http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52113
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-04
07:39:14 UTC ---
Then it should be just a gcc.c-torture/compile/ test instead.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52121
--- Comment #1 from David Brown 2012-02-04 06:49:59 UTC
---
Created attachment 26571
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26571
bug sources in gnatchop format
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52121
Bug #: 52121
Summary: [Ada] Compiler assertion on precondition
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52120
Bug #: 52120
Summary: [Ada] Compiler assertion in iterator
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41709
--- Comment #10 from Anh Vo 2012-02-04 05:06:33
UTC ---
This was fixed long time ago. Thus, it can be closed. Thanks.
Anh Vo
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 2:46 PM, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41709
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41004
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski 2012-02-04
03:00:33 UTC ---
First off, I think cselim should also be run at -Os.
And then we have the issue of tree-ssa-tail-merge not running at -Os.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45861
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |tree-optimization
Severity|mino
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33315
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski 2012-02-04
02:33:16 UTC ---
tail merge should be able to do this. It currently does not though for the
provided testcase in comment #1 but that is PR 52009.
Also note cselim should be able to do it too.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52119
Richard Smith changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||richard-gccbugzilla at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52110
--- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-02-04 01:40:27 UTC ---
Attached is a possible patch. On "most" PARISC machines, reads and
writes are strongly ordered and
possibly this meets the "atomic" requirement.
--
John David Anglin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52119
Bug #: 52119
Summary: numeric_limits::min() is not a constant expression
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52113
--- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-02-04
01:14:53 UTC ---
Thanks.
For the testcase, omit -mmcu=. That option is set by board.exp during
testsuite:
-/* { dg-options "-O1" } */
+/* { dg-options "-O1 -mmcu=atmega64" } */
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19452
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30095
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21110
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2012-02-04
00:52:00 UTC ---
The number of low order bits is machine-dependent but is
normally the number of bits in a @code{Pmode} item minus the number of
bits set by @code{high}.
@var{m} should be @code{Pmode}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46751
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Component|libstdc++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51522
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-02-04
00:19:16 UTC ---
> Yes, I saw the same thing. But, as I didn't see any relation between
> resolve.c:10559 and the r183681 patch, I assumed this was something which was
> present before and didn'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52113
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52101
--- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl
2012-02-04 00:01:08 UTC ---
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 10:46:53PM +, sgk at troutmask dot
apl.washington.edu wrote:
>
> Index: decl.c
> ===
> --- de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52118
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49469
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52107
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37304
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski 2012-02-03
23:19:31 UTC ---
Does this work now? I do combined builds and this works for me in 4.6.1.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52107
--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra 2012-02-03 23:17:36
UTC ---
.tc generates an 8-byte word in both cases, so no space saved in the toc. This
bit of code in rs6000_emit_move does the loads in DImode, then cse1 shows the
toc load being converted to a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40634
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38788
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44637
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43878
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-02-03
22:56:06 UTC ---
The trick is to use --with-newlib as the stage1 compiler.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44307
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42695
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41709
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52101
--- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl
2012-02-03 22:46:53 UTC ---
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 09:16:47PM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> I believe that John is correct. The form 'CHARACTER*n string'
> is obsolescent while the form 'CHARACTER stri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32287
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kwieman at blackrock dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34924
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51522
--- Comment #7 from Janne Blomqvist 2012-02-03 22:36:13
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> If I try the example of comment 4 with the line break before "&" undone and
> using the newest 4.7 trunk (clean build), I see in valgrind:
>
> ==14154== I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49011
Bud Davis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bdavis at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48847
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig 2012-02-03
22:13:07 UTC ---
This doesn't match the docs. We say
-Wunused-parameter'
Contrary to `gcc''s meaning of `-Wunused-parameter', `gfortran''s
implementation of this option does not warn about
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51591
Bud Davis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bdavis at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35407
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|bootstrap |libgcj
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52093
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46447
--- Comment #3 from Benjamin Kosnik 2012-02-03
21:23:44 UTC ---
Just an update on this...
