wstring::length() does not work properly with --short-wchar
I'm not sure if this bug is in gcc or glibc. It could be that gcc does not
properly set a certain variable with --short-wchar, or, it could be that glibc
does not properly implement wstring, always assuming a 4-byte wchar_t.
Here is a sa
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
GCC build trip
Current trunk generates always a call to
_gfortran_pow_r4_i4 for this code
SUBROUTINE T(a,b,F,n)
REAL :: a,b,F(n)
INTEGER :: n
INTEGER :: i
DO i=1,n
a=a+F(i)*b**i
ENDDO
END SUBROUTINE
which could, however, be transformed by the compiler (at least in -ffast-math,
but even otherwise for F
--- Comment #30 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-06-07 03:16 ---
(In reply to comment #26)
> Created an attachment (id=13656)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13656&action=view) [edit]
> patch preventing reassociation across loop boundaries
>
Here are SPEC CPU 2K -O2 -
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-07 02:55 ---
I have a fix, I fixed this one already on the pointer_plus branch and I did not
know there was a way to invoke this bug on the trunk.
2007-05-12 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* expr.c (expand_expr_addr
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-07 02:49 ---
This testcase still fails as of today unlike the one in PR 30840 so reopening.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-07 02:47 ---
This testcase works on the trunk on, it was fixed between 20070513 and
20070531. I will check on the other testcase too.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30840
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-07 02:40 ---
I can no longer reproduce this bug on the mainline. It was fixed between
20070531 and 20070602.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31685
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-07 02:34 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-07 02:31 ---
here is the link to the patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg4.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32224
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-07 02:29 ---
Caused by:
r120825 | dorit | 2007-01-16 00:26:03 -0800 (Tue, 16 Jan 2007) | 11 lines
* tree-vectorizer.h (is_pattern_stmt_p): New.
* tree-vect-analyze.c (vect_determine_vectorization_factor): Fix
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-07 02:14
---
Fixed, thanks for the report.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-07 02:12
---
Subject: Bug 32231
Author: pinskia
Date: Thu Jun 7 02:12:31 2007
New Revision: 125521
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125521
Log:
2007-06-06 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-07 01:49
---
I have a fix, there is a missing update_stmt :) at the very end of
vectorizable_call after it does:
/* The call in STMT might prevent it from being removed in dce. We however
cannot remove it here, due to t
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-07 01:45
---
(gdb) p debug_generic_expr (stmt)
D.1980_10 = 0.0
(gdb) p *stmt_ann (stmt)->operands.use_ops.use_ptr.use
$14 = 0xa5a5a5a5
So somebody forgot to update the use cache.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #30 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-07 00:31 ---
(In reply to comment #29)
> Fixed.
>
I was waiting for updating http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.3/changes.html before
closing, but whatever...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23479
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-07 00:14
---
Investigating
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assigned
--
sje at cup dot hp dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sje at cup dot hp dot com
Status|UNCONFIRMED |
--- Comment #6 from anhvofrcaus at gmail dot com 2007-06-06 23:29 ---
Oop! I meant inclusive conclusion.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32234
--- Comment #5 from anhvofrcaus at gmail dot com 2007-06-06 23:27 ---
Valgrind is helful only if there is a crash (segmentation fault). However,
there is no seg fault when executed in this case. Therefore, there would be
exclusive conclusion.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Summary|../gcc/libjava/classpath/inc|[4.3 Regression
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Boot failure Comparing |[4.3 Regression] Boot
|stages 2 and 3
--- Comment #29 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 23:23
---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Make FAILURE in 4.3.0 - |[4.3 Regression] Make
|`CXXFLAGS' has changed error
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 23:04 ---
Reduced testcase, I cannot remove the inline function for some reason:
void f(char);
static inline
void * __memset_generic(char c)
{
f(c);
}
int prepare_startup_playback_urb(
int b,
int c
)
{
char d;
--- Comment #3 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 22:57 ---
Not failing anymore.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
St
--- Comment #2 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 22:57
---
Just a note:
> Also, shouldn't there also be an error about lack of return type for
> _M_fill_initialize?
