http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48075
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Marlier
2011-03-31 07:26:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 23833
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23833
same testcase but with errors removed
(In reply to comment #1)
> Can you reduce this test case aga
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48381
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44643
Klaus Rudolph changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lts-rudolph at gmx dot de
--- Comment #7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48380
--- Comment #1 from revital.eres at linaro dot org 2011-03-31 08:38:40 UTC ---
Created attachment 23834
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23834
Test inspired from libgcov.c
Command to run the test on ARM machine:
/home/revitale/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48383
Summary: Line continuations handled incorrectly in 4.5 and
above
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41445
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dg at cowlark dot com
--- Comment #7 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48383
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48383
--- Comment #2 from David Given 2011-03-31 09:38:58 UTC
---
Adding -P does fix our immediate problem; thanks.
I would note that there's no indication in the documentation as to why this
option would help; I would never have known to use it if yo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48372
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48377
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48378
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48377
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Severi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48384
Summary: lto, linker-plugin and optimization clutter the stack
trace
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Componen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48246
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2011-03-31
10:00:48 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Mar 31 10:00:44 2011
New Revision: 171774
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=171774
Log:
2011-03-31 Richard Guenther
PR lto/482
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48246
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2011-03-31
10:02:03 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Mar 31 10:02:00 2011
New Revision: 171775
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=171775
Log:
2011-03-31 Richard Guenther
PR lto/482
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48246
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
--- Comment #6 from Richa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48379
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48360
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48384
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2011-03-31
10:28:07 UTC ---
Hm. I get
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH=. gdb ./t_hltog
GNU gdb (GDB) SUSE (7.2.50.20110206-67.1)
...
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x77ff87eb in foo (h=0x0) at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48382
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48378
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-03-31
10:38:30 UTC ---
this is documented at
http://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html
and
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FAQ#configure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48384
--- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-03-31 10:39:36 UTC ---
Thanks,
at least on some system it seems to behave correclty.
I had to rebuild binutil to enable the plugin and something may have gone wrong
are you using standard bfd "ld" or
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48384
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-03-31
10:43:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Thanks,
> at least on some system it seems to behave correclty.
> I had to rebuild binutil to enable the plugin and something may have gone
> wrong
> are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48383
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-03-31
10:44:08 UTC ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FAQ#cpp_continuation_discarded
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48384
--- Comment #4 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-03-31 11:05:47 UTC ---
its' a gold effect!
with
ld -v
GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.21
things are fine
(gdb) run
Starting program: /afs/cern.ch/user/i/innocent/public/ctest/lto/t_hlto
Program received signa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48142
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou 2011-03-31
11:11:03 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Thu Mar 31 11:10:59 2011
New Revision: 171777
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=171777
Log:
PR target/48142
* config/i386/i386.c (i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48142
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou 2011-03-31
11:14:44 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Thu Mar 31 11:14:41 2011
New Revision: 171778
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=171778
Log:
PR target/48142
* config/i386/i386.c (i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48142
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48143
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to wo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48143
--- Comment #8 from Andrey Belevantsev 2011-03-31
11:44:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Do you plan to backport this to 4.6 branch?
Sure, I was just waiting for 4.6.0 to take off.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48382
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2011-03-31
12:01:36 UTC ---
It looks like the issue boils down to implementing the existing XXX comment in
ctype.cc, seems doable:
// XXX At some point, just rename this file to ctype_configure_char.cc
// an
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47109
--- Comment #5 from Joseph S. Myers 2011-03-31
12:13:24 UTC ---
Author: jsm28
Date: Thu Mar 31 12:13:13 2011
New Revision: 171779
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=171779
Log:
PR target/47109
* doc/tm.texi.in (TARGET_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47109
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48313
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-03-31
12:40:24 UTC ---
Thanks for the fix, Jason, I've just encountered the bug myself using
boost::thread
I expect others will to, so for the benefit of search engines, the error is
post_event_test.cc:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48352
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-31
12:54:26 UTC ---
The regression is caused by r171207.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48385
Summary: x86-64: Tail call recursion optimization with
-mcmodel=large can generate invalid assembly
(immediate operand illegal with absolute jump)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48386
Summary: "Cannot declare static function inside another
function"
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48360
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48352
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2011-03-31
13:05:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> The regression is caused by r171207.
