - another dev made a const. called block_size :(
--
pieter at vodacom dot co dot za changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 06:59 ---
Since when? I can't make sense of this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24382
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 07:07
---
I don't know when it appeared, since I only make monthly builds on mingw32. I
think it wasn't there on 2005-09-02, but that's all I can say.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24382
--- Comment #12 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 07:09
---
Subject: Bug 24315
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]2005-10-17 07:09:25
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/testsuite :
--- Comment #15 from rep dot nop at aon dot at 2005-10-17 07:09 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
(In reply to comment #9)
Also your patch had odd whitespace.
Do you mean tabs or something else?
tabs = 8 spaces in the GNU coding style.
I mean something else, specifically:
@@
--- Comment #13 from uros at kss-loka dot si 2005-10-17 07:21 ---
Fixed on mainline.
The bugfix is really trivial to fix, but I don't have older branches installed
here. Could somebody help me with a backports?
--
uros at kss-loka dot si changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #7 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 08:07
---
This is only fixed on mainline.
It won't be fixed on the 4.0 branch as Mark said in the patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg00930.html
Tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied on the mainline.
AO Legnano - Segnalazione Mail Infetta
Virus name: Worm.SomeFool.P
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Recipient: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #12 from nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 08:36 ---
the overflow happens in the static constant assignment 'int b = 0x8000'
assigns an unsigned long to an int, and overflows. The int_cst as b's
DCL_INITIAL has the overflow flag set. I rejected clearing the
--- Comment #9 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 09:27 ---
Comments #4 and #5 suggest that there is still some slowdown compared to
gcc 3.4 and earlier, but we know what the problems are and we have open
bug reports for those problems.
Since this bug is now inactive for
--- Comment #18 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 09:27 ---
*** Bug 20945 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 09:29 ---
What is the deal here? Is there a bug, or not? If so, can someone
confirm the bug, and otherwise close it as invalid?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22042
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23302
--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 09:35 ---
Re. comment #5 -- it's always a possibility ;-)
Just show that it's worth it. I doubt it is, really.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23346
--- Comment #20 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 09:41 ---
Yes, further work is planned on this. Someone just needs to figure out
what is still eating so much time. If you can compile with -ftime-report
and report back the top 10 compile time consumers, that'd be helpful
--- Comment #21 from jaffe at broad dot mit dot edu 2005-10-17 10:01
---
% gcc -O3 -ftime-report -c test.ii | grep usr | sort -t : +1 -n -r | head -10
tree SSA incremental : 3.19 (12%) usr 0.02 ( 2%) sys 3.18 (11%) wall
8995 kB ( 2%) ggc
scheduling 2 : 2.03 (
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 10:22
---
Recategorizing.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #22 from uros at kss-loka dot si 2005-10-17 10:28 ---
(In reply to comment #21)
We really should turn on gcse-sm for 4.1 but then again maybe it is too late
for that.
Better not. Look at PR 24257, comment #4 and comment #5, why.
--
This program demonstrates a problem with Fortran EQUIVALENCE
in 32-bit compilations. The equivalenced value in variable rteps
gets set correctly (as evidenced by the write statement) but too
late - an incorrect value has already been used in the earlier
comparison statement.
Moving the statement
--- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 11:19
---
Subject: Bug 21353
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 11:19:12
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog decl.c parser.c
--- Comment #6 from nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 11:26 ---
fixed mainline and 4.0.
2005-10-17 Nathan Sidwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR c++/21353
* decl.c (check_default_argument): Don't check
processing_template_decl or uses_template_parms here.
--- Comment #7 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 11:26
---
Subject: Bug 21353
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 11:26:51
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog
--- Comment #6 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 11:29 ---
Subject: Bug 22273
Author: tobi
Date: Mon Oct 17 11:29:33 2005
New Revision: 105364
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=105364
Log:
2005-10-17 Erik Edelmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
fortran/
PR
--- Comment #6 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 11:29 ---
Subject: Bug 22273
Author: tobi
Date: Mon Oct 17 11:29:33 2005
New Revision: 105364
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=105364
Log:
2005-10-17 Erik Edelmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
fortran/
PR
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 11:29 ---
Hmm:
li r2,0
lfd f13,56(r1)
addis r27,r31,ha16(L__gfortran_filename$non_lazy_ptr-L001$pb)
stw r0,56(r1)
addis
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 11:30 ---
-O2 -fno-strict-aliasing works .