Well, here's the code snippet from the function grokdeclarator in decl.c
that deals with missing return ty
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-06-06
22:56 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/assumed_charlen_function_5.f90 -O (test for
excess errors)
> --- Comment #1 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2007-06-06 22:48 ---
> Dave, I am not seeing this in my
--- Comment #1 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2007-06-06 22:48 ---
Dave, I am not seeing this in my recent PA runs. Do you still get this failure
or can we close this defect out.
--
sje at cup dot hp dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2007-06-06 22:04 ---
Here is a cutdown test case, it looks like we have a roundoff difference
between the exponentiation done at compile time and the exponentiation done at
run time and thus a and b are not 'exactly the same'. Maybe we shoul
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 21:56 ---
Reducing ...
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 21:52 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 21:51 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|norma
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 21:48 ---
The main reason why is that we don't process the initializer for foo if we get
an error.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32205
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 21:46 ---
First 3.4.x is no longer maintained, so you should upgrade.
Second how much memory do you have?
Third can you make sure you read http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html and supply all
the required information there?
--
pins
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 21:44 ---
I can only assume this was a test bug so closing.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from weinert at cmth dot phys dot uwm dot edu 2007-06-06
21:36 ---
Created an attachment (id=13662)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13662&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32238
ICE with gcc version 4.3.0 20070606 (experimental) on where( ) with complex
array; worked fine previously up until at least gcc version 4.3.0 20070111.
Here is test case (taken from other code) with compiler info and messages
embedded:
module bug_test
! > gfortran -v
! Using built
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 21:13 ---
*** Bug 32208 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 21:13 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 32233 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 21:11 ---
> we want to have G++ semantics here defined
The semantics are defined, just you are invoking other undefined behavior with
respect of doing stuff like:
b a;
a = a;
Which are what the semantics of C++ says the two
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 21:03 ---
Confirmed:
t1.c:10: note: ==> examining statement: __asm__("bswap %q0":"=r" *__dst_4:"0"
D.2235_9)
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from r dot f dot arduini at larc dot nasa dot gov
2007-06-06 21:00 ---
Subject: Re: internal compiler error: in gfc_assign_data_value, at
fortran/data.c:288
Thank you for your quick and thorough response. I am now able to
compile the program with gfortran and can pro
--- Comment #4 from baldrick at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 20:59
---
You have to run it under valgrind to see the problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32234
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 20:53 ---
In most of the cases we already check before calling
bsi_insert_on_edge_immediate.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32230
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 20:52 ---
Confirmed, there are two ways of fixing this bug, either check before calling
bsi_insert_on_edge_immediate that we have a NULL statement or inside
bsi_insert_on_edge_immediate, we could return NULL always if we don't
--- Comment #52 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 20:49 ---
Subject: Bug 25241
Author: manu
Date: Wed Jun 6 20:49:09 2007
New Revision: 125505
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125505
Log:
2007-06-06 Manuel Lopez-Ibanez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR t
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #3 from anhvofrcaus at gmail dot com 2007-06-06 20:46 ---
The test code works fine on GNAT-GPL-2007 (Linux and Windows). In addition, it
works fine on Linux with GCC-4.3-2007070518 and GCC-4.3-20070601 also.
--
anhvofrcaus at gmail dot com changed:
What|Re
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 20:31 ---
I may do something wrong, but I get with this example always:
read =Three
I tried gfortran, g95, NAG f95, g77 and ifort with the same result.
Additionally, I is a bit unclear how using backspace on standard in (stdi
--- Comment #2 from jimmyhappyi at gmail dot com 2007-06-06 20:27 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> g++: Internal error: Killed (program cc1plus)
>
> ... suggests that some external force terminated g++. Did you perhaps run out
> of memory? (If so, try 'ulimit')
>
So should I run
ulimi
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 20:22 ---
Your example file misses the "param" module; however, I found it via google:
http://www.crseo.ucsb.edu/esrg/pauls_dir/sbdart_browser/html_code/sbdart/params.f.html
The complete package is at:
ftp://ftp.icess.ucsb.edu
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 19:24 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 19:23 ---
Subject: Bug 32225
Author: pinskia
Date: Wed Jun 6 19:23:19 2007
New Revision: 125502
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125502
Log:
2007-06-06 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR tr
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 19:01 ---
That is correct, template arguments cannot be local classes/structs.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
I can't compile this code:
void f()
{
struct a { int i; };
std::vector v;
}
Moving the struct declaration out of the function solves the problem.
