http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49730
Ira Rosen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||irar at il dot ibm.com
--- Comment #2 from Ir
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49739
--- Comment #4 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-14
03:38:11 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Jul 14 03:38:06 2011
New Revision: 176261
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176261
Log:
Restore bootstrap on Linux/x86.
2011-07-13
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49739
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2011-07-14 03:01:15
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > Created attachment 24752 [details]
> > proposed patch
> >
> > Drats, I've missed that part of the i[34567]86-*-linux* case. Could yo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49739
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu 2011-07-14 02:59:50
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Created attachment 24752 [details]
> proposed patch
>
> Drats, I've missed that part of the i[34567]86-*-linux* case. Could you
> please
> try the attached patc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49743
Summary: -g enables var_tracking on -O0 - causes long
compilations
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49742
Summary: ICE for gcc.dg/vect/O3-pr39675-2.c on ARM
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assigned
Configured with: ../gcc-4.7-20110713/configure --prefix=/sw
--prefix=/sw/lib/gcc4.7 --mandir=/sw/share/man --infodir=/sw/lib/gcc4.7/info
--with-build-config=bootstrap-lto --enable-stage1-languages=c,lto
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto,objc,obj-c++,java --with-gmp=/sw
--with-libiconv-prefix=/sw
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49735
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2011-07-14
00:07:51 UTC ---
This patch fixes the infinite loop:
Index: ipa-inline.c
===
--- ipa-inline.c(revision 176253)
+++ ipa-inline.c(w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49735
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2011-07-13
23:21:26 UTC ---
I almost want to say it was caused by:
r175169 | hubicka | 2011-06-18 01:33:47 -0700 (Sat, 18 Jun 2011) | 31 lines
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49735
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2011-07-13
23:18:11 UTC ---
Here is a short testcase:
typedef unsigned int UQItype __attribute__((mode (QI)));
static
UQItype sync_fetch_and_add_1 (UQItype *ptr, UQItype value)
{
return __sync_fetch_and_add (p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49735
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build, ice-on-valid-code
Targ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49726
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49726
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2011-07-13
23:08:31 UTC ---
The problem is that the specs don't understand that -g0 is overridden by -g in
the driver. In the cc1/cc1plus/fortran1 case, the driver passes -g* directly
to those programs but in th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49726
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-07-13
23:05:31 UTC ---
>Why .c and .S behave differently wrt -g application rules?
Because something goes wrong in either the driver or as (which GCC has no
control over).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49740
Douglas Mencken changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|minor |normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49738
--- Comment #4 from Jack Howarth 2011-07-13
22:21:38 UTC ---
Also note that...
2011-06-19 Jack Howarth
PR target/49461
* configure.ac: Use mh-x86-darwin.
* configure: Regenerate.
config:
2011-06-19 Jack Howarth
PR target/49
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49656
--- Comment #3 from andreas at galauner dot de 2011-07-13 22:09:11 UTC ---
I just compiled GCC 4.6.1 again without clang after I found out how to do that.
By defining
CC = /usr/bin/gcc-4.2
CPP = /usr/bin/cpp-4.2
CXX = /usr/bin/g++-4.2
LD = /usr/bi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49738
--- Comment #3 from bosephus61 at gmail dot com 2011-07-13 21:53:19 UTC ---
I'll have to check as that's likely the case since I have apple Xcode 4.1
installed.
On Jul 13, 2011, at 2:46 PM, howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49738
Jack Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howarth at nitro dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49533
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-13 21:13:31 UTC ---
Hmm, that whole approach doesn't seem to work.
The following patch survives building of stellarium and explains the
failures that I've reported above:
diff --git a/gcc/ipa-inl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49740
Summary: [4.7 Regression] powerpc native bootstrap with -O3
produces "Bootstrap comparison failure!"
