[Bug bootstrap/25794] gcc won't link to new local glibc

--- Comment #8 from davek at csh dot rit dot edu 2006-01-17 07:45 --- I see gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org in the cc list, and I can't remove it. I was just using this as my notebook for this problem. I thought no email was sent on resolved bugs, but now I see I'm getting emails. Who's getting

[Bug bootstrap/25794] gcc won't link to new local glibc

--- Comment #7 from davek at csh dot rit dot edu 2006-01-17 07:41 --- a better patch -> --- orig/gcc-4.0.2/gcc/Makefile.in Fri Sep 9 17:05:39 2005 +++ gcc-4.0.2/gcc/Makefile.in Mon Jan 16 21:40:20 2006 @@ -73,6 +73,9 @@ srcdir = @srcdir@ docdir = @srcdir@/doc +# hack +BOOT_LD

[Bug ada/20753] ACATS ce3810b segfaults at runtime

--- Comment #10 from laurent at guerby dot net 2006-01-17 07:37 --- Present on 4.1 in 200601 for: sparc-linux http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-01/msg00635.html sparc-solaris http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-01/msg00504.html s390-linux http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testre

[Bug rtl-optimization/25791] -O2 execution fails, -O and -g work

--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-17 06:59 --- > (gdb) run > Starting program: > /afs/ir.stanford.edu/users/g/u/guertin/wylsrc/wylbur.ge > > > Program received signal SIGILL, Illegal instruction. > 0x00297064 in hex_to_character () > (gdb) where > #0 0x0029

[Bug bootstrap/25794] gcc won't link to new local glibc

--- Comment #6 from davek at csh dot rit dot edu 2006-01-17 06:20 --- I've gotten the compile to continue by cross compiling and altering the Makefile between stage 1 and 2 (or wherever it errored). $ diff -u orig/gcc-4.0.2/gcc/Makefile.in gcc-4.0.2/gcc/Makefile.in --- orig/gcc-4.0.2/gc

[Bug regression/25816] New: [4.1/4.2 Regression] Configure detects TLS, but glibc does not support it.

I have a mipsel-linux system with glibc 2.3.3 which does not support TLS. Due to bugs in earlier binutils versions, I must use a binutils version that does support TLS on mips. The GCC configure does an assembler check to see if TLS is supported and then generates code based on that decision. Wh

[Bug rtl-optimization/25791] -O2 execution fails, -O and -g work

--- Comment #5 from dick_guertin at yahoo dot com 2006-01-17 04:34 --- Subject: Re: -O2 execution fails, -O and -g work I have created a 'wylsrc.tgz' file and made it available for download over the web. I updated the Bugzilla report # 25791 accordingly. Be sure to read 'a.readme.txt

[Bug c++/25814] Request for warning for parser ambiguity of function declarations and variable declarations with initializations

--- Comment #2 from gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu 2006-01-17 04:01 --- Subject: Re: Request for warning for parser ambiguity of function declarations and variable declarations with initializations "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Maybe if more C++ books actu

[Bug libgcj/25398] .jar files held open twice at runtime

--- Comment #1 from green at redhat dot com 2006-01-17 03:59 --- I discovered why we open all jar files twice. It happens in gnu/java/net/protocol/jar/Connection.java. While searching jar files, we call gnu.java.net.protocol.jar.Connection.getJarFile(). The first thing this does is c

[Bug ada/24533] FAIL: a85013b: *** glibc detected *** free(): invalid pointer: 0x00062a00 ***

--- Comment #15 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-01-17 03:49 --- Subject: Re: FAIL: a85013b: *** glibc detected *** free(): invalid pointer: 0x00062a00 *** > --- Comment #8 from hainque at adacore dot com 2006-01-03 16:25 --- > Subject: Re: FAIL: a85013b:

