http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53239
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Compone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53239
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29442
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #16
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29442
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-07
07:53:46 UTC ---
Seems my memory doesn't serve me well already, I've even implemented that:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-06/msg01908.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53255
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2012-05-07
08:35:21 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon May 7 08:35:