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49541
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-13
19:34:48 UTC ---
> This is strange: in my case, libgomp.so is self-contained and linked
> with the right libthread.so which provides __tls_get_addr:
>
> > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=. ldd -r ./libgomp.so.1
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49738
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49739
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth 2011-07-13 19:00:54 UTC
---
Created attachment 24752
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24752
proposed patch
Drats, I've missed that part of the i[34567]86-*-linux* case. Could you please
try the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49296
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49296
--- Comment #17 from Janne Blomqvist 2011-07-13
18:52:43 UTC ---
Author: jb
Date: Wed Jul 13 18:52:40 2011
New Revision: 176246
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176246
Log:
PR 49296 List read, EOF before separator, backport
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49739
Summary: [4.7 Regression] bootstrap failure
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassig...@
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49296
--- Comment #16 from Janne Blomqvist 2011-07-13
18:46:48 UTC ---
Author: jb
Date: Wed Jul 13 18:46:44 2011
New Revision: 176245
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176245
Log:
PR 49296 List read, EOF without preceding separator
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49738
Summary: Compile errors on OSX darwin 11 (Lion)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassig
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49737
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-07-13 18:20:48 UTC ---
> I am now at stage 2.
Great. Please close the PR one bootstrap finished.
Thanks.
Rainer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49737
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-07-13
18:11:57 UTC ---
> That said, please update to rev 176242 instead. Unless I made a
> mistake, that one should bootstrap again.
I am now at stage 2.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49541
--- Comment #6 from Rainer Orth 2011-07-13 17:58:20 UTC
---
Author: ro
Date: Wed Jul 13 17:58:18 2011
New Revision: 176244
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176244
Log:
PR target/49541
* config/sol2.h (LIB_SPEC): Simp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49541
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-07-13 17:56:26 UTC ---
> --- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-13
> 16:11:25 UTC ---
>> Since I could only run the bootstrap on a Solaris 8 branded zone where the
>> default libthre
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49737
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-07-13 17:43:32 UTC ---
> --- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres
> 2011-07-13 17:39:51 UTC ---
>> With the patch in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg01068.html,
>> bootstra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49737
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-07-13
17:39:51 UTC ---
> With the patch in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg01068.html,
> bootstrap fails with:
Apparently something went wrong in the patching process, trying revision
17
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49737
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-07-13
17:28:11 UTC ---
With the patch in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg01068.html,
bootstrap fails with:
make[5]: *** No rule to make target
`../../../../work/libgcc/config/i386/crtfas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49737
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-07-13 17:10:14 UTC ---
> rm -f ../../.././gcc/i386/libgcc_s_x86_64.1.dylib
> ln -s libgcc_s.1.dylib \
> ../../.././gcc/i386/libgcc_s_x86_64.1.dylib
> rm -f ../../.././gcc/i386/lib
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49737
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-07-13
17:03:30 UTC ---
I configured the build with
../work/configure --prefix=/opt/gcc/gcc4.7w
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,objc,obj-c++,java,lto --with-gmp=/opt/sw64
--with-libiconv-prefix=/opt/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49737
--- Comment #1 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-07-13 17:00:22 UTC ---
> # If the gcc directory specifies which extra parts to
> # build for this target, and the libgcc configuration also
> # specifies, make sure they match. This can
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49737
Summary: [4.7 Regression] Bootstrap failure at revision 176240
on x86_64-apple-darwin10
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49736
Summary: [4.7 Regression] Revision 176228 miscompiled
255.vortex in SPEC CPU 2000
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Emrich 2011-07-13
16:22:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> It's the same for a native i686-pc-mingw32 bootstrap using msys.
>
> See also PR 49625 and 48151, which are duplicates.
>
> A patch is proposed here http:/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Emrich 2011-07-13
16:16:09 UTC ---
It's the same for a native i686-pc-mingw32 bootstrap using msys.
See also PR 49625 and 48151, which are duplicates.
A patch is proposed here http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-09/msg0022
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49541
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-13
16:11:25 UTC ---
> Since I could only run the bootstrap on a Solaris 8 branded zone where the
> default libthread.so is a copy of the lwp one, could you try it on bare metal
> to confirm that it works?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49725
--- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-07-13 16:00:24 UTC ---
On 7/13/2011 4:26 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Does it work on trunk then?
Yes.
The only change that I see that could cause this is:
2011-07-11 Martin Jambor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49723
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |target
--- Comment #6 from John David
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49734
--- Comment #3 from MaratIK 2011-07-13
15:23:52 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> int acc = std::accumulate(c, c + 5, 0);
Thanks. I used overloaded std::accumulate with BinaryOperation (Adder) because
indices for c are in l.
---
struct Ad
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49559
--- Comment #23 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-13
15:20:23 UTC ---
To be honest, isn't a real regression, because you are using -std=gnu++0x, and
simply in 4.4.x we had no C++0x conforming std::stable_sort. In general, my
feeling is that the fix is t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49559
--- Comment #22 from joerg.rich...@pdv-fs.de 2011-07-13 15:11:21 UTC ---
Is it possible to fix it for 4.6.2?