[Bug rtl-optimization/25683] Error while running `make`

--- Comment #12 from gccbugzilla at multiwebinc dot com 2006-01-17 03:30 --- oh btw this is my gcc -v output: $ gcc -v Using built-in specs. Target: i486-linux-gnu Configured with: ../src/configure -v --enable-languages=c,c++,java,f95,objc,ada,treelang --prefix=/usr --with-gxx-include-

[Bug libstdc++/25815] [4.1 regression] libstdc++ testsuite: ext/pb_assoc/example/erase_if.cc execution test

--- Comment #2 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-17 03:02 --- In response to comment #1: For the record, *all* library maintainers have access to such a system, AFAIK. I don't expect anyone to look into this, since it involves a few extra steps, some of which involve considerable m

[Bug rtl-optimization/25683] Error while running `make`

--- Comment #11 from gccbugzilla at multiwebinc dot com 2006-01-17 02:34 --- Their "Detailed bug reporting instructions" is not very "detailed". I have no idea what I'm doing. What files do I provide you? I never have to `run gcc -v -save-temps all-your-options source-file`, I just do `

[Bug libstdc++/25815] [4.1 regression] libstdc++ testsuite: ext/pb_assoc/example/erase_if.cc execution test

--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-01-17 02:21 --- For sure, no changes to the concerned library code. Considering that, to my best knowledge, nobody among the library maintainers has got such kind of system and that the problem is not reproducable elsewhere, it's highly un

[Bug libstdc++/25815] New: [4.1 regression] libstdc++ testsuite: ext/pb_assoc/example/erase_if.cc execution test

Last known to work with: "Fri Dec 30 21:24:33 UTC 2005 (revision 109181M)". Known to fail with: "Wed Jan 11 14:14:27 UTC 2006 (revision 109585M)". FAIL: ext/pb_assoc/example/erase_if.cc execution test With the message in the .log being: ... PASS: ext/pb_assoc/example/erase_if.cc (test for excess

[Bug testsuite/25590] [4.1/4.2 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-11.c scan-tree-dump-times vectorized 1 loops 1

--- Comment #8 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-17 02:02 --- Also seen on 4.1 branch, regression appearing between Fri Dec 30 21:24:33 UTC 2005 (revision 109181M) and Wed Jan 11 14:14:27 UTC 2006 (revision 109585M) for cris-axis-elf, cris-axis-linux-gnu and mmix-knuth-mmixware, cro

[Bug rtl-optimization/25683] Error while running `make`

--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-17 01:49 --- Nope that is not the proprocessed source. Again read and provide the proprocessed source. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25683

[Bug c/25683] Error while running `make`

--- Comment #9 from gccbugzilla at multiwebinc dot com 2006-01-17 01:44 --- Anyone know what's wrong and how I can fix it? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25683

[Bug target/20294] ia64 gcj failures

--- Comment #3 from overholt at redhat dot com 2006-01-17 01:38 --- (In reply to comment #2) > Andrew, is this still happening with 4.1? No. Sorry I didn't close this already. I successfully built Eclipse (natively-compiled) on ia64 last week. Marking WORKSFORME. -- overholt at r

[Bug target/20294] ia64 gcj failures

--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-17 01:20 --- Andrew, is this still happening with 4.1? -- tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug rtl-optimization/25791] -O2 execution fails, -O and -g work

--- Comment #4 from dick_guertin at yahoo dot com 2006-01-17 01:19 --- I have created 'wylsrc/tgz' that you can download from the web as follows: http://lindy.stanford.edu/~guertin/wylsrc.tgz Use the following to extract the 'wylsrc' directory: gzip -d wylsrc.tgz tar -xf wylsrc.tar

[Bug classpath/20198] java.security.CodeSource.getLocation output is different than expected

--- Comment #6 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-17 01:17 --- Testing a patch. -- tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|g

[Bug c++/25814] Request for warning for parser ambiguity of function declarations and variable declarations with initializations

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-17 00:58 --- Maybe if more C++ books actually talked about this issue, there would not be a problem (sorry I could not resists). Also warning about very valid and defined code even if it is a common mistake that beginers make.