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24406
--- Comment #17 from schwab at suse dot de 2005-10-17 12:06 ---
Bootstrap was successful and most Ada tests pass now
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-10/msg00730.html).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17356
--- Comment #6 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 12:44 ---
There is an argument about this PR in gcc-patches list
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg00816.html
and I've commited the patch in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg00859.html
which disables
--
nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |nathan at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 12:59 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
I am going to move the target milestone to 4.2 so that for 4.2, it will be
fixed without a workaround and that if people start to look at bugs which
should be added back the target
--- Comment #5 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-17 13:14
---
Working on a patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21625
--- Comment #13 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 13:54
---
Subject: Bug 22551
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 13:54:34
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog c-common.c
gcc/testsuite
--- Comment #14 from nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 13:57 ---
refixed
2005-10-17 Nathan Sidwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR c++/22551
* c-common.c (c_add_case_label): Revert my 2005-10-14 clearing of
overflow flags.
2005-10-17 Nathan Sidwell [EMAIL
--- Comment #15 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 13:57
---
Subject: Bug 22551
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 13:57:37
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
--- Comment #4 from nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 13:58 ---
fixed
2005-10-17 Nathan Sidwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR c++/22551
* c-common.c (c_add_case_label): Revert my 2005-10-14 clearing of
overflow flags.
2005-10-17 Nathan Sidwell [EMAIL
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24399
--- Comment #4 from krebbel1 at de dot ibm dot com 2005-10-17 14:42 ---
I think the problem is that cgraph_decide_recursive_inlining returns true even
if nothing got inlined. That may happen if the function is already more often
inlined into itself than max_depth. In this case the body
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 14:50 ---
Confirmed, and .
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 14:50 ---
Confirmed. Reduced testcase:
struct a
{
int length;
int a1[256];
};
void *malloc(long size) __attribute__((malloc));
void f(void)
{
struct a *a = malloc(sizeof(struct a));
}
we pile up heap variables:
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 14:51 ---
And removing target milestone and suspending since the DR report is still
active:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#515
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 15:02 ---
Assigning to D. Berlin per his request.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 15:03
---
Assigning to D. Berlin per his request.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 15:05 ---
Hmm, this looks related to DR 388.
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#388
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23257
--- Comment #4 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 15:09 ---
If you add a line to the test case:
printf (%d\n, offsetof (CABINETSTATE, fMenuEnumFilter));
you get 2 for GCC 4.1, and 4 for GCC 3.3.
So this is definitely an ABI change.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
There was some discussion on the GCC mailing list in late August, early
September about a performance regression caused by the disabling of the old
loop optimizer when doing FDO.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-08/msg00899.html
Loop invariant motions done by the old loop optimizer no longer
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 15:14 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 15:26 ---
Linking to the testcase for future reference:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-08/msg00910.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24408
If a dummy argument name is the same as the name of the module containing the
interface an ICE (or other errors, according to the test case) results.
--
Summary: ICE on module name vs dummy argument name
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status:
--- Comment #1 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2005-10-17 15:47 ---
Created an attachment (id=10007)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10007action=view)
test case
[EMAIL PROTECTED] sfilippo]$ gfortran -v -c micro_test.f90
Using built-in specs.
