http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49165
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49159
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49038
--- Comment #4 from irar at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-05-26 07:50:14 UTC ---
Author: irar
Date: Thu May 26 07:50:09 2011
New Revision: 174265
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174265
Log:
PR tree-optimization/49038
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49169
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49168
--- Comment #1 from rguenther at suse dot de
2011-05-26 07:58:45 UTC ---
On Wed, 25 May 2011, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49168
>
>Summary: [4.7 Regression] Aligned store used with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49168
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Componen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49169
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-05-26
08:20:22 UTC ---
There are several places in the compiler where we assume DECL_ALIGN
constraints the lower bits of the address of the DECL.
See several similar bugs in the past (PR47239 comes to my
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49166
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49165
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2011-05-26
08:25:26 UTC ---
&& !VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (pred, 1)))
2578&& !VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (pred, 2
shouldn't either none or both arms be VOID_TYPE_P? So
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49169
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-05-26
08:30:21 UTC ---
Btw, we finally should introduce a target hook for this I think.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49165
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-26
08:47:36 UTC ---
No.
Both arms shouldn't be VOID_TYPE_P, otherwise the COND_EXPR would be
VOID_TYPE_P too and we really shouldn't be using the COND_EXPR's value.
The problem is that the C++ FE gives us
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49141
--- Comment #9 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-05-26 09:26:13 UTC ---
> --- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini
> 2011-05-24 15:00:21 UTC ---
> Rainer, please confirm that everything is ok now, 2/3 of the patch goes to
> 4_6-branch too.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49141
--- Comment #10 from Paolo Carlini 2011-05-26
09:37:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> that passed before. I don't believe this is related and probably
> warrants a new PR.
For sure isn't related to my tweak, neither to something that went i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49118
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini 2011-05-26
09:41:10 UTC ---
Maybe Jason can give you some tips, better sending the patch to the mailing
list for that, though, Bugzilla isn't meant for patches. CC Jason.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49166
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-05-26
09:53:00 UTC ---
On x86_64-apple-darwin10, this PR is fixed by revision 174268 (I have tested
objc and obj-c++ with -m32 and -m64 without failure after an update and a full
rebuild of the multil
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49141
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-05-26 09:57:17 UTC ---
> --- Comment #10 from Paolo Carlini
> 2011-05-26 09:37:55 UTC ---
> (In reply to comment #9)
>> that passed before. I don't believe this is related and probabl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49141
--- Comment #12 from Paolo Carlini 2011-05-26
10:01:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> They passed on 20110520.
Then I'm relieved ;) Really, nothing changed in the code of the
library and 13450.cc between 20110520 and now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48702
--- Comment #25 from Richard Guenther 2011-05-26
10:01:33 UTC ---
I have benchmarked SPEC2k6 on the 4.6 branch with the patch (and required
backports) with -O3 -ffast-math -funroll-loops, Base is unpatched, Peak
is patched. Average of three runs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49161
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-26
10:05:08 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu May 26 10:05:05 2011
New Revision: 174270
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174270
Log:
PR tree-optimization/49161
* tree-vrp.c (st
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49166
Nicola Pero changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49161
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-26
10:20:37 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu May 26 10:20:34 2011
New Revision: 174272
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174272
Log:
PR tree-optimization/49161
* tree-vrp.c (st
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49165
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-26
10:25:23 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu May 26 10:25:21 2011
New Revision: 174273
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174273
Log:
PR c++/49165
* gimplify.c (shortcut_cond_r)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49165
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-26
10:27:59 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu May 26 10:27:57 2011
New Revision: 174274
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174274
Log:
PR c++/49165
* gimplify.c (shortcut_cond_r)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49161
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.1, 4.7.0
Summary|[4.5/4.6/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49165
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.6
Summary|[4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49118
--- Comment #7 from David Krauss 2011-05-26 11:05:12
UTC ---
Yes, I'll likely do that in a few days… just wanted to put the code in "safe
holding," just in case.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48702
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24354|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49099
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48845
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49141
--- Comment #13 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-05-26 11:25:27 UTC ---
> --- Comment #12 from Paolo Carlini
> 2011-05-26 10:01:48 UTC ---
> (In reply to comment #11)
>> They passed on 20110520.
