--- Comment #2 from sabre at nondot dot org 2006-12-03 07:47 ---
Fair enough!
--
sabre at nondot dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-03 07:45 ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ gcc t.c -pedantic-errors
t.c: In function blah:
t.c:3: error: empty declaration
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30057
For:
void blah(X, Y)
int X, Y;
struct foo;
{
}
GCC emits a warning for 'foo', this seems like it should be an error.
-Chris
--
Summary: error diagnosed with warning
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-03 07:18 ---
Subject: Bug 29642
Author: pault
Date: Sun Dec 3 07:18:22 2006
New Revision: 119461
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119461
Log:
2006-12-03 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #9 from ron3763 at msn dot com 2006-12-03 04:58 ---
I am using gcc-4.3 1202, also 2.17.x headers. glibc 2.5
I get this on a few programs didn't build with emerge -e system (gentoo distro)
amd64(core2) and multilib environment.
sys-libs/timezone-data-2006p, this *** did ***
--- Comment #8 from ron3763 at msn dot com 2006-12-03 04:55 ---
I am using gcc-4.3 1202, also 2.17.x headers. glibc 2.5
I get this on a few programs didn't build with emerge -e system (gentoo distro)
amd64(core2) and multilib environment.
sys-libs/timezone-data-2006p, this *** did ***
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 23:31
---
Please note the subtle difference with this case while working this:
WRITE(1) 1
REWIND(1)
READ(1,ERR=10) I
READ(1,END=10) J
print *,"no error"
stop
10print *,"error
--- Comment #1 from eedelman at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 22:28
---
I thought I would have time to do something about this bug, but I will not; not
in the next few weeks/months. I therefore unassign it from me. My appologies
to those who expected to be fixed soon.
If it's still
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 22:25 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 22:23 ---
Fixed for 4.2.0:
.L5:
addl(%ecx), %eax
addl$4, %ecx
subl$1, %edx
jne .L5
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 22:18 ---
Subject: Bug 30040
Author: hjl
Date: Sat Dec 2 22:18:25 2006
New Revision: 119454
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119454
Log:
2006-12-02 H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR target/30040
The error condition isn't detected for write, and is
mis-represented as an EOF for read.
$ cat exceed-recl-direct.f
program main
integer i,j
open (10, form="unformatted", access="direct", recl=4)
write (10, rec=1, err=10) 1,2
print *,"did not detect error on write"
1
--- Comment #4 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 21:56 ---
g77 gets this right:
$ cat eor2.f
program eor
WRITE(1) 1
REWIND(1)
READ(1,ERR=10) I,J,K
print *,"no error"
stop
10 print *,"error value"
end
$ g77 eor2.f && ./a.out
erro
while(__builtin_expect(len != 0, 1)) below produces a slower
loop than without the __builtin_expect(). It adds a jmp
which makes an extra testl instruction needed in the loop.
__builtin_expect(..., 1) and __builtin_expect(..., 0)
produce the same code in this case, maybe that is relevant.
-fpro
gcc -Wc++-compat is quiet about goto crossing/skipping initialization.
g++ says they are errors.
bash$ cat a.c
void foo(void)
{
{
goto bar;
int i = 0; // C++ error
{ int j = 0; } // Not C++ error (just for comparison)
bar:
--- Comment #30 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-12-02
21:17 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] build/genconditions
../../gcc/gcc/config/pa/pa.md > tmp-condmd.c: /bin/sh: 13354 M
> I will test on a cross if it fixes the failure on hppa.