Target:
--- Comment #50 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 16:33
---
This program no longer crashes cc1plus. I propose to close this PR. I don't
see anything obvious left to do that could be justified for 4.1.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15855
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 16:42 ---
Confirmed, reduced testcase:
module string
interface tolower
function tolowerc(string )
character(len=*), intent(in) :: string
character(len=len(string )):: tolowerc
end function tolowerc
--- Comment #51 from law at redhat dot com 2005-10-17 16:46 ---
Subject: Re: [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] g++ crash with
-O2 and -O3 on input file
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 16:34 +, dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
--- Comment #50 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 17:23
---
Subject: Bug 24244
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 17:23:42
Modified files:
libstdc++-v3 : ChangeLog
libstdc++-v3/include/tr1:
--- Comment #2 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 17:25
---
Subject: Bug 24386
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 17:25:19
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog cp-tree.h pt.c typeck.c
--- Comment #10 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 17:26
---
Subject: Bug 24244
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 17:26:51
Modified files:
libstdc++-v3 : ChangeLog
--- Comment #2 from dj at redhat dot com 2005-10-17 17:27 ---
Subject: Re: New: Bootstrap failure: conflicting types for
'floatformat_to_double', others
Please make sure you're not building the latest gcc sources
(gcc/libiberty/floatformat.c) with older binutils sources
--- Comment #11 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-10-17 17:28 ---
Fixed for 4.0.3.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 17:29 ---
2005-10-17 Nathan Sidwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR c++/24386
* cp-tree.h (BASELINK_QUALIFIED_P): New.
* pt.c (tsubst_copy_and_build): CALL_EXPR case: Use it.
* typeck.c
--- Comment #52 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 17:32
---
Mark, there's probably not much else we can do in this PR for 4.1. What I see
in the aliasing times involves quite a few changes, most of them from the
aliasing branch and some other similarly intrusive changes
--- Comment #4 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 17:32
---
Subject: Bug 24386
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 17:32:07
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog
--- Comment #12 from nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 17:36 ---
I'll take a look
--
nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 17:36 ---
I'll take a look
--
nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pluto at agmk dot net 2005-10-17 17:57 ---
works for me with 4.1.0-20051005.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22524
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 18:00 ---
The code is illegal, and therefore gfortran can do anything
it wants (including start WW III).
(1) rteps is never defined, so it can't be reference in the IF
statement.
(2) Even if rteps was defined prior to
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 18:01 ---
Forgot to add myself to the CC list.
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
While the JDK, Kaffe etc allow running a Java app like this:
executable foo/bar/baz/MainClass
instead of
executable foo.bar.baz.MainClass
GIJ does only accept the second variant.
Eg for:
gij de/bitecode/test/lazy/Bogus
GIJ outputs:
Exception in thread main java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
--- Comment #3 from pluto at agmk dot net 2005-10-17 18:39 ---
% cat pr22524.c.t03.gimple
main ()
{
char * D.1282;
int D.1283;
int D.1284;
int i;
D.1282 = a ();
D.1283 = (int) D.1282;
D.1284 = ~buf;
i = D.1283 + D.1284;
}
--
--- Comment #1 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-17 18:47 ---
Possible fix: Take the class name as it is given on the command line and
replace all / with . .
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24410
--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 18:54 ---
The patch identified in comment #2 has nothing to do with this problem. Pinski
is right in comment #1, loop-invariant.c does not verify that the insns it
moves/inserts are valid. Using emit_move_insn is just one
--- Comment #7 from pluto at agmk dot net 2005-10-17 19:01 ---
both testcases works for me 4.1.0-20051005.
i have applied patches for: PR7776, PR20297, PR22533, PR23948, PR19505,
PR20606/PR24069.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23775
--- Comment #6 from laurent at guerby dot net 2005-10-17 19:59 ---
Also fails on ia64-linux as of 20051017
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22561
--- Comment #1 from laurent at guerby dot net 2005-10-17 20:00 ---
Also fail on ia64-linux as of 20051017:
,.,. C940013 ACATS 2.5 05-10-17 13:06:13
C940013 Check that queues on protected entries are handled FIFO and
that 'count is correct.
* C940013 Unexpected
From 20051017 run here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-10/msg00730.html
The 17 first with an unexpected exception in a task
,.,. C95065A ACATS 2.5 05-10-17 13:08:19
C95065A CHECK THAT CONSTRAINT_ERROR IS NOT RAISED IF AN
INITIALIZATION VALUE DOES NOT SATISFY
--- Comment #2 from laurent at guerby dot net 2005-10-17 20:15 ---
Also fails on ia64-linux as of 20051017.
,.,. C940013 ACATS 2.5 05-10-17 13:06:13
C940013 Check that queues on protected entries are handled FIFO and
that 'count is correct.