[Bug middle-end/23785] [4.1/4.2 Regression] 197.parser performance drop

--- Comment #6 from uttamp at us dot ibm dot com 2006-01-17 00:42 --- With the latest mainline, the performance numbers for parser benchmark are very close to the reported numbers (on July 29th 2005). With the mainline, parser numbers on powerpc64-linux with "-O3 -m32 -mcpu=power4 -ffast

[Bug c++/25814] New: Request for new warning

I'd like to request a warning to notify that a statement like "X x(const Y&)" is parsed as function declaration and not a definition of variable x. See the code below. At least as couple of PRs have been filed (9217,19503) on this topic. I've just spent at least 2 hrs trying to figure out why my c

[Bug target/24831] [4.1/4.2 regression] gthr-dce.h:77: error: expected expression before '{' token

--- Comment #11 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-01-17 00:20 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 regression] gthr-dce.h:77: error: expected expression before '{' token Alex, > Created an attachment (id=10362) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10362&action=view

[Bug fortran/24327] Does not detect duplicate symbol names in contains block

--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-17 00:12 --- *** Bug 25813 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug fortran/25813] EXTERNAL statement cause ICE in trans-decl.c

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-17 00:12 --- This is a dup of bug 24327. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 24327 *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug fortran/25813] New: EXTERNAL statement cause ICE in trans-decl.c

The following code is invalid due to the "external sin" line. Nonetheless, we get an ICE. kargl[255] gfc4x -o z v.f90 v.f90: In function 'MAIN__': v.f90:2: internal compiler error: in build_function_decl, at fortran/trans-decl.c:1131 program a external sin print *, sin() contains intege

[Bug fortran/20869] EXTERNAL and INTRINSIC cannot be used together

--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-17 00:02 --- I have a patch -- kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unass

[Bug middle-end/24565] [4.1/4.2 Regression] facerec performance regression

--- Comment #8 from uttamp at us dot ibm dot com 2006-01-16 23:56 --- I'm closing this bug as FIXED since the current facerec benchmark numbers on powerpc64-linux seems to be lot closer to the numbers generatged in Oct 2005 (before reported regression happen). -- uttamp at us dot ibm

[Bug middle-end/22275] [3.4/4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] bitfield layout change (regression?)

--- Comment #25 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 23:33 --- Re. comment #23, iiuc the old behavior was to align the zero-length bitfield, not the next field. My patch (one of them anyway) switches the order of EMPTY_FIELD_BOUNDARY and PCC_BITFIELD_TYPE_MATTERS back to how it

[Bug middle-end/22275] [3.4/4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] bitfield layout change (regression?)

--- Comment #24 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 23:31 --- Realistically, I don't think it's safe to still fix this for GCC 4.1. The whole thing looks so complicated (to me at least) that the risk of introducing new bugs just before the release is significant. It is unfort

[Bug rtl-optimization/25791] -O2 execution fails, -O and -g work

--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 23:20 --- Yes we need the proprocessed source. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c/25791] -O2 execution fails, -O and -g work

--- Comment #2 from dick_guertin at yahoo dot com 2006-01-16 23:16 --- See my response below yours. --- ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot > org 2006-01-15 10:01 --- > We cannot do anything witho

[Bug rtl-optimization/24626] [4.1/4.2 Regression] internal compiler error: verify_flow_info failed

--- Comment #59 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-01-16 22:34 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] internal compiler error: verify_flow_info failed > --- Comment #58 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 21:52 > --- > Re. comment #56, > Richard, only

[Bug middle-end/24565] [4.1/4.2 Regression] facerec performance regression

--- Comment #7 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 22:32 --- It's your bug. If you're happy with the current numbers, you should close the bug as FIXED. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24565

[Bug c++/25808] constant on rhs of conditional assignment

--- Comment #2 from dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2006-01-16 22:28 --- (In reply to comment #1) > Both of these are questionable, I don't see why there should be a different > diagnostic. Because the two different diagnostics make it easier to grep for. For example, Intel C++ compiler find

