http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49107
--- Comment #10 from Paolo Carlini 2011-06-04
06:57:59 UTC ---
Thanks Jason, seems a nasty issue. I'm trying to understand how the specific
testcase in Comment #4 fits in the picture, ie why it compiles only because I
commented out that VectorH3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49107
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49107
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49281
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu 2011-06-04 03:18:48
UTC ---
When the SImode pattern is enabled, SPEC CPU 2006 is miscompiled.
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: andi-...@firstfloor.org
A large lto1-wpa run with 20110603 results now in
malloc.c:3551: munmap_chunk: Assertion `ret == 0' failed.
on x86-64-linux.
When I run with MALLOC_CHECK_=2 it seems to get
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49271
--- Comment #8 from Hugh 2011-06-04 01:08:47 UTC ---
I will be happy to update the compiler. I very recently downloaded the latest
one that was labeled "Stable Release" for Mac OS X. Which version do you
recommend?
Thanks,
Hugh McCutchen, Jr.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49281
Summary: lea_general_4 doesn't work for x32
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49280
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49280
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49280
Summary: Misinterpretation of -static-libgfortran switch
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44290
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49135
--- Comment #6 from Ramana Radhakrishnan 2011-06-03
22:18:04 UTC ---
combine puts 2 and 2 together .
(insn 11 10 12 (set (reg/f:SI 154)
(mem/u/c/i:SI (symbol_ref/u:SI ("*.LC0") [flags 0x2]) [4 S4 A32]))
/home/ramana/cos/git/gcc/gcc/test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49271
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl
2011-06-03 21:59:43 UTC ---
On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 09:50:46PM +, coml4 at san dot rr.com wrote:
>
> gcc version 4.5.0 20090604 (experimental) [trunk revision 148180] (GCC)
>
You may be hitting an old bug. 2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49271
--- Comment #6 from Hugh 2011-06-03 21:50:43 UTC ---
oz-2:gert_library hugh$ gfortran -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-apple-darwin8.10.1
Configured with: /tmp/gfortran-20090604/ibin/../gcc/configure
--prefix=/usr/local/gfortran --enable-lang
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46329
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.0
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49279
Summary: Optimization incorrectly presuming constant variable
inside loop in g++ 4.5 and 4.6 with -O2 and -O3 for
x86_64 targets
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49271
--- Comment #5 from Asher Langton 2011-06-03
21:18:20 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I apologize for omitting the OS.
>
> 27" iMac with i7 processor running OS X 10.6.7. I know the code is bad. It
> is
> just that the compiler crashed and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48792
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48808
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48792
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48250
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49276
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49276
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-03
20:21:41 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jun 3 20:21:38 2011
New Revision: 174620
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174620
Log:
PR c++/49276
* mangle.c (write_nested_name)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49276
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-03
20:19:46 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jun 3 20:19:42 2011
New Revision: 174619
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174619
Log:
PR c++/49276
* mangle.c (write_nested_name)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48250
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Kno
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49167
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49167
Josh Stone changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jistone at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49278
--- Comment #2 from Steve Kargl
2011-06-03 18:10:40 UTC ---
On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 04:08:05PM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49278
>
> Reduced testcase.
>
> module oad_active
>implicit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49271
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-06-03
17:38:13 UTC ---
Compiling the code gives the error without crash for me too on
x86_64-apple-darwin10.7.0 (trunk and 4.4.4).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49271
--- Comment #3 from Hugh 2011-06-03 17:33:03 UTC ---
I apologize for omitting the OS.
27" iMac with i7 processor running OS X 10.6.7. I know the code is bad. It is
just that the compiler crashed and requested a bug report.
Hugh
On Jun 3,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49271
Asher Langton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||langton at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49271
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49278
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
K
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49036
Martin von Gagern changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Martin.vGagern at gmx dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49278
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49276
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49277
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Component|m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49274
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-03
14:37:17 UTC ---
Thanks, Jason.
So to respond to the OP, although unique_ptr allows T to be incomplete it
might instantiate T, and unlike unique_ptr most templates in the standard
library cannot be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49274
--- Comment #13 from Paolo Carlini 2011-06-03
14:14:14 UTC ---
Ah, thus exactly like the issue we discussed a few days ago. I suspected that
and indeed Intel was accepting the code.
By the way, PR49107 is different then?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49274
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49274
--- Comment #11 from Jason Merrill 2011-06-03
14:03:59 UTC ---
Yes, cont is an associated type for argument-dependent lookup, so
we instantiate it to get any friend declarations. I think G++ is correct.
Clang fails to compile the testcase for 3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49276
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49277
Summary: [4.7 Regression] 456.hmmer in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to
build
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49276
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49276
Summary: Segmentation fault with default lambda parameter in
member function
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49270
--- Comment #8 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2011-06-03 13:19:39 UTC ---
See also PR49116.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49261
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48377
--- Comment #45 from Richard Guenther 2011-06-03
12:55:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #44)
> Created attachment 24423 [details]
> gcc46-pr48377.patch
>
> I don't see why mode should be relevant, the MEM_REF should have from the type
> clear ind
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48906
--- Comment #23 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-06-03
12:55:21 UTC ---
Patch submitted to list for approval.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49274
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49274
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|4.5.0 |4.1.2
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49274
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini 2011-06-03
11:40:20 UTC ---
Thanks Jon.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48377
--- Comment #44 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-03
11:24:27 UTC ---
Created attachment 24423
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24423
gcc46-pr48377.patch
I don't see why mode should be relevant, the MEM_REF should have from the type
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49274
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Compo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48377
--- Comment #43 from Eric Botcazou 2011-06-03
11:10:35 UTC ---
> Conceptually it is no different from
> struct A { char c; unsigned int d; } __attribute__((packed));
>
> unsigned int
> id (struct A *p)
> {
> return p->d;
> }
>
> which is hand
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48377
--- Comment #42 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-03
10:54:54 UTC ---
It surprises me it doesn't handle it, that is clearly a bug.
Conceptually it is no different from
struct A { char c; unsigned int d; } __attribute__((packed));
unsigned int
id (struc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46003
Yufeng Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47858
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24416|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48377
--- Comment #41 from Eric Botcazou 2011-06-03
10:41:55 UTC ---
> Can you explain why it cannot pass on strict-alignment targets? The read is
> done through a type with explicit low alignment, so strict alignment targets
> just shouldn't use an a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49274
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48377
--- Comment #40 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-03
10:06:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #39)
> > Fixed (the testcase with aligned(1)). The original is INVALID.
>
> The testcase with aligned(1) cannot pass on strict-alignment targets, either
> with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48377
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49274
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini 2011-06-03
09:37:00 UTC ---
PR49107
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=
Oliver Metz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||oliver.metz at gmx dot de
--- Comment #6 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49274
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2011-06-03
09:32:34 UTC ---
Jon, I'm traveling, I cannot investigate this in detail, but I'm wondering if
this isn't a duplicate of the recent issue failed by Marc Glisse, about pair,
noexcept and incompleteness,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49274
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-03
08:50:23 UTC ---
I'm not sure why default_delete needs to instantiate T, it doesn't need a
complete type except in operator()
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49274
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49264
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47597
--- Comment #2 from Anitha Boyapati
2011-06-03 07:20:44 UTC ---
Patch in trunk revision 171296
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/trunk/gcc/dwarf2out.c?r1=171150&r2=171296&diff_format=h
69 matches
Mail list logo