--
Summary: can't compile when a vector is based on a local struct
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-06-06 18:45 ---
Fixed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 18:44 ---
Subject: Bug 32233
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Jun 6 18:44:02 2007
New Revision: 125499
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125499
Log:
2007-06-06 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstd
--- Comment #1 from r dot f dot arduini at larc dot nasa dot gov
2007-06-06 18:41 ---
Created an attachment (id=13661)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13661&action=view)
part of fortran 77 package
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32236
--- Comment #2 from baldrick at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 18:35
---
> Why shouldn't it happen in a small program?
It can cause a segfault also in small programs.
However, memory areas often start out containing
all zeros, so until the program has dirtied a bunch
of memory uninitia
--- Comment #11 from andreast at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 18:28
---
Bootstrap succeeded on both, ppc darwin and i686 darwin. disable-checking!
Thank you!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32209
Crash occurs while compiling fortran code...error as indicated in summary.
Compiler output:
ssai13-larc-nasa-gov > gfortran -v -save-temps tauaero.f
Driving: /usr/local/bin/gfortran -v -save-temps tauaero.f -lgfortranbegin
-lgfortran -shared-libgcc
Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-apple-darwin8.
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-06-06 18:23 ---
Mine, fixed momentarily.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unass
--- Comment #1 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-06-06 18:03 ---
just wondering if this is related to PR 32176 (see comment 2 for a similar
looking testcase), crashing with the same options, though a different location.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32087
--
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
--- Comment #10 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-06-06 17:58 ---
(sid)25696:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~] /usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcc -ffast-math -O1
-ftree-vectorize --param ggc-min-expand=0 --param ggc-min-heapsize=0
beep-visualization.c
beep-visualization.c: In function 'calc_freq':
beep-vis
--- Comment #1 from sje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 17:48 ---
Subject: Bug 31828
Author: sje
Date: Wed Jun 6 17:48:03 2007
New Revision: 125496
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125496
Log:
PR testsuite/31828
* inclhack.def (hppa_hpux_fp_macro
--- Comment #1 from anhvofrcaus at gmail dot com 2007-06-06 17:44 ---
Why shouldn't it happen in a small program?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32234
g77, g95, Absoft 9.2, etc.. position the text file correctly, but gfortran is
off by one line -
[dranta:~/tests/gfortran-D] dir% gfortran -fno-automatic -std=legacy -o aRead01
aRead01.f
[dranta:~/tests/gfortran-D] dir% aRead01 < aRead01.in
1one
--- Comment #42 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 15:52
---
Subject: Re: [4.2 regression] miscompilation of sigc++-2.0 based code with
-fstrict-aliasing
On 6 Jun 2007 08:49:50 -, rguenther at suse dot de
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #41 from rguent
I see this problem with mainline and with GNAT GPL 2007.
A pointer is not being default initialized to NULL in
Ada.Containers.Hashed_Maps. This causes segmentation faults
on large programs. On the small testcase (see end of message)
you need valgrind to see it, since almost always you get NULL
by
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-06-06 15:32 ---
Fixed by patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-06/msg00064.html
--
dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression]|[4.1/4.2 Regression]
|miscompilation with - |
--- Comment #8 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 15:02 ---
testcase works with gcc 3.4 and gcc 3.3
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #6 from raeburn at raeburn dot org 2007-06-06 14:51 ---
Subject: Re: optimize unsigned-add overflow test on x86 to use cpu flags from
addl
On Jun 6, 2007, at 04:15, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> in config/i386/i386-modes.def, documentation says:
>
>Add CCGOC to indi
--- Comment #10 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 14:27
---
Patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-06/msg00341.html
--
rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
This program:
#include
int main() {
std::vector v(10);
}
Triggers the following warning in recent SVN versions:
/home/wouter/gcc/local/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.3.0/../../../../include/c++/4.3.0/bits/stl_vector.h:
In member function int std::vector<_Tp, _Alloc>::_M_fill_initia
--- Comment #7 from P dot Schaffnit at access dot rwth-aachen dot de
2007-06-06 13:21 ---
If someone acts on FX's suggestion, Bug 32035 might also be tackeled at the
same time...