[Bug libstdc++/25797] [4.2 Regression] almost all libstdc++ tests fail

--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 22:12 --- Created an attachment (id=10655) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10655&action=view) correct configure test -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25797

[Bug libstdc++/25797] [4.2 Regression] almost all libstdc++ tests fail

--- Comment #4 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 22:11 --- I'm on it. This patch should be a step to fixing this. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25797

[Bug rtl-optimization/24626] [4.1/4.2 Regression] internal compiler error: verify_flow_info failed

--- Comment #58 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 21:52 --- Re. comment #56, Richard, only the patch of comment #39 is necessary to fix this bug. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24626

[Bug testsuite/25741] Gcc testsuite isn't parallel build safe

--- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 21:43 --- Subject: Bug 25741 Author: hjl Date: Mon Jan 16 21:43:05 2006 New Revision: 109773 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=109773 Log: gcc/ 2006-01-16 H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR testsuite/

[Bug testsuite/25767] g++.dg/lookup/builtin1.C (and a couple others) fails on i686-darwin

--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 21:22 --- Fixed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug testsuite/25767] g++.dg/lookup/builtin1.C (and a couple others) fails on i686-darwin

--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 21:21 --- Subject: Bug 25767 Author: pinskia Date: Mon Jan 16 21:21:49 2006 New Revision: 109772 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=109772 Log: 2006-01-16 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR te

[Bug bootstrap/25794] gcc won't link to new local glibc

--- Comment #5 from davek at csh dot rit dot edu 2006-01-16 20:48 --- still can't get it to work. I've tried at least 50 different configurations and had to wait an hour to see if each one would work. It always exits with undefined references to symbols in /usr/glibc2/lib/ld-2.3.6.so.

[Bug c++/25342] [3.4/4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] internal compiler error: in lookup_member, at cp/search.c:1209

--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 20:34 --- A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the testcase from comment #1 identified the following patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=72611 r72611 | lerdsuwa | 2003-10-17 15:41:46 + (Fri, 17 Oct 2003) | 1

[Bug target/25758] gcc.c-torture/compile/20030921-1.c fails at -O0

--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 20:18 --- Patch posted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-01/msg00897.html -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug libstdc++/24660] versioning weak symbols in libstdc++

--- Comment #30 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 20:09 --- Confirmed. Excellent, thanks. This is great, no regressions known with this on. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24660

[Bug c++/25811] No failure creating a POD containing a const member, using new without a new-initializer.

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 20:06 --- Confirmed, not a regression. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/25811] New: No failure creating a POD containing a const member, using new without a new-initializer.

$ cat podnew.cpp struct Foo // POD { double const d; }; int main() { Foo* foo = new Foo; // without the new-initializer } This simple code does not fail to compile. According to the standard (5.3.4.15), I am not sure, but i think it should fail to compile. $ g++ podnew.cpp && echo "no f

[Bug testsuite/25777] acats_run doesn't include gcc base directory in LD_LIBRARY_PATH

--- Comment #5 from guerby at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 19:38 --- Subject: Bug 25777 Author: guerby Date: Mon Jan 16 19:38:30 2006 New Revision: 109767 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=109767 Log: 2006-01-16 John David Anglin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR

[Bug testsuite/25777] acats_run doesn't include gcc base directory in LD_LIBRARY_PATH

--- Comment #4 from guerby at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 19:35 --- Subject: Bug 25777 Author: guerby Date: Mon Jan 16 19:35:02 2006 New Revision: 109765 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=109765 Log: 2006-01-16 John David Anglin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR

[Bug c/25682] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] ICE when using old sytle offsetof (with non zero start) as array size

--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 19:28 --- A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the submitter's testcase identified the following patch as introducing the failure: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=87064 r87064 | rth | 2004-09-03 23:50:11 + (Fri

[Bug testsuite/25777] acats_run doesn't include gcc base directory in LD_LIBRARY_PATH