That's http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2011-03/msg00630.html
Author: tkoenig
Date: Mon Mar 21 07:14:42 2011
New Revision
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48360
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-31
13:06:06 UTC ---
Disregard 2, wrong PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48386
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48352
--- Comment #5 from Joost VandeVondele
2011-03-31 13:25:27 UTC ---
reduced:
INTEGER, DIMENSION(:), POINTER :: a
DO I=1,MIN(SIZE(a),SIZE(a))
ENDDO
END
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48387
Summary: ICE with -floop-flatten
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48386
--- Comment #2 from zxfox at mail dot ru 2011-03-31 13:37:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> This is not a bug, G++ is correct.
>
> Are you trying to create a static variable?
>
> The rules of C++ say that "B b( A() )" is interpreted as a decl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48386
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-03-31
13:40:52 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> all works, so I have decide that is a bug, sorry for wasted time.
It compiles, but it doesn't do what you think: it declares a function "b" not a
variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48387
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2011-03-31
13:49:59 UTC ---
Sebastian - you didn't commit any of the loop flattening testcases when
merging the support to trunk. Please fix that.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48148
--- Comment #22 from H.J. Lu 2011-03-31 14:14:08
UTC ---
Can we apply Jaub's patch to fix bootstrap?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48124
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-03-31
14:27:15 UTC ---
Created attachment 23837
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23837
gcc46-pr48124.patch
WIP patch, completely untested, that attempts to pass down to get_best_mode
exac
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48382
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48352
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-31
15:01:31 UTC ---
I am a little suspicious of this:
static int count_arglist;
+/* Pointer to an array of gfc_expr ** we operate on, plus its size
+ and counter. */
+
+static gfc_expr ***expr_array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16292
--- Comment #9 from Rainer Orth 2011-03-31 15:02:39 UTC
---
Author: ro
Date: Thu Mar 31 15:02:33 2011
New Revision: 171784
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=171784
Log:
PR target/16292
* gfortran.dg/g77/cabs.f: Only x
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16292
--- Comment #10 from Rainer Orth 2011-03-31 15:05:53
UTC ---
Author: ro
Date: Thu Mar 31 15:05:47 2011
New Revision: 171785
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=171785
Log:
PR target/16292
* gfortran.dg/g77/cabs.f: Only
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16292
--- Comment #11 from Rainer Orth 2011-03-31 15:11:28
UTC ---
Author: ro
Date: Thu Mar 31 15:11:20 2011
New Revision: 171786
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=171786
Log:
PR target/16292
* gfortran.dg/g77/cabs.f: Only
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48388
Summary: libgcc compilation causes a segfault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48388
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48301
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mschamschula at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48389
Summary: [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE: in make_edges, at
cfgbuild.c:319 with -mtune=pentiumpro
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48019
--- Comment #13 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-03-31 16:00:53 UTC ---
> OK, so now we know that connect ignores SA_RESTART, but I forgot to ask about
> accept. Can you try this program as well?
>
> On GNU/Linux it prints "accept suc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48382
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-03-31 16:06:20 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Mar 31 16:06:12 2011
New Revision: 171790
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=171790
Log:
2011-03-31 Paolo Carlini
PR libs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48382
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48390
Summary: Multiple setting to restricted pointer variable not
optimized away
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45734
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|SUSPENDED
Target Milestone|4.6.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45665
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48390
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2011-03-31
16:15:56 UTC ---
For the C case: If "ptr" is also "restrict", the "*a = 1" is optimized away.
Ditto for Fortran, if "ptr" is not a POINTER but a normal variable.
