--- Comment #9 from rwild at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-15 07:16 ---
> I had no knowledge of `config.status -d`, but this helped me a lot. I've been
> able to see the confstat temporary files and figure out the problem. Thanks
> for
> pointing this out, this will help me a lot to debug
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-15 06:54 ---
First, the code compiles fine on i386 with 4.4.0 20090113.
Second, I support Joost's position in that the ICE you
posted and the subsequent failure of loading f951 in dbx
suggests the problem is in your installation.
--- Comment #3 from kamaraju at gmail dot com 2009-01-15 06:21 ---
Joost,
Did you test on the solaris machine or on the i386 machine. I think this is a
architecture specific bug. Could you please confirm the architecture of your
machine?
thanks
raju
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
--- Comment #2 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-01-15 06:05 ---
doesn't fail in 4.4.0 and 4.3.1.
Since this refers to an 'old' version of trunk (i.e. 4.4. in full development),
I'll close this as fixed. If the problem remains with an up-to-date trunk, or
on any active release branch
--
jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed
--- Comment #2 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-01-15 05:56 ---
looks like this always failed ?
--
jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDep
--- Comment #3 from dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net 2009-01-15
02:39 ---
I believe that this failure reflects the fact that PE_COFF dll's do not allow
undefined symbols. Because of that, the rule to decide shared vs static libgcc
in gcc.c init_gcc_spec, namely the case for
--- Comment #7 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2009-01-15 01:49 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 regression] performance regression of sse code from 4.2/4.3
I guess th3 main difference here is that load + addps pair generate 2
uops, while mov + loading addps generate 3 since the move has to go
through
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-01-15 01:25 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
>
> H.J. perhaps, you can have some advice here? Or at least can we do some
> benchmarking?
>
Joey and Xuepeng are looking into it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3882
Does anyone knows how to deal with this one:
/usr/bin/ld: a.out: hidden symbol `__fixunsdfdi' in
/opt/gcc402/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.0.2/libgcc.a(_fixunsdfdi.o) is
referenced by DSO
/usr/bin/ld: final link failed: Nonrepresentable section on output
Thanks in advance
--
View this message in
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Summary|Error Building libssp, |[4.4 Regression
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-15 01:08 ---
Without a self contained testcase, it is hard to decide if this is a bug in GCC
or MPICH2.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-15 01:07 ---
Confirmed.
here is one that fails with both the C and C++ front-ends:
inline __attribute__((always_inline)) void A(int *this1)
{
int this2;
int this3;
A(&this2);
A(
--- Comment #5 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-15 00:30 ---
Created an attachment (id=17106)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17106&action=view)
Proposed patch
The patch makes GCC to generate movaps load followed by addps. On Core 2 it
speeds up the testc
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 23:14 ---
*** Bug 25351 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 23:14 ---
And it is. I had the same issue also and backporting the patch for PR 26399
fixes it for me.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26399 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 22:25 ---
You need to do some work to reduce this to a testcase.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from kamaraju at gmail dot com 2009-01-14 22:14 ---
Created an attachment (id=17105)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17105&action=view)
code to reproduce the internal compiler error
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38853
Consider the attached heapsort.f90. When compiled it gives an internal
compiler error.
According to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2009-01/msg00179.html, the bug is
not present in 4.4.0 20081209 x86_64-*-freebsd .
> gfortran -c heapsort.f90
heapsort.f90: In function 'heapsort':
heapsort.f90:1: i
--- Comment #1 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-01-14 22:08 ---
Confirmed on i686-apple-darwin9/trunk, it also fails with gfortran 4.2.3 and
4.3.3.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38852
--- Comment #11 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 22:06
---
(In reply to comment #10)
> You would completely underestimate the optimization opportunities PRE
> unleashes.
Well, at least for partial-partial-RE, as mentioned before in PR38401,
benchmarks indicate that we'd
The UBOUND function returns zero for subscript triplets that have a negative
stride, such as 5:4:-1. Fails with both compile-time expressions and run-time
expressions. LBOUND and SHAPE work correctly on the same triplets.
This might be related to 35685 since I think this started soon after 35685
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 21:58 ---
other.c_ = c;
The issue here is that MyCompare is an empty struct (but has a sizeof of 1
because C++ standard) but GCC is not deleting stores for some reason.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 21:53 ---
Related to PR 34870 and 37804.
friend and templates never got along.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38850
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 21:51 ---
Oh yes it only fails inside a template context.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38850
--- Comment #2 from rbenedik at fsmat dot htu dot tuwien dot ac dot at
2009-01-14 21:50 ---
I tried to make a single file from the code but the bug does not show up there.