--- Comment #3 from guerby at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 19:28 --- Subject: Bug 25777 Author: guerby Date: Mon Jan 16 19:28:02 2006 New Revision: 109764 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=109764 Log: 2006-01-16 John David Anglin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR

[Bug rtl-optimization/25799] [42. Regression] cc1 stalled with -O1 -fmodulo-sched

-- zadeck at naturalbridge dot com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |zadeck at naturalbridge dot |dot org

[Bug testsuite/25767] g++.dg/lookup/builtin1.C (and a couple others) fails on i686-darwin

--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 19:00 --- Patch posted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-01/msg00884.html -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug testsuite/25767] g++.dg/lookup/builtin1.C (and a couple others) fails on i686-darwin

--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 18:53 --- Submitting the obvious patch right now. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug fortran/25219] [GOMP] ICE with SAVE attribute and (FIRST|LAST)PRIVATE

--- Comment #5 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 18:23 --- Fixed with http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-12/msg01192.html -- dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug rtl-optimization/25677] [4.2 regression] testsuite failure:gcc.c-torture/execute/960802-1.c -O1 and -O2

--- Comment #7 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-01-16 18:21 --- Patch committed -- bonzini at gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug middle-end/24565] [4.1/4.2 Regression] facerec performance regression

--- Comment #6 from uttamp at us dot ibm dot com 2006-01-16 18:19 --- Steve, The numbers have changed since the last time I saw them. The current facerec perf. numbers are much close to the Oct. when I reported it. Do we still want me to investigate this any further? -- http://gcc.

[Bug fortran/25219] [GOMP] ICE with SAVE attribute and (FIRST|LAST)PRIVATE

--- Comment #4 from dnovillo at redhat dot com 2006-01-16 18:18 --- Subject: Re: [GOMP] ICE with SAVE attribute and (FIRST|LAST)PRIVATE On Monday 16 January 2006 12:40, jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > ICEs the same. I can't reproduce this in the Fedora Core gcc though, > so I t

[Bug fortran/25219] [GOMP] ICE with SAVE attribute and (FIRST|LAST)PRIVATE

--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 17:40 --- This is not Fortran specific, int main (void) { static int i; static int k; k = 3; #pragma omp parallel #pragma omp for private(i) lastprivate(k) for (i = 1; i <= 100; i = i + 1) k = i; __

[Bug tree-optimization/25680] Store CCP does not understand REALPART_EXPR < COMPLEX_CST >

--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 17:24 --- Patch posted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-01/msg00870.html -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c/23087] Misleading warning, "... differ in signedness"

--- Comment #8 from axel at zankasoftware dot com 2006-01-16 17:14 --- There's also the following issue, which seem related. $ cat test.c void nil_uch(unsigned char *uch) { *uch = 0; } void nil_sch(signed char *sch) { *sch = 0; } int main(void) { char ch = 0; nil_uch(

[Bug tree-optimization/17064] -falias-noargument-global doesn't eliminate dead stores/loads

--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 17:11 --- Partial patch posted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-01/msg00864.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17064

[Bug tree-optimization/21470] -fargument-noalias-global has no effect for the vectorizer

--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 17:09 --- Patch posted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-01/msg00864.html -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug fortran/25806] problems with functions returning array pointers?

--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 16:54 --- Shorter testcase: program a real, target :: storage(2) real :: s(2) s = x(2) print*,s contains function x(n) result(t) integer :: n real, pointer :: t(:) t => storage(1:n) ! allocate( t(n) )

[Bug fortran/25806] problems with functions returning array pointers?