Philippe
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25104
--- Comment #5 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-06-06 13:00 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
>I see no reason the i386 back end can't be improved in a similiar fashion.
Interesting...
I agree that this bugreport can be an enhancement request for the code you
provided. We can perhaps
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 12:55 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #9 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-06-06 12:13 ---
Fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #8 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 12:12 ---
Subject: Bug 32216
Author: uros
Date: Wed Jun 6 12:12:32 2007
New Revision: 125482
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125482
Log:
PR tree-optimization/32216
* tree-vectorizer.c (sup
--- Comment #7 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-06-06 11:55 ---
Patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-06/msg00318.html
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #29 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 11:23 ---
(In reply to comment #28)
> (In reply to comment #27)
>
> > It is not like GCC is a closed source program either,
> > you can try to make a fix for the issue too.
>
> Andrew, real world is not so simple ;)
[snip]
> c
--- Comment #4 from rask at sygehus dot dk 2007-06-06 10:33 ---
I see no reason to mark this enhancement request as invalid.
As to generating reasonable x86 code for overflow checks written in C, it
isn't completely hopeless. I did an experiment with my 16-bit x86 port. First,
I w
// { dg-do compile }
template struct A;
template struct B {};
template A& operator<<(A&, const B&);
template
struct A
{
A& operator<<(A& (*)(A&));
};
template A& foo(A&);
extern A c;
int
main()
{
c << (1, foo);
}
ICEs in resolve_overloaded_unification with 3.4, 4.1.2 and the trunk, compile
--- Comment #9 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-06-06 10:12 ---
Reducing, but this will take a while...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32231
--- Comment #8 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-06-06 10:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=13660)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13660&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32231
--- Comment #28 from pluto at agmk dot net 2007-06-06 10:08 ---
(In reply to comment #27)
> It is not like GCC is a closed source program either,
> you can try to make a fix for the issue too.
Andrew, real world is not so simple ;)
some time ago Manuel López-Ibáñez helps me create off
--- Comment #7 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-06-06 09:54 ---
I wonder if this is the same or related to PR29975, see comment
100: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29975#c100
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32231
--- Comment #6 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-06-06 09:51 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Since this is obviously caused by GC (look at the backtrace and you have
> 0xa5a5a5a5), use "--param ggc-min-expand=0 --param ggc-min-heapsize=0" as
> options to get a reduced testcase (it might
--- Comment #3 from waldemar dot rachwal at gmail dot com 2007-06-06 09:44
---
[3 weeks went by, but i've not forgotten about my bug report ;]
as about the last comment (#2) I can't fully agree. -Winit-self works, but only
in case of builtin scalar data types. For objects the compiler
--- Comment #27 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 09:23
---
> 4.2.1 won't have dataflow merge. we need a fix, or switch to disable
> this broken feature.
Seongbae knows dataflow will not be in 4.2, what he is trying to say, which I
think you misunderstood, is that he will
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2007-06-06 09:10 ---
Subject: Re: optimize unsigned-add overflow test on x86 to use cpu flags from
addl
> And BTW - wrapping is undefined operation.
One for signed integers for unsigned it is actually defined as
wrapping and the reporter us
And BTW - wrapping is undefined operation.
One for signed integers for unsigned it is actually defined as
wrapping and the reporter used unsigned integers here.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 09:02 ---
{GC 21223k -> 16452k}
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
verify_ssa_name (ssa_name=0xa5a5a5a5a5a5a5a5, is_virtual=0 '\0')
at gcc/tree-ssa.c:109
109 if (TREE_CODE (ssa_name) != SSA_NAME)
s
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 09:01 ---
Since this is obviously caused by GC (look at the backtrace and you have
0xa5a5a5a5), use "--param ggc-min-expand=0 --param ggc-min-heapsize=0" as
options to get a reduced testcase (it might take a little while b
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 09:00 ---
c-parse.c: No such file or directory
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #41 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-06-06 08:49 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 regression] miscompilation of sigc++-2.0
based code with -fstrict-aliasing
On Wed, 5 Jun 2007, dberlin at dberlin dot org wrote:
> q_2 = q_1 + 1
> q_3 = q_2 + 1
> q_4 = q_3 + 1
> q_5 = q_4 + 1
> p2 =
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