with gcc-4.7 2012-02-03
-g -O2
%./a-02.out
spin_mutex_tt took 84.0168 cycles (averaged over 1 trials)
af_set_tt took 36.7017 cycles (averaged ove
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52101
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49445
--- Comment #10 from Benjamin Kosnik 2012-02-03
21:10:06 UTC ---
Author: bkoz
Date: Fri Feb 3 21:10:00 2012
New Revision: 183878
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183878
Log:
2012-02-03 Benjamin Kosnik
PR libstdc++/4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52118
Bug #: 52118
Summary: The explanation of Wunused-local-typedefs is truncated
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52101
--- Comment #3 from John.Harper at msor dot vuw.ac.nz 2012-02-03 20:51:10 UTC
---
On Fri, 3 Feb 2012, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 07:22:28 +
> From: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
> To: john.har...@vuw.ac.nz
> Subject
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #52 from Mike Stump 2012-02-03
20:44:16 UTC ---
> OK. I'd missed that - in which case no objection to the unconditional disable
> from me.
We can even fixincludes it away! I'm fine with #undef or some such... I think
that is a good
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52012
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52117
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52012
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sphirshman at yahoo dot com
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52093
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-03
20:37:40 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Feb 3 20:37:36 2012
New Revision: 183877
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183877
Log:
2012-02-03 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/52
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52117
Bug #: 52117
Summary: allocated arrays give incorrect results when used with
RESHAPE in gcc v4.6.2
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49445
--- Comment #9 from Benjamin Kosnik 2012-02-03
20:28:29 UTC ---
This is no longer present on 4.7.x branch. I'm going to add this test case in
any case.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49445
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51811
--- Comment #2 from Benjamin Kosnik 2012-02-03
19:49:17 UTC ---
Author: bkoz
Date: Fri Feb 3 19:49:11 2012
New Revision: 183875
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183875
Log:
2012-02-03 Benjamin Kosnik
PR libstdc++/51
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52115
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51811
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52116
Bug #: 52116
Summary: pragma GCC diagnostic only acts on some lines
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52115
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
fix=/gnu/install/gcc-4.7 --disable-nls --enable-languages=c,c++
--with-dwarf2 --enable-checking=yes,rtl
GNU C (GCC) version 4.7.0 20120203 (experimental) (avr)
compiled by GNU C version 4.3.2 [gcc-4_3-branch revision 141291], GMP
version 4.3.2, MPFR version 2.4.2, MPC version 0.8.2
ICE:
pr448
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50105
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52112
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52114
Bug #: 52114
Summary: SFINAE out the rvalue iostream operators to give
better error messages
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52060
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Kno
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52113
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||avr
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51794
Ian Bolton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52012
--- Comment #12 from Paul Thomas 2012-02-03 18:34:04
UTC ---
Author: pault
Date: Fri Feb 3 18:33:58 2012
New Revision: 183874
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183874
Log:
2012-02-03 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/52012
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52112
--- Comment #4 from Daniel Davis 2012-02-03 18:24:49
UTC ---
Any thoughts on why it won't vectorize for me on x86_64 4.6.1?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #51 from Iain Sandoe 2012-02-03 17:56:29
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #49)
> (In reply to comment #46)
> > (In reply to comment #45)
> > > Then I think we have to disable __GTHREAD_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INIT
> > > unconditionally
> > > on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #50 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
17:52:39 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #48)
> (In reply to comment #46)
>
> Actually, using -mmacosx-version-min=10.6
> --sysroot=/Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.6.sdk doesn't work as you end up with the
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52111
--- Comment #3 from alexander tismer 2012-02-03 17:51:51
UTC ---
Thanks for your annotations.
I will give thought to that.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #49 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
17:50:07 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #46)
> (In reply to comment #45)
> > Then I think we have to disable __GTHREAD_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INIT
> > unconditionally
> > on darwin.
>
> I hope not.