You can download the software at:
http://fsmat.htu.tuwien.ac.at/~rbenedik/gauss-2.06.tar
Run
make clean; make
a
--
nemet at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |nemet at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #4 from nemet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 21:48 ---
It only happens on SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED targets (i.e. mips but not x86).
I will do some more digging on the history of the SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED code
here but this patch fixes the ICE:
Index: expmed.c
=
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 21:46 ---
>From a first look Max should be found during argument-dependent name-lookup.
EDG
confirms this theory. gcc 4.1 accepts this code.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from nvachhar at google dot com 2009-01-14 21:30 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I think this code is invalid as the call to Max is not going to be dependent
> as
> the arguments are not dependent and can be looked up at the time the function
> is defined.
>
I don't thin
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 21:26 ---
> @@ -2451 +2451 @@ gfc_conv_function_call (gfc_se * se, gfc
> - && fsym->as->type != AS_ASSUMED_SHAPE;
> + && fsym->as && fsym->as->type != AS_ASSUMED_SHAPE;
This might lead to wrong code
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 21:24 ---
I think this code is invalid as the call to Max is not going to be dependent as
the arguments are not dependent and can be looked up at the time the function
is defined.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 21:16 ---
> Thanks for this report. Please also test with the code of graphite
> branch that contains a patch that schedules several scalar optimizations
> that can improve the quality of the code generated.
For the geometric
--- Comment #16 from laurent at guerby dot net 2009-01-14 21:12 ---
binutils 2.19 and CVS do not seem to cure the issue, I opened:
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9743
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38523
--- Comment #13 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 21:12 ---
Fixed on trunk(4.4) and 4.3.
Thanks for the report!
--
mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #39 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 21:11 ---
Subject: Bug 38431
Author: spop
Date: Wed Jan 14 21:11:05 2009
New Revision: 143384
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143384
Log:
2009-01-14 Sebastian Pop
PR middle-end/38431
*
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 21:05 ---
I cannot even compile or link this in any obvious way.
gcc -o t t.c -DDOUBLE
/usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.3.2/../../../../lib/crt1.o: In function `_start':
(.text+0x18): undefined reference to `main'
/tmp/ccNVE5Zw.
--- Comment #1 from nvachhar at google dot com 2009-01-14 21:05 ---
Created an attachment (id=17104)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17104&action=view)
Test case program
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38851
Compiling the following program:
int printf(const char *fmt, ...);
class MyCompare {
public:
MyCompare() { }
bool operator() (const int a, const int b) const {
return a > b;
}
};
template
class Other {
public:
Other (const Comp &c) : c_(c) { }
void* doSomething();
private:
Co
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 21:04 ---
I think this is a dup of bug 26399 which was fixed for 4.2.0
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25351
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #12 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 20:53 ---
Subject: Bug 38669
Author: mikael
Date: Wed Jan 14 20:53:18 2009
New Revision: 143383
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143383
Log:
2009-01-14 Mikael Morin
PR fortran/35681
*
--- Comment #8 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 20:53 ---
Subject: Bug 38487
Author: mikael
Date: Wed Jan 14 20:53:18 2009
New Revision: 143383
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143383
Log:
2009-01-14 Mikael Morin
PR fortran/35681
*
--- Comment #28 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 20:53 ---
Subject: Bug 35681
Author: mikael
Date: Wed Jan 14 20:53:18 2009
New Revision: 143383
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143383
Log:
2009-01-14 Mikael Morin
PR fortran/35681
*
--- Comment #1 from nvachhar at google dot com 2009-01-14 20:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=17103)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17103&action=view)
Test case program
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38850
i686-unknown-linux-gnu
--target=i686-unknown-linux-gnu --enable-static-nss --with-arch=pentium3
--with-tune=pentium4
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.4.0 20090114 (experimental)
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-v' '-c' '-shared-libgcc' '-mtune=pentium4'
'-march=p
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-01-14 20:51 ---
Subject: Re: huge performance regression on
EEMBC bitmnp01
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009, amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> I think the disregard for conditional execution opportunities and the
> assumption that phi nodes
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-01-14 20:50 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 regression] warnings from -isystem
headers strikes back.
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009, pluto at agmk dot net wrote:
> --- Comment #10 from pluto at agmk dot net 2009-01-14 18:29 ---
> (In reply to co
--- Comment #8 from thomas dot jourdan at gmail dot com 2009-01-14 20:45
---
Hi all
I did my homework tonight and I found the problem, thanks to your help. For
other purposes, I had to export a function in my shell this way :
---8<---
function install() { ginstall "$@"; }
export -f in
--- Comment #1 from nils dot de dot reus at ivm dot vu dot nl 2009-01-14
20:44 ---
It is a bit further removed from the real life situation I am dealing with, but
to make testing easier I've moved it all into one file so you don't need to
bother with importing or package structure.