>
> Then I'm relieved ;) Really, nothi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49141
--- Comment #14 from Paolo Carlini 2011-05-26
11:32:20 UTC ---
Thanks Rainer. Let me know if I can be otherwise useful.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49170
Summary: [4.7 regression] Several libstdc++ tests fail to link
on Solaris 8/9: cexp missing
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49141
--- Comment #15 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-05-26 11:35:05 UTC ---
> --- Comment #14 from Paolo Carlini
> 2011-05-26 11:32:20 UTC ---
> Thanks Rainer. Let me know if I can be otherwise useful.
I will, thanks. I've already iden
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48508
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2011-05-26
11:51:37 UTC ---
Created attachment 24363
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24363
reduced testcase
Reduced to two files, delta-reduced, independend on file order
> g++ -g -flto -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10634
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49171
Summary: [C++0x][constexpr] Constant expressions support
reinterpret_cast
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20215
licheng.1...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||licheng.1212 at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49171
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler
2011-05-26 12:10:59 UTC ---
Additional remark: I'm speaking of potential code breakages that did rely on
non-portable behaviour, because there is no evidence for me that C++03 did
support this kind of reinterpre
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49170
--- Comment #1 from William J. Schmidt 2011-05-26
12:12:00 UTC ---
I'll take a look.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49170
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-05-26
12:13:35 UTC ---
I think the TARGET_HAS_SINCOS || TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS has to be moved somewhere
else.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49172
Summary: [C++0x][constexpr] References should be declarable
with constexpr
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41619
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou 2011-05-26
12:43:10 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Thu May 26 12:43:06 2011
New Revision: 174278
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174278
Log:
Backport from mainline
2011-01-21 Jef
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49099
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth 2011-05-26 12:44:19 UTC
---
Author: ro
Date: Thu May 26 12:44:16 2011
New Revision: 174279
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174279
Log:
PR target/49099
* config/sparc/sparc.c (sparc_so
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20215
--- Comment #6 from licheng.1212 at gmail dot com 2011-05-26 12:44:09 UTC ---
the Testcase attachments can't donwload
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46575
licheng.1...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49099
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10634
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-26
12:50:33 UTC ---
Ah!
Well you can still initialize a static data member of non-integral type, you
just need a valid initializer.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44643
--- Comment #12 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-05-26
12:52:10 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Thu May 26 12:52:03 2011
New Revision: 174281
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174281
Log:
PR target/44643
* config/avr/avr.c (avr_i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48906
--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-05-26
12:53:30 UTC ---
Created attachment 24364
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24364
Preliminary patch
I am getting two testsuite regressions with this patch. At least one of those I
th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48702
--- Comment #27 from Richard Guenther 2011-05-26
13:01:50 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu May 26 13:01:48 2011
New Revision: 174282
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174282
Log:
2011-05-26 Richard Guenther
PR tree-o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10634
--- Comment #15 from Daniel Krügler
2011-05-26 13:01:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
Yes, of-course. I opened bug 49171 to ensure that the compiler will diagnose
the cast-situation.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48702
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.0
Summary|[4.6/4.7 Regr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48424
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-26
13:22:54 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu May 26 13:22:51 2011
New Revision: 174285
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174285
Log:
PR c++/48424
* decl.c (grokparms): Function
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49170
--- Comment #3 from William J. Schmidt 2011-05-26
13:24:31 UTC ---
Rainer, please try:
Index: tree-ssa-math-opts.c
===
--- tree-ssa-math-opts.c(revision 174277)
+++ tree-ssa-mat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48424
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48424
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-26
13:44:26 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu May 26 13:44:20 2011
New Revision: 174287
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174287
Log:
PR c++/48424
* decl.c (grokparms): Function
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46696
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47184
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.1
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46245
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46005
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47184
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49173
Summary: [4.7 Regression] No rule to make target
`../../../../work/libgcc/../gcc/libgcc-std.ver',
needed by `libgcc.map'.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCON
ot;GCC: (GNU) 4.7.0 20110526 (experimental)"
.section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
[hjl@gnu-6 pr49168]$
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48826
--- Comment #9 from Ryan Mansfield 2011-05-26
14:20:54 UTC ---
Richard, thanks for your patch. It fixed most of the failures I saw but there
are still cases where the note doesn't get moved after call split. The
following example ICEs with rev174
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49173
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-apple-darwin10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49174
Summary: numeric_limits template is a struct not a class
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49174
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20215
--- Comment #7 from licheng.1212 at gmail dot com 2011-05-26 15:06:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> the Testcase attachments can't donwload
I have got the Testcase,but it still hava problem
[lee@localhost Downloads]$ gcj -v DuplicateField.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49147
--- Comment #2 from Sebastian Pop 2011-05-26 15:11:52
UTC ---
Author: spop
Date: Thu May 26 15:11:48 2011
New Revision: 174293
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174293
Log:
Fix PR49147: ICE with -fgraphite-opencl-ignore-dep
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49173
--- Comment #2 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-05-26
15:12:56 UTC ---
Argh, the stupid half-transition again. I grepped only in gcc/config.