> putti
d/gcc47-4.7.0-1/darwin_objdir/x86_64-apple-darwin11.3.0/libstdc++-v3/include
-I/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/gcc-4.7-20120203/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++
-I/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/gcc-4.7-20120203/libstdc++-v3/include/backward
-I/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/gcc-4.7-20120203/libstdc++-v3/tes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52112
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2012-02-03
17:44:36 UTC ---
:
vect_var_.146 = MEM[base: &A, index: ivtmp.196];
MEM[base: &B, index: ivtmp.196] = [mult_expr] vect_var_.146 * vect_var_.146;
ivtmp.196 = ivtmp.196 + 16;
if (ivtmp.196 != 800
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52112
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2012-02-03
17:43:41 UTC ---
Even in 4.4, both multiplication loops are vectorized
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52112
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-02-03
17:40:23 UTC ---
This is vectorized for me on x86_64 on the trunk.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #47 from Jack Howarth 2012-02-03
17:37:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #46)
> (In reply to comment #45)
> > Then I think we have to disable __GTHREAD_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INIT
> > unconditionally
> > on darwin.
>
> I hope not.
> putting
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52113
Bug #: 52113
Summary: [4.7 regression][avr] ICE: in extract_insn, at
recog.c:2123
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52111
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #46 from Iain Sandoe 2012-02-03 17:27:30
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #45)
> Then I think we have to disable __GTHREAD_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INIT unconditionally
> on darwin.
I hope not.
putting -mmacosx-version-min=10.6 - will cause the m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52106
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|warning for useless |[C11] missing
|assignme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #45 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
17:16:38 UTC ---
Then I think we have to disable __GTHREAD_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INIT unconditionally
on darwin.
If the bug is later fixed in (say) 10.8 then we could use the init macro if
MIN_REQUIRED >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #44 from Iain Sandoe 2012-02-03 17:14:43
UTC ---
if you are saying that:
code targeted at 10.6 produced on 10.7 (using the correct 10.6 SDK) doesn't run
properly on 10.7
- no surprise - that's just exposing the OS bug.
If you are s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52112
Bug #: 52112
Summary: Vectorizer fails when using CRTP
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #43 from Jack Howarth 2012-02-03
17:00:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #42)
> That header isn't even installed, let alone included, on other targets
>
> Jack, if you test it please change == to >= in
> libstdc++-v3/config/os/bsd/darw
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52060
Ian Bolton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52111
--- Comment #1 from alexander tismer 2012-02-03 16:22:36
UTC ---
Created attachment 26564
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26564
program that produces compiler error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52111
Bug #: 52111
Summary: [OOP] procedure pointer with polymorphic passed dummy
argument
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52110
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin 2012-02-03
16:21:17 UTC ---
Removing declaration at s-taspri-hpux-dce.ads, I get:
/xxx/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc/xgcc -B/xxx/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc/
-B/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.7/hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20/bin/
-B/opt/gnu/gcc/g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52109
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52110
Bug #: 52110
Summary: s-osinte.ads:447:09: "clockid_t" conflicts with
declaration at line 194
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51514
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-03
15:09:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> > cf. also PR 51514.
> ? wrong pr?
No, why should it be wrong? - Clearly this PR is related to itself...
(I meant PR 50981 - and in particular the summary
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52109
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
15:06:38 UTC ---
fixed in 4.7.0, you get a nice 14 line error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50981
--- Comment #36 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-03
15:05:55 UTC ---
I lost a bit the overview, but I think the following still needs to be done:
- 4.4/4.5/4.6: Backporting the fix for nonpresent actuals to elemental procs,
cf. commit in comment 5 /
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52109
Bug #: 52109
Summary: Apparently endless recursive instantiation
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52108
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51514
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-02-03
14:28:56 UTC ---
> cf. also PR 51514.
? wrong pr?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51514
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52108
Bug #: 52108
Summary: declval() with incomplete type
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52102
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-03
13:37:39 UTC ---
Related issue with MOLD=, here one gets with "x = 5" default initialization and
allocate (two%a(8), mold=t(4))
print '(*(i2))', two%a(:)%x
the result:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
That is: o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52107
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
1 - 100 of 145 matches
Mail list logo