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 16:30 --- Confirmed, this is defintely a problem. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug c/25805] [3.4/4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] Incorrect handling of zero-initialized flexible arrays

-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot |

[Bug java/25535] gcj broken on 64-bit big-endian systems

--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 15:51 --- Subject: Bug 25535 Author: aph Date: Mon Jan 16 15:51:42 2006 New Revision: 109748 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=109748 Log: 2006-01-16 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR java/25535

[Bug rtl-optimization/25654] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] RTL alias analysis unprepared to handle stack slot sharing

--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 15:38 --- It is solved (all are) with -fno-strict-aliasing. Whether the failure mode is that of an aliasing problem or not, is another question. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25654

[Bug middle-end/24900] [4.1 Regression] new "value computed is not used" warning in gcc 4.1

--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 15:30 --- *** Bug 25810 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c/25810] spurious warning about unused function return

--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 15:30 --- This is actually not a bug. This is also a dup of bug 24900. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 24900 *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug c++/25808] constant on rhs of conditional assignment

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 15:27 --- Both of these are questionable, I don't see why there should be a different diagnostic. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25808

[Bug middle-end/22275] [3.4/4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] bitfield layout change (regression?)

--- Comment #23 from matz at suse dot de 2006-01-16 15:14 --- The x86-64 ABI itself doesn't talk about zero-sized bitfields. So both behaviours are correct regarding the ABI. It talks about unnamed bitfields (which zero-sized ones must be) not influencing the overall alignment of struc

[Bug c/25810] spurious warning about unused function return

--- Comment #2 from wingo at pobox dot com 2006-01-16 15:07 --- Just for clarity, here is the warning: test.c: In function ‘main’: test.c:33: warning: value computed is not used The line corresponding to 33 in the preprocessed file: (void*)data_ref((data*)d); data_ref is not decl

[Bug rtl-optimization/25654] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] RTL alias analysis unprepared to handle stack slot sharing

--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 15:03 --- Your char testcase is invalid - it violates type based aliasing rules as you access memory of type char as int and short. Is it solved with -fno-strict-aliasing? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2

[Bug c/25810] spurious warning about unused function return

--- Comment #1 from wingo at pobox dot com 2006-01-16 15:02 --- Created an attachment (id=10654) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10654&action=view) short test case to show problem -- preprocessed Compiler output: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ gcc -v -save-temps -Wall -o tes

[Bug c/25810] New: spurious warning about unused function return

The attached file warns about an unused function return value, when the non-bugs section suggests that unused return values are quite fine. -- Summary: spurious warning about unused function return Product: gcc Version: 4.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug rtl-optimization/25654] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] RTL alias analysis unprepared to handle stack slot sharing

--- Comment #7 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 14:56 --- These two testcases seems to still fail for me even with the patch. (I use b.c -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -S -march=i686 -frename-registers) extern void abort (void) __attribute__((noreturn)); struct setconflict

[Bug tree-optimization/25809] New: missed PRE optimization - move "invariant casts" out of loops

In testcases that have reduction, like gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-2char.c and gcc.dg/vect-reduc-2short.c, the following casts appear: signed char sdiff; unsigned char ux, udiff; sdiff_0 = ... loop: # sdiff_41 = PHI ; . ux_36 =

[Bug c++/25808] New: constant on rhs of conditional assignment

Given the following C++ source code void g(); void h(); void f( int a, int b) { if (b = 1) // case 1 - fixed constant on rhs. g() always executed. g(); if (b = a) // case 2 - variable on rhs. h() might be executed. h(); } then GNU C++ 4.

[Bug c/19606] wrong code for arith.expr: (((unsigned int)(signed int) a ) / 2LL) with signed char a=-4

--- Comment #8 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 14:07 --- Assigning to myself. -- kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|u

[Bug libstdc++/23953] using stringstreams causes crashes with some locales

--- Comment #10 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-01-16 13:55 --- *** Bug 25807 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pcarlini at suse dot de changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/25807] endless loop when with sl_SI locale.

--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-01-16 13:55 --- Hi. I cannot reproduce the problem with current mainline/4_1-branch/4_0-branch, whereas I see a Segmentation fault with stock 4.0.2. This is a duplicate of libstdc++/23953, already fixed indeed. Thanks for your report, anyw

[Bug preprocessor/25717] [3.4/4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] -dD does not list all defined macros (in particular, __STDC__)

-- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org

[Bug libstdc++/25807] New: endless loop when with sl_SI locale.