* C940013 Unexpected
#include signal.h
#include unistd.h
int test;
void handler (int sig)
{
test = 1;
}
int main()
{
signal (SIGALRM, handler);
alarm (1);
while (test == 0)
asm();
return 0;
}
Results in an infinite loop with -O2. The load of test in main should not
be hoisted out of the loop. A
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 20:30 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
works for me with 4.1.0-20051005.
This with a patch from PR 22368 and did not the last time I tested which was
Sun Oct 9 16:00:28 UTC 2005.
--
--- Comment #53 from mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-10-17 20:30 ---
Subject: Re: [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] g++ crash with
-O2 and -O3 on input file
dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #52 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 17:32
---
Mark,
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 20:32 ---
I thought this was decided this was not a bug. I have to find the discussion.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24414
--- Comment #4 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 20:39
---
Subject: Bug 23424
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 20:39:46
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/doc: md.texi
Log
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mark at codesourcery dot com
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 20:50 ---
Confirmed, gij problems are considered libgcj problems (the library issues) and
not front-end issues (which is what java component is for).
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 20:52
---
Subject: Bug 20866
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 20:52:37
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog gfortran.h resolve.c expr.c decl.c
--- Comment #4 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 20:52
---
Subject: Bug 21459
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 20:52:37
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog gfortran.h resolve.c expr.c decl.c
--- Comment #2 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 20:52
---
Subject: Bug 20853
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 20:52:37
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog gfortran.h resolve.c expr.c decl.c
--- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 20:52
---
Subject: Bug 23446
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 20:52:37
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog gfortran.h resolve.c expr.c decl.c
--- Comment #2 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 20:52
---
Subject: Bug 20837
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 20:52:37
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog gfortran.h resolve.c expr.c decl.c
--- Comment #2 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 20:52
---
Subject: Bug 20849
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-17 20:52:37
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog gfortran.h resolve.c expr.c decl.c
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 20:56 ---
An asm instruction without any operands or clobbers (an old style asm) will
be treated identically to a volatile asm instruction.
Or what is in the newer doc:
3933: An @code{asm} instruction
seen with HEAD CVS 20051017
stage1/xgcc -Bstage1/ -B/usr/powerpc-linux-gnu/bin/ -c -O2 -gnatpg -gnata
-g -O1 -fno-inline \
-I- -I. -Iada -I../../src/gcc/ada ../../src/gcc/ada/a-except.adb -o
ada/a-except.o
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.1.0
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 20:58 ---
Thank you Salvatore and Andrew.
The proposed patch is about to be posted on the fortran and gcc-patches list.
I just have a couple more minutes of testing other, completely off-the-wall
cases before submitting.
--- Comment #3 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 21:02 ---
If we decided this was not-a-bug, then there's a bug in __sync_synchronize,
as that uses asm() if there's no target fallback.
But personally I think this is a documentation bug. We should consider
memory to be
$ cat foo.f90
PROGRAM foo
IMPLICIT NONE
CHARACTER(len=10) name,var
NAMELIST /input/ var
OPEN(unit=1,file=input.tmp,delim='apostrophe',status='unknown')
READ(1,NML=input)
CLOSE(1)
OPEN(unit=1,file=toto.tmp,status='old')
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 21:43 ---
The flow code was added by Jeff Law back in 1999:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/1999-03/msg00763.html
Jeff, was there a reason why you mentioned old-style asm as special even though
GCC never handled or
--- Comment #5 from law at redhat dot com 2005-10-17 21:55 ---
Subject: Re: Old-style asms don't clobber
memory
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 21:43 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 21:43
---
The
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 22:05 ---
This might be fixed in 4.0.2.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 22:10 ---
Nope, still fails on the mainline.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 22:22
---
Subject: Bug 23440
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]2005-10-17 22:22:30
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog parser.c
gcc/testsuite :
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 22:25 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
WHy? Think about it for a little while, an old-style asm provides us
with zero information on what values it uses, what values it sets and
what values it clobbers.
Because you changed
1 - 100 of 145 matches
Mail list logo