I seem to fail getting a cross-build to that point, so could you try changing
$(gcc_srcdir)/libgcc-std.ver
to e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49147
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49173
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-05-26
15:23:24 UTC ---
The same problem may happen for s390 and sh:
[macbook] f90/bug% grep -r libgcc-std.ver /opt/gcc/work/libgcc/*
/opt/gcc/work/libgcc/Makefile.in:libgcc-std.ver: $(srcdir)/libgcc-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49173
--- Comment #4 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-05-26
15:33:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> In which file should I do the change(s)?
In the one you quoted, libgcc/config/t-slibgcc-darwin.
> How could it work if there is no gcc/libgcc-std.ver file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42056
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42056
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47719
--- Comment #11 from Nitin Kamble 2011-05-26
16:26:45 UTC ---
I am not able to reopen this bug, can somebody reopen the bug?
Thanks,
Nitin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49175
Summary: vect/pr48172.c execution failure for ARM GNU/Linux
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42056
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2011-05-26
16:48:01 UTC ---
Eh, I decided to ask when I saw your fix for 48599 involving type_uses_auto ;)
Anyway, the below indeed appears to work pretty well. Is the error message Ok
with you?
Index: typeck2.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48211
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46145
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-26
17:02:14 UTC ---
Oops, those patches were really for bug 46005.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42056
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|paolo.carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49175
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49168
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18918
--- Comment #50 from Tobias Burnus 2011-05-26
17:41:37 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Thu May 26 17:41:34 2011
New Revision: 174301
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174301
Log:
2011-05-26 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42056
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini 2011-05-26
18:01:42 UTC ---
Actually, I can do better.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49176
Summary: [4.6 Regression][c++0x] valid code rejected with
"error: uninitialized const"
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49173
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-05-26
18:04:06 UTC ---
With the following patch
--- ../_clean/libgcc/config/t-slibgcc-darwin2010-02-02 11:25:59.0
+0100
+++ libgcc/config/t-slibgcc-darwin2011-05-26 18:42:41.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47601
--- Comment #12 from Rich Townsend 2011-05-26
18:05:35 UTC ---
Do we have any progress in fixing this one? It's become a showstopper for me,
alas!
(Serves me right for starting a number of new, large projects in F2003).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49177
Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/fast-math-ifcvt-1.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
As
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48955
--- Comment #12 from Paul Thomas 2011-05-26 18:19:40
UTC ---
Author: pault
Date: Thu May 26 18:19:36 2011
New Revision: 174302
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174302
Log:
2011-05-26 Paul Thomas
Thomas Koenig
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49178
Summary: Space between linker option and library in gfortran
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: driver
AssignedT
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49174
--- Comment #2 from fr...@kingswood-consulting.co.uk 2011-05-26 18:25:03 UTC ---
I realize struct and class are interchangeable.
llvm with -Wextra finds the difference worth warning about.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49173
--- Comment #6 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-05-26
18:25:30 UTC ---
Did that work before revision 174284? I'm not sure whether this looks related
or not.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42056
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-26
18:25:40 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> + error ("expected an expression");
That sounds like a parse error, when the real issue is a semantic constraint
violation: it would make perfect sens
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47635
Pawel Sikora changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|4.5.3, 4.6.0|4.5.4, 4.6.1, 4.7.0
--- Comment #2 from Pa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48211
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-26
18:30:17 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu May 26 18:30:13 2011
New Revision: 174303
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174303
Log:
PR c++/48211
* name-lookup.h (cp_class_bind
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48211
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47956
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47635
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini 2011-05-26
18:35:28 UTC ---
Is this a C++0x issue? Should be marked as such.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49173
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-05-26
18:39:56 UTC ---
> Did that work before revision 174284? I'm not sure whether this looks related
> or not.
My last successful update was revision 174269.
I'll try the other choice.
BTW regres
1 - 100 of 149 matches
Mail list logo