Ok, I'll see if it fixes the pro
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 20:22 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2006-12-02 20:22 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> This also fails on x86_64:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-12/msg00083.html
Assembling functions:
i386_cpuid_edx chk_pd {GC 5328k -> 2784k} i386_cpuid_ecx main
Program received sig
--- Comment #2 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 18:56
---
Fixed on mainline, 4.2 branch, and 4.1 branch by Lee's patch for PR29022.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 18:54
---
Fixed on mainline, 4.2 branch, and 4.1 branch by Lee's patch for PR29022.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 18:17 ---
This also fails on x86_64:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-12/msg00083.html
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 18:13 ---
You want (without template<>):
void A::outer() const { cout << "outer" << endl; }
Because A is fully specialized. If A was not fully specialized then:
template <> void A::outer() const { cout << "outer" << endl; }
// I am using: i686-apple-darwin8-g++-4.0.1 (GCC) 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc.
build 5363)
//
// compile with: g++ template_demo.c++
// yields:
// template_demo.c++:30: error: template-id 'outer<>' for 'void A::outer()
const' does not match any template declaration
// template_demo.c++:30: error: i
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-12-02 17:58 ---
Created an attachment (id=12729)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12729&action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30052
attached testcase eats a 1GB of ram, swap and it's killed by OOM.
it works fine on 4.1.2/{all} and 4.2.0/{i386,ppc}.
so, it looks like a 4.2/x86-64 target regression.
--
Summary: memory hog.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
--- Comment #16 from paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr 2006-12-02 17:56 ---
Subject: Re: Problem with handling optional and entry
master arguments
elizabeth dot l dot yip at boeing dot com wrote:
> It worked using gfortran on my OS X system.
>
> ~/src/C_C++ $ gfortran -v
> Using built-in
--- Comment #15 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 17:50 ---
> I don't think this is an error... you can add further compilers to the list of
> 'believers' xlf90 / pgf90.
There is no need to add any more compilers to the list - it's manifestly a
gfortran bug. Whilst the gene
--- Comment #28 from volodyan at gmail dot com 2006-12-02 17:46 ---
(In reply to comment #27)
> I committed the patch that enables vectorization of strided accesses
Confirmed the bug on gcc-4.3/(Pentium-M)X86. Configured as
../gcc/configure --enable-bootstrap --enable-languages=c
a
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 17:43 ---
Here is the patch which I am testing:
Index: tree-vrp.c
===
--- tree-vrp.c (revision 119451)
+++ tree-vrp.c (working copy)
@@ -102,6 +102,10 @@ nonnul
--- Comment #29 from paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch 2006-12-02
17:38 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] build/genconditions
../../gcc/gcc/config/pa/pa.md > tmp-condmd.c: /bin/sh: 13354 Memory
fault(coredump)
>> I'm pretty sure that's the same issue as the second and third h
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 17:24 ---
This is a "bug" in glibc. The mainline changed the way it handles inline to be
the C99 way.
Also see:
http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-hacker/2006-11/msg1.html
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
A gcc built from the latest sources (as of 20061126) gets an error compiling
the latest glibc. The compiler distributed with Fedora Core 6 (4.1.1) works.
Glibc cannot be built without -std=gnu99.
Here's how to reproduce using a stripped down test case from the glibc
sources.
$ cat bug.i
extern
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 17:09 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 17:09 ---
Subject: Bug 29984
Author: pinskia
Date: Sat Dec 2 17:09:33 2006
New Revision: 119451
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119451
Log:
2006-11-28 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR tr
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Component|c |tree-opti
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 17:01 ---
Subject: Bug 30033
Author: pinskia
Date: Sat Dec 2 17:01:04 2006
New Revision: 119449
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119449
Log:
2006-12-02 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR C+
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 16:59 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #13 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-12-02
16:51 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2/4.3 regression] Unsatisfied symbol "fmodl" in
libgfortran shared library
> Really I wish we would have libgcc-math and all of these C99 problems would be
> solved.
Sigh, I was very
--- Comment #3 from lmillward at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 16:39
---
Fixed in 4.3.