/
This program gives an ICE when compiled with gfortran 4.4 trunk:
FUNCTION myfortran_error ()
USE ISO_C_BINDING
IMPLICIT NONE
CHARACTER(LEN=5) :: myfortran_error
CHARACTER(KIND=C_CHAR, LEN=5), POINTER :: chararr
TYPE(C_PTR) :: c_str
c_str = C_NULL_PTR
CALL C_F_POINTER (c_str, chararr
--- Comment #4 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 20:31 ---
Actually perhaps in simple case like this even peep2 will work since we can
copyprop will fix it later. I am trying to add the peep
--
hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 20:29 ---
Fixed. The testcase was added in
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143376
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Summary|[4.4 regression] performance|[
--- Comment #3 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 20:20 ---
It might be IRA change. Chips generally preffer separate load and execute
instruction as in the old loop over the load+execute since they are easier to
retire.
Splitting the instruction post reload probably won't d
--- Comment #3 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 20:07 ---
is_scalar_expr_ptr is weird.
Those are the things to change in it, IMHO:
- is_scalar_expr_ptr does not need to check whether character lengths are
equal to 1 as arbitrary length character variables are considered as
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
Component|c |middle-end
h
/* The program doesn't terminate with -O2 but works with no optimization on
double Datatype */
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#define STRMAX 1000
#ifdef FLOAT
#define FTYPE(function) function##_f
#define DTYPE float
#define SIZE 4
#endif
#ifdef DOUBLE
#define FTYPE(function) funct
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 19:52 ---
I almost have a patch for this.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 19:24
---
>/mnt/gnu/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr38616.c:1: warning: -fstack-protector
That has already been fixed:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-01/msg00372.html
Fixed so closing.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #2 from jeff at schwabcenter dot com 2009-01-14 19:20 ---
I'm seeing the same thing with Boost.Bind (boost 1.37, GCC 4.2.1).
#include
#include
using boost::bind;
using std::multiplies;
int main() {
// Fine.
int const lvalue = 5;
bind(multiplies(),4,_1)(lvalu
--- Comment #10 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 19:18
---
Test fails on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11:
Executing on host: /mnt/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/xgcc -B/mnt/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/
/mnt/
gnu/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr38616.c -O2 -fstack-protector
-fno-show-col
umn -lm -o ./
--- Comment #2 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2009-01-14 19:03 ---
Created an attachment (id=17102)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17102&action=view)
another testcase, this one fails _only_ with -O1
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38844
--- Comment #21 from r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com 2009-01-14
18:47 ---
The link step for libstdc++.la gives warnings for failed file format test using
a file magic. This is wrong!
The problem results from different output of native file command and the linux
file command.
lib
--- Comment #9 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 18:47 ---
I think the disregard for conditional execution opportunities and the
assumption that phi nodes have no execution cost are two separate issues.
I'd like to address the latter first, because it causes exponential code
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 18:45 ---
The culprit is -floop-block (which is already enabled by default in the
graphite branch with -O2). Using only -floop-interchange -floop-strip-mine I
get a run time inbetween (16.5s, single run). Using only -fgraphite-
--- Comment #1 from sebpop at gmail dot com 2009-01-14 18:42 ---
Subject: Re: New: [Graphite] 70% slower using -floop* than without graphite
(gas_dyn of Polyhedron)
Hi,
Thanks for this report. Please also test with the code of graphite
branch that contains a
patch that schedules seve
Hi,
Thanks for this report. Please also test with the code of graphite
branch that contains a
patch that schedules several scalar optimizations that can improve the
quality of the code generated.
Thanks,
Sebastian Pop
--
AMD - GNU Tools
--- Comment #1 from veredz at elta dot co dot il 2009-01-14 18:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=17101)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17101&action=view)
config.log
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38847
I'm trying to build gcc-4.3.2 for powerpc-405-gnu-linux.
I'm using binutils 2.18 built earlier with no erros according to LSF 6.4
Steps for building gcc (according to LSF 6.4):
../gcc-4.3.2/configure \
--target=powerpc-405-linux-gnu --prefix=/tools \
--disable-nls --disable-shared --disable-mult
--- Comment #10 from pluto at agmk dot net 2009-01-14 18:29 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> I just installed a fix - can you verify if all the annoying warnigns are
> gone?
> Thx!
>
they are still there.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38503
--- Comment #3 from syntheticpp at gmx dot net 2009-01-14 18:29 ---
11.2 is talking about a different case.
