--- Comment #2 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-03-27 07:41 ---
Combine doesn't want to merge memory operand into sse2_pmaddwd pattern. Perhaps
this is the limitation of combiner, since pmaddwd pattern defines multiple uses
of its input operands.
--
--- Comment #7 from nickc at redhat dot com 2008-03-27 08:26 ---
Subject: Re: Problem while compiling gcc for mn10300-elf
Hi Jeff,
The CLASS is DATA_OR_EXTENDED_REGS.
(plus:SI (reg/f:SI 9 sp)
(const_int 1100 [0x44c]))
Hmm, so why isn't this caught by this code in
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 08:56 ---
Subject: Bug 35429
Author: pinskia
Date: Thu Mar 27 08:55:50 2008
New Revision: 133631
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133631
Log:
2008-03-27 Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
#includesstream
#includemath.h
#includeomp.h
class ProcessorScheduling{
public :vector string schedule(vector int machines, vector string jobs,
int transfer){
vectorint assignments(0);
vector vector int minimization(machines.max_size(),vector
int(machines.max_size()));
int c,j;
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 09:31 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #11 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 09:42 ---
That will unnecessarily punish the majority of targets which use simple
pointers.
I thought you can align functions more than FUNCTION_BOUNDARY by
ASM_OUTPUT_MAX_SKIP_ALIGN, but apparently that's not unconditional.
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-03-27 09:52 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression] Symbol address check
eliminated by C frontend.
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008, jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #11 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 09:42
--- Comment #1 from anoop dot sabir at rediffmail dot com 2008-03-27 10:49
---
Created an attachment (id=15386)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15386action=view)
code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35715
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 11:00 ---
so... where does the bug hide?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-03-27 11:08 ---
Some comments about the patch in comment #2:
1) If I am not mistaken, the first change is within a commented block (look at
the last line in the diff.:
' } */')
2) With the patch I have a lot of regressions on
--- Comment #3 from anoop dot sabir at rediffmail dot com 2008-03-27 11:09
---
ProcessorScheduling.cc: In member function std::vectorstd::basic_stringchar,
std::char_traitschar, std::allocatorchar ,
std::allocatorstd::basic_stringchar, std::char_traitschar,
std::allocatorchar
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-03-27 11:10 ---
Works as advertised without regression on i686-apple-darwin9 for 32 and 64 bit
modes.
Thanks for the patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35702
--- Comment #7 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-03-27 11:11 ---
Works as advertised without regression on i686-apple-darwin9 for 32 and 64 bit
modes.
Thanks for the patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35699
--- Comment #4 from anoop dot sabir at rediffmail dot com 2008-03-27 11:22
---
ProcessorScheduling.cc: In member function std::vectorstd::basic_stringchar,
std::char_traitschar, std::allocatorchar ,
std::allocatorstd::basic_stringchar, std::char_traitschar,
std::allocatorchar
--- Comment #1 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 14:14 ---
Confirmed in trunk and GCC 4.3.0
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Gcc 4.4 revision 133635 has
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-03/msg02105.html
FAIL: gfortran.dg/assign_6.f -O1 execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/assign_6.f -O2 execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/assign_6.f -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/assign_6.f -O3
Gcc 4.4 revision 133630 has
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-03/msg02104.html
Running target unix/-m32
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/limits-structnest.c -O2 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/limits-structnest.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
(test for excess errors)
--- Comment #1 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-03-27 14:27 ---
my build patches are innocent :-)
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from anoop dot sabir at rediffmail dot com 2008-03-27 14:39
---
Created an attachment (id=15387)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15387action=view)
code
this code is better
--
anoop dot sabir at rediffmail dot com changed:
What
--- Comment #6 from anoop dot sabir at rediffmail dot com 2008-03-27 14:40
---
errors compiling:
ProcessorScheduling.cc: In member function std::vectorstd::basic_stringchar,
std::char_traitschar, std::allocatorchar ,
std::allocatorstd::basic_stringchar, std::char_traitschar,
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-03-27 14:41 ---
Confirmed on i686-apple-darwin9 at revision 133638. The error is:
Fortran runtime error: Assigned label is not in the list
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35716
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 14:54 ---
Subject: Bug 35704
Author: dgregor
Date: Thu Mar 27 14:53:57 2008
New Revision: 133643
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133643
Log:
2008-03-27 Douglas Gregor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #4 from dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 14:54 ---
Fixed on mainline
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 15:11 ---
Seen for cris-elf too; worked with 133631, failed with 133638.
--
hp at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-03-27 15:29 ---
This problem may be kernel related.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35717
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-03-27 15:44 ---
I have verified that revision 133632:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2008-03/msg00852.html
is the cause.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35716
--- Comment #4 from schwab at suse dot de 2008-03-27 15:47 ---
Results here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-03/msg02106.html,
and it fixes the test case.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35695
The following program fails to raise an error condition in the deallocate
statement. The pointer target was not created by an allocate.