--
lmillward at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Stat
--- Comment #28 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-12-02
16:39 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] build/genconditions
../../gcc/gcc/config/pa/pa.md > tmp-condmd.c: /bin/sh: 13354 M
> I'm pretty sure that's the same issue as the second and third hunk of
> http://gcc.gnu.or
--- Comment #2 from lmillward at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 16:34
---
Subject: Bug 27953
Author: lmillward
Date: Sat Dec 2 16:34:26 2006
New Revision: 119446
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119446
Log:
PR c/27953
* c-decl.c (store_parm_decls_
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 16:33 ---
Closing then.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WA
--- Comment #2 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2006-12-02 15:14
---
Subject: Re: Bootstrap comparison failure
Let's drop it, I've wiped my linux partitions and can't try it any more.
Thanks.
Brad
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29684
--- Comment #14 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2006-12-02 14:00 ---
> Are you in a position to try the patch on CP2K?
no quite so easy right now, but I'll be svn updating as soon as it is in. Looks
like tobias anyway tested it OK.
> your PRs have given me something absorbing
... th
--- Comment #13 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2006-12-02 13:55 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Created an attachment (id=12724)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12724&action=view) [edit]
> test case for interface "bl_copy"
> all_cp2k_gfortran.f90:418697.22:
> USE
--- Comment #12 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2006-12-02 13:37 ---
> I am not sure that I see how the test case in #6 can ever have worked; if it
> is
> indeed representative of the code in CP2K, I do not see how that can have
> worked either.
fparser is a relatively new addition
--- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 10:40 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg01819.html?
Patch works (except for gcc.dg/vect/no-math-errno-vect-pow-1).
It indeed helps a lot:
- Fortran test case: before 0m7.281s, now 0m
The following program (split off from PR30032) needs with
"gcc -march=opteron -ffast-math -funroll-loops -ftree-vectorize -msse3
-O3 -g"
0m6.478s
but if I use #define NODES 2500 it only needs only
0m1.390s
(The Intel compiler seems to do this conversion automatically and needs
0m1.879s for
--- Comment #27 from paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch 2006-12-02
09:27 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] build/genconditions
../../gcc/gcc/config/pa/pa.md > tmp-condmd.c: /bin/sh: 13354 Memory
fault(coredump)
dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote:
> --- Comment #25
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:42 ---
This works for me, can you try again?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:41 ---
Closing as fixed for 4.2.0 since this works there.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:37 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|norma
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:34 ---
Works at least on the mainline and 4.2.0:
How to set Valid to TRUE, Method 1
Config_Message_Buffer = SL1= 100 SL2= 100 Valid=FALSE
Config_Message_Buffer = SL1= 100 SL2= 100 Valid=TRUE
How to set Valid to TRUE, Method
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:30
---
Really I wish we would have libgcc-math and all of these C99 problems would be
solved.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24518
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:27
---
*** Bug 30048 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:27
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 29810 ***
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30037
--- Comment #24 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:23 ---
(In reply to comment #23)
> Just to let you know that the Fortran compiler has been broken for about a
> month on all Solaris versions (except release 10) with
I just filled this as PR30048.
--
http://gcc.gnu.o
Split off from PR24518
-- PR24518, Comment #23 From Eric Botcazou 2006-12-02 08:12 ---
Just to let you know that the Fortran compiler has been broken for about a
month on all Solaris versions (except release 10) with:
Undefined first referenced
symbol
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|blocker |critical
Summary|Unsatisfied symbol "fmodl" |[4.1/4.2/4
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:20 ---
Again I think this is also a dup of bug 12990 really.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29998
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:20
---
Confirmed on all Solaris versions except release 10, now with 4.1.2pre too.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:19 ---
I think this is really a dup of bug 12990.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29997
--- Comment #23 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:12
---
Just to let you know that the Fortran compiler has been broken for about a
month on all Solaris versions (except release 10) with:
Undefined first referenced
symbol
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:11 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:10 ---
Confirmed.
/* Do not warn if this level of the initializer uses member
designators; it is likely to be deliberate. */
if (constructor_unfilled_fields && !constructor_designated)
I think w
67 matches
Mail list logo