The following programm enters an endless loop with recursively calling std::money_put > >::~money_put () ** #include #include #include int main() { std::cout.imbue(std::locale("sl_SI")); std::cout << "pi = " << M_PI << std::endl; return 0; } ** This appears

[Bug c/25682] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] ICE when using old sytle offsetof (with non zero start) as array size

-- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org

[Bug rtl-optimization/24626] [4.1/4.2 Regression] internal compiler error: verify_flow_info failed

--- Comment #57 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 11:24 --- Created an attachment (id=10652) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10652&action=view) patch Testing the attached patch on x86-64 (all languages) and hppa (only C, my machine is slow). -- rgue

[Bug rtl-optimization/25654] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] RTL alias analysis unprepared to handle stack slot sharing

--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 11:23 --- Created an attachment (id=10651) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10651&action=view) patch Testing the attached patch. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug fortran/24875] [gfortran, 4.1.0 regression] Arithmetic overflow during compilation

--- Comment #7 from martin at mpa-garching dot mpg dot de 2006-01-16 11:14 --- I have re-tested today, and it seems that the problem only occurs when gfortran is built using a self-compiled version of GMP 4.1.3. When using the system-wide installed GMP 4.1.4 I don't get the error. So th

[Bug rtl-optimization/24626] [4.1/4.2 Regression] internal compiler error: verify_flow_info failed

--- Comment #56 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 10:37 --- Steven, are your patches in comment #31 orthogonal to the fix proposed in comment #39, or is it strictly needed? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24626

[Bug middle-end/23631] construct to memory and memcpy instead of memset

--- Comment #2 from etienne_lorrain at yahoo dot fr 2006-01-16 10:36 --- Same bug still present in gcc version 4.0.3 20051201 (prerelease) (Debian 4.0.2-5). http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23477 is itself corrected, but this current bug has never been corrected. -- et

[Bug fortran/25806] New: problems with functions returning array pointers?

Hi! This code program a real, target :: storage(10) real :: s(5) print*,x(5) s = 0 s = x(5) print*,s contains function x(n) result(t) integer :: n real, pointer :: t(:) t => storage(1:n) ! allocate( t(n) ) t = (/ (i,i=1,n) /) end function x end program a prints: f

[Bug middle-end/22275] [3.4/4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] bitfield layout change (regression?)

--- Comment #22 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 10:22 --- Honza or Micha - can you take over from here? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22275

[Bug c/25805] Incorrect handling of zero-initialized flexible arrays

--- Comment #1 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 10:19 --- Testing a fix -- rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo

[Bug c/25805] New: Incorrect handling of zero-initialized flexible arrays

A GNU C extension allows you to initialise a flexible array field. However, if you do this, the DECL_SIZE of the containing object does not account for the size of the initialised array. DECL_SIZE is simply CHAR_BIT * sizeof (the structure type). Thus if you have: struct { int a; int x[]; }

[Bug rtl-optimization/24257] [4.1 Regression] ICE: in extract_insn with -O -fgcse -fgcse-sm

--- Comment #17 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 09:37 --- Fixed. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug rtl-optimization/24257] [4.1 Regression] ICE: in extract_insn with -O -fgcse -fgcse-sm

--- Comment #16 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 09:37 --- Subject: Bug 24257 Author: rguenth Date: Mon Jan 16 09:37:10 2006 New Revision: 109744 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=109744 Log: 2006-01-16 Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Ri

[Bug debug/25793] dwarf2 debug info lacks linkage names for constructors & destructors

--- Comment #2 from thor at math dot tu-berlin dot de 2006-01-16 09:29 --- HI Andrew, even though I'm not sure whether this is a duplicate of 11774 (I'm not competent enough to judge that), let me explain: i) The reason why you are able to set a breakpoint here is the consequence of t

  1   2   >