Dick Hendrickson
program MF0069
! fails on Windows XP
! gcc version 4.4.0 20080312 (experimental) [trunk revision 133139]
! F95 page 83, line 34 says
The ASSOCIATED function returns FALSE when its argument is a
pointer to a zero-sized array.
Dick Hendrickson
program try_mf1053
! fails on Windows XP
! gcc version 4.4.0 20080312 (experimental) [trunk revision 133139]
call mf1053 ( 1, 2, 3, 4)
end
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 16:22 ---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 16:32 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 16:33 ---
Subject: Bug 32810
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Mar 27 16:32:28 2008
New Revision: 133645
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133645
Log:
2008-03-27 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 16:35 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 16:35 ---
Subject: Bug 32511
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Mar 27 16:34:55 2008
New Revision: 133646
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133646
Log:
2008-03-27 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
I'm trying to build a 32 bit version of GCC 4.3.0 on an AIX 5.3 system using
GCC v3.3.3.
/tmp/gcc_exe/./gcc/xgcc -B/tmp/gcc_exe/./gcc/
-B/apps/gcc/4.3.0/powerpc-ibm-aix5.3.0.0/bin/
-B/apps/gcc/4.3.0/powerpc-ibm-aix5.3.0.0/lib/ -isystem
/apps/gcc/4.3.0/powerpc-ibm-aix5.3.0.0/include -isystem
--- Comment #1 from al dot danial at gmail dot com 2008-03-27 16:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=15388)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15388action=view)
/tmp/gcc_exe/powerpc-ibm-aix5.3.0.0/pthread/libgcc/config.log
--
--- Comment #2 from al dot danial at gmail dot com 2008-03-27 16:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=15389)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15389action=view)
/tmp/gcc_exe/powerpc-ibm-aix5.3.0.0/pthread/libgcc/_gcov_execl.dep
--
The ASSOCIATED functions returns false for the 4th test below. It
should return true. there have been a ton of interps and rewording
of the associated function. It's probably clearer to read
case (v) in the F2003 standard.
program try_mg0028
! fails on Windows XP
! gcc version 4.4.0
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 16:50 ---
Confirmed. gfortran deallocates the static memory as valgrind also complains:
==3839== Invalid free() / delete / delete[]
==3839==at 0x4C2430F: free (in
/usr/lib64/valgrind/amd64-linux/vgpreload_memcheck.so)
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 16:53 ---
Confirm. Thanks for finding this bug.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 17:10 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 17:10 ---
Subject: Bug 35716
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Mar 27 17:09:54 2008
New Revision: 133647
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133647
Log:
2008-03-27 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 17:17
---
(In reply to comment #6)
Now the patch does not solve the following testcase:
int main1 (int X)
This is really PR 32107 and PR 32110 which I have patches for, and I will be
submitting them this weekend.
The
--- Comment #5 from schwab at suse dot de 2008-03-27 17:18 ---
It also fixes the original problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35695
The following well-formed example produces the incorrect error:
error: cannot expand G ... into a fixed-length argument list
templatetypename G = void, typename H = void
struct foo
{};
templatetypename... G
struct bar : fooG...
{};
int main() {
barint, float f;
}
--
--
dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-03-27 17:43 ---
This test needs more than 8MB stack. I have
stacksize 8MB
Some kernel doesn't enforce it. When I set stack to unlimited,
it compiles fine.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35717
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 18:27 ---
Confirm. Note NAG f95 complains the program is invalid and I think it is right:
Error: Explicit interface required for MG0028 from TRY_MG0028 - argument TDA2R
(no. 1) is a TARGET
But this does not solve the
--- Comment #4 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 18:53 ---
Subject: Bug 35657
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Mar 27 18:52:18 2008
New Revision: 133649
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133649
Log:
2008-03-27 H.J. Lu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR target/35657
--- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 18:56 ---
Subject: Bug 35657
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Mar 27 18:55:36 2008
New Revision: 133651
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133651
Log:
2008-03-27 H.J. Lu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Backport from
--- Comment #8 from law at redhat dot com 2008-03-27 18:57 ---
Subject: Re: Problem while compiling gcc for mn10300-elf
nickc at redhat dot com wrote:
Nope, when you pointed it out to me I puzzled over it too. The answer
is quite simple though, at the point where
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-03-27 19:05 ---
Fixed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pluto at agmk dot net 2008-03-27 19:26 ---
ping-bug,
comeau detects this error w/o any problems.
ComeauTest.c, line 2: error: incompatible exception specifications
void (*pt)() throw() = foo
^
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
--- Comment #3 from pluto at agmk dot net 2008-03-27 19:29 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
ping-bug,
comeau detects this error w/o any problems.
ComeauTest.c, line 2: error: incompatible exception specifications
void (*pt)() throw() = foo
^
one more
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-03-27 19:38 ---
The patch for PR 32000:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-03/msg01632.html
is another approach to handle unaligned SSE load/store.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed
The following program gives an error message for valid use of
an array element in an expression for an automatic character
array.