Following program is a 4.4 regression (when using -std=gnu++0x):
---8<-
#include
#include
#include
using namespace std;
i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49471
razya at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49471
--- Comment #5 from razya at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-13 15:06:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > (In reply to comment #2)
> > > (In reply to comment #1)
> > > > Why is
> > > > D.7313_5 = MEM[(struct *).paral_data_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49733
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2011-07-13
14:42:43 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> is
[...]
> invalid then?
Yes, the does not even have the correct syntax. I assume you means something
like:
module m
integer :: global
end module m
prog
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49734
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-07-13
14:29:35 UTC ---
You probably want to use the return value:
add = std::for_each(l, l + 5, add);
Although for this specific case you could #include and use
std::accumulate
int acc = std::a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49735
Summary: mips64-elf libgcc build fails with apparently infinite
recursion.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49733
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-07-13
14:17:38 UTC ---
is
program test
integer :: a
subroutine bar()
a = 1
end
subroutine sub(non_aliasing_var)
integer :: non_aliasing_var
non_aliasing_var = 5
bar()
if (non_alias
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49733
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2011-07-13
14:06:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> C test case matching the Fortran one, which also shows that the "if" is not
> optimized away.
According to Ian (cf. thread linked to in comment 0), C99's re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49734
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49733
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2011-07-13
13:42:26 UTC ---
C test case matching the Fortran one, which also shows that the "if" is not
optimized away.
void some_function(void);
void
sub (int *restrict non_aliasing_var)
{
*non_aliasing_var
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49734
Summary: Adding using std::for_each inconsistent with return
value
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25829
--- Comment #23 from Tobias Burnus 2011-07-13
13:15:39 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> I think the easiest is to not set the "restrict" of dummy arguments involved
> in
> ASYNCHRONOUS I/O.
It seems that GCC understands something different t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49733
Summary: Missed optimization: Variable value not propagated to
remove "if" condition
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49731
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49732
Summary: GNAT 4.6.[01] crashes on
terminal_interface-curses-menus.adb from ncruses 5.9
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49731
Summary: internal compiler error: verify_gimple failed
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49651
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther 2011-07-13
12:31:13 UTC ---
Further reduced (-O2 vs. -O1):
#include
#include
extern "C" void abort (void);
typedef unsigned int u32;
using namespace std;
vector g;
void f(u32 b)
{
g.push_back(b);
for(
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49487
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49730
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49723
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-13
10:49:16 UTC ---
> Indeed, (const_int 2147483648 [0x8000]) isn't valid for SImode, it should
> be (const_int -2147483648 [0x8000]) as RTL constants are always
> sign-extended for their mode.
A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49730
Summary: loop not vectorized if inside another loop
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assigne
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49723
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49580
razya at il dot ibm.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49580
--- Comment #1 from razya at il dot ibm.com 2011-07-13 10:20:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Compilation of reload1.c fails:
> gcc -c -o reload1.o -DSPEC_CPU -DNDEBUG -I. -fpeel-loops -funroll-loops
> -fno-tree-vectorize -fno-vect-cost-model
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49728
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-07-13
09:47:14 UTC ---
See http://blog.regehr.org/archives/213 for an introduction to what undefined
behaviour means. C++ does not check for runtime errors, instead your program is
simply broken.
http://bl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49719
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49728
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49729
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25829
--- Comment #22 from Tobias Burnus 2011-07-13
09:24:40 UTC ---
Note: TR 29113 introduces a wider coverage of ASYNCHRONOUS, cf. almost-PDTR
29113 at ftp://ftp.nag.co.uk/sc22wg5/N1851-N1900/N1866.pdf.
I think the easiest is to not set the "restric
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49729
Summary: diagnostic cascade
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
Re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49541
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49727
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49728
--- Comment #1 from JohnBrystone 2011-07-13
08:56:00 UTC ---
posted here first...
http://www.cplusplus.com/forum/general/46599/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49728
Summary: g++ -> int object in memory deleted multiple times: no
runtime error
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49727
Summary: Same classes in different files issue.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49725
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.2
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49724
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49723
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-07-13
08:24:40 UTC ---
Well, the expander - or rather the constant should be properly extended in
the first place (if it is signed).
86 matches
Mail list logo