In case of Fortran, the a/b/c cannot a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48391
Summary: tr1/memory's shared_ptr causing excessive system
memory consumption
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48391
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-03-31
16:37:26 UTC ---
I think this is probably a dup of PR 46455
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48301
--- Comment #7 from Jack Howarth 2011-03-31
16:43:28 UTC ---
This issue has been fixed in Apple's llvm-gcc at revision 128619. It is unclear
if this fix will make it into llvm.org's llvm-gcc-4.2 2.9 release (which is
slated to be the final one wi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48392
Summary: [regression] bootstrap errors on an
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, slackware 13.0 box
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48392
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-03-31
16:56:30 UTC ---
how did you configure gcc? do you have 32bit glibc installed?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48391
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-03-31
16:57:05 UTC ---
to summarise: there's nothing wrong with shared_ptr itself, but prior to GCC
4.6 our mutex had no destructor, so if shared_ptr uses a mutex it leaks
resources
mingw seem to have cha
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48392
--- Comment #2 from ronis at ronispc dot chem.mcgill.ca 2011-03-31 17:09:10 UTC
---
I configured with:
../gcc/configure --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --prefix=/usr --with-gnu-as
--enable-shared --with-gnu-ld --enable-threads=posix
--with-ecj-jar=/usr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48392
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-03-31
17:15:21 UTC ---
you need to install the 32bit glibc headers and libraries if you want to
compile for 32bit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48391
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48392
--- Comment #4 from froydnj at codesourcery dot com 2011-03-31 17:18:33 UTC ---
Or at least don't pass --host if you don't need it; configure will do a
fine job of figuring things out on its own.
Since you don't have the 32-bit libraries installe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48392
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48393
Summary: ICE: in omega_add_zero_geq, at omega.h:274 with
-fcheck-data-deps --param omega-max-geqs=0
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48378
--- Comment #3 from nbi at wideopenwest dot com 2011-03-31 17:35:44 UTC ---
My apologies, I should know better to RTFM for something of GCC's complexity.
Have gotten too used to packages for which only in place configure & make are
neccessary. Will
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48391
--- Comment #3 from Johnson Lin 2011-03-31
17:38:47 UTC ---
Many thanks for the brief and clear explanation. :)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48392
--- Comment #6 from ronis at ronispc dot chem.mcgill.ca 2011-03-31 17:53:53 UTC
---
Removing the --host and adding --disable-multilib seems to have worked.
Thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46455
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arch.jslin at gmail dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48391
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48343
--- Comment #8 from Paulo César Pereira de Andrade 2011-03-31 18:06:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Created attachment 23821 [details]
> gcc46-pr48343.patch
>
> Untested fix.
I also confirm gcc built with this patch compiles the i586
ker
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48352
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48262
--- Comment #16 from Michael Meissner 2011-03-31
18:38:41 UTC ---
Created attachment 23841
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23841
Patch to fix the problem, originally from Andrew Pinski
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48262
--- Comment #17 from Michael Meissner
2011-03-31 18:43:44 UTC ---
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 09:43:05PM +, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48262
>
> --- Comment #15 from Dominique d'Humieres
> 20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48394
Summary: ObjC exceptions cannot be caught in ObjC++
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig..
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48395
Summary: [AVR] ICE: segmentation fault when compiling
libgcc2.c, SVN trunk r171783
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48381
Vladimir Makarov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at redhat dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48395
--- Comment #1 from Joerg Wunsch 2011-03-31
19:13:13 UTC ---
If I unpatch r171532 from gcc/expr.c (which introduced the current
version of that piece of code), I don't get a segfault anymore but
a different ICE:
../../../../libgcc/../gcc/libgcc2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48365
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2011-03-31
19:18:28 UTC ---
To further clarify, the issue boils down to class _BinBase1 (and _BinBase2)
using only const ref data members for performance reasons, likewise elsewhere
copies are always carefully av
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48381
--- Comment #3 from Vladimir Makarov 2011-03-31
19:54:07 UTC ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Thu Mar 31 19:54:02 2011
New Revision: 171795
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=171795
Log:
2011-03-31 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48381
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou 2011-03-31
20:00:56 UTC ---
*** Bug 48364 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48364
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48280
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2011-03-31
20:29:52 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Mar 31 20:29:49 2011
New Revision: 171797
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=171797
Log:
PR c++/48280
* method.c (defaultable_fn_che
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48280
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2011-03-31
20:33:10 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Mar 31 20:33:07 2011
New Revision: 171798
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=171798
Log:
PR c++/48280
* method.c (defaultable_fn_che
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48280
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48212
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48380
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48380
--- Comment #3 from Richard Earnshaw 2011-03-31
21:05:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 23843
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23843
testcase reduced from libgfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48380
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