The error message is repeated twice.
Changing from a run-time subscript in the parameter array to a
constant fixes the problem.
Dick Hendrickson
program
--- Comment #5 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 21:55 ---
Confirmed :(
Just found: the same holds true for -fintrinsic-modules-path which is supposed
to accept separated arguments as well. For both, -J and
-fintrinsic-modules-path, a separated argument is stripped away
The following program gives a compile time segmentation fault.
Changing the third argument to CSHIFT to either MF1 or -1 fixes
the problem.
I didn't experiment with a unary minus expression for the
second argument.
Dick Hendrickson
SUBROUTINE RA0072(DDA,LDA,nf10,nf1,mf1,nf2)
! fails on
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.1.2
Known to work||4.2.0
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 22:04 ---
Fixed for 4.3.0, wontfix for earlier releases.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|4.1.2 |4.1.2 4.3.0
Summary|[4.2 regression] entry and |[4.2
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 22:07
---
Fixed in 4.2.0.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 22:09 ---
As suggested. Please re-open only with a proper testcase.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 22:10 ---
Thus, invalid.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 22:11 ---
Fixed in 4.2.0.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 22:11 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #13 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 22:13
---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 22:15 ---
Which exact version? Does this still happen? Does this happen with 4.1 as a
bootstrap compiler?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34216
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 22:18 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
Keywords||wrong-code
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Summary|[4.x regression] renames|[4.1/4.2/4.3/4.4
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35090
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35146
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35366
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35388
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|other |target
Keywords||build
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35680
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35687
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.4, 4.3 regression]: |[4.3/4.4 Regression]:
|structure character element
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 22:28 ---
This is know.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 35608 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-27 22:28 ---
*** Bug 35717 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
This snipped
code
#include string
#include vector
#include algorithm
int main() {
std::vectorstd::string foo(20);
std::fill(foo.begin(), foo.end(), bar);
}
/code
compiles fine with g++-4.2.3, where 4.3.0 gives the attached error message
(error.log) .
--
Summary: ambiguous
--- Comment #1 from beckmann dot maik at googlemail dot com 2008-03-27
22:35 ---
Created an attachment (id=15390)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15390action=view)
error message
error message of g++-4.3.0 when compiling the provided snippet
--
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-03-27 23:08 ---
This test needs more than 8MB stack. I have
stacksize 8MB
Some kernel doesn't enforce it. When I set stack to unlimited,
it compiles fine.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35608
--- Comment #13 from carlos at codesourcery dot com 2008-03-28 00:14
---
Dave,
I tested the patch you posted in comment #9, and I have no regressions on
hppa-linux (C/C++), and it fixes my testcase. I haven't done a full
all-languages bootstrap and test.
--
** I am trying to compile a program that looks like the following but the
compiler cannot recognize which class the nested class belongs to:
#include iostream
using namespace std;
template typename T
struct A
{
class B;
friend class B;
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-28 00:25 ---
This error message is correct as you specialized Avoid but you also need to
specialize the nested class as the non specialized version of the nested
function will not be used.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-03-28 00:37 ---
Argh. Easy to fix, will do ASAP.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-28 00:40 ---
This patch seems to finally fix the problem - but if this is the Right Way
(TM)?
The changes in gfortranspec.c are necessary to trigger a missing-argument
message on:
$ gfortran-svn foo.f90 -J
gfortran-svn:
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-03-28 00:47 ---
Created an attachment (id=15392)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15392action=view)
Draft patch
I'm finishing testing something along these lines...
--
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35725
--- Comment #2 from dick dot hendrickson at gmail dot com 2008-03-28 00:57
---
Subject: Re: ASSOCIATED returns false when strides confusing
On 27 Mar 2008 18:27:44 -, burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-28 01:09
---
I will have a go at this one.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
From http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9079 now we get:
.file foo.c
.section.rodata.str1.1,aMS,@progbits,1
.LC0:
.string Hello World.\n
.text
.p2align 4,,15
.type funk, @function
funk:
pushl %ebp
movl
--- Comment #16 from rusty at rustcorp dot com dot au 2008-03-28 02:38
---
OK, this is fixed in gcc 4.3 (woot!), but the unused funk is still omitted.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35728
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9079
This is for gcc version 4.3.0 (GCC)
func_1() here should never load from g_361 since the loop body never executes:
const volatile int g_361 = 3L;
volatile int g_2 = 0L;
void func_1 (void) {
for (g_2 = 0; g_2 10; g_2++)
{
int l_357 = g_361;
}
}
However when
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-28 04:18
---
The following patch appears to fix this.
Index: iresolve.c
===
--- iresolve.c (revision 133275)
+++ iresolve.c (working copy)
@@ -597,7 +597,8 @@
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35724
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