When you instantiate the integer template parameter manually you will see that
it is really a bug:
struct Policy
{
protected:
Policy() {}
Policy(const Policy&) {}
};
te
This is with gfortran 4.4.0 20090114 [trunk revision 143364] and the Polyhedron
test suite, http://www.polyhedron.co.uk/MFL6VW74649
on AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4800+ running openSUSE Factory
x86-64.
First the good news: No ICE and no result-checking failures.
The geometric
The alignment of an anonymous structure defined as a member
of another structure (thanks to -fms-extensions) cannot be
forced with __attribute__((aligned)).
This problem occurs on cygwin with default gcc packages:
gcc version 4.3.2 20080827 (alpha-testing) 1 (GCC)
and:
gcc version 3.4.4 (cygming s
--- Comment #1 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2009-01-14 18:14 ---
Created an attachment (id=17100)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17100&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38844
gcc seems to deadlock with the following code at -O1 and above:
=
struct A {
inline __attribute__((always_inline)) A()
{
A();
A();
}
};
int main()
{
A();
return 0;
}
===
--- Comment #1 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2009-01-14 18:06 ---
Built and tested with my hacks, works.
Rob
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38803
--- Comment #7 from rwild at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 18:02 ---
Please go into the gcc directory in the build tree and confirm that
./config.status
reproduces the errors (ignore further errors). If yes, then please show
the output of
./config.status -d
wc confstat*/*
If an
--- Comment #3 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2009-01-14 17:54 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Relinking in itself is not a bug. You can avoid it on some systems
> (but likely not on yours) with --enable-fast-install.
> On some systems it is simply necessary.
>
> If there is a specific pr
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2009-01-14 17:46 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 38843 ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2009-01-14 17:46 ---
*** Bug 38842 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38843
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-01-14 17:36
---
First, this issue has nothing to do with the preprocessor. Actually, looking at
your PR, has nothing to do with GCC. Apparently, the authors of SystemC forgot
to include in sc_utils_ids.cpp, and that shows up
--- Comment #5 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2009-01-14 17:24 ---
Created an attachment (id=17099)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17099&action=view)
Memory Usage Report for "classpath/tools/.libs/libgcj_tools_la-tools.o"
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to commen
Hi ,
Dear Stuff,
Lastly I wanted to install SystemC on my linux Ubuntu 8.10(Intrepid) with
kernel 2.6.27-7, but I got some problems at compilation time with GCC 4.3.2:
g++ -I. -I. -I../../../../src/sysc/utils -I../../../../src-Wall
-DSC_INCLUDE_FX -O3 -c -o sc_utils_ids.o `test -f
'../../..
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-01-14 17:07 ---
An updated patch is at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-01/msg00747.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
Hi ,
Dear Stuff,
Lastly I wanted to install SystemC on my linux Ubuntu 8.10(Intrepid) with
kernel 2.6.27-7, but I got some problems at compilation time with GCC 4.3.2:
g++ -I. -I. -I../../../../src/sysc/utils -I../../../../src-Wall
-DSC_INCLUDE_FX -O3 -c -o sc_utils_ids.o `test -f
'../../..
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 16:48 ---
I just installed a fix - can you verify if all the annoying warnigns are gone?
Thx!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38503
--- Comment #18 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 16:47
---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNE
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 16:45 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 16:45 ---
Subject: Bug 38826
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Jan 14 16:45:22 2009
New Revision: 143374
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143374
Log:
2009-01-14 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/
--- Comment #17 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 16:45
---
Subject: Bug 38477
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Jan 14 16:45:22 2009
New Revision: 143374
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143374
Log:
2009-01-14 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimizatio
In the testsuite for C++ is the file g++.dg/ext/utf16-4.C
I just tried to compile this file with the GNU C++ compiler
version 4.4 snapshot 20090109 using valgrind.
The debug output was
g++.dg/ext/utf16-4.C:6:29: error: empty character constant
==9851== Conditional jump or move depends on uniniti
--- Comment #2 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 16:37 ---
11.2:
If a class is declared to be a base class for another class using
the protected access specifier, the public and protected memb
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 16:09 ---
For UCN see also PR 9449.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38839
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 16:00 ---
And for the universal-character-name, the following compiles with Intel's icc
void \u01ac(void) {
}
and should be valid C99. ICC generates the identifier "_u01ac". Using "gcc
-fextended-identifiers"
it shows up in t
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 16:00 ---
The following seems to be rejected as well:
subroutine test() bind(c, name=1_"name")
I don't see why this is rejected. The standard has:
C540 (R509) The scalar-char-initialization-expr shall be of default character
When compiling a class which assigns the value 1 to a variable of type static
final int, and that class has an annotation with a boolean value being set in
it, and annotation retention policy for the annotation is set RUNTIME, an
internal compiler error occurs in handle_constant.
I tried this on t
1 - 100 of 144 matches
Mail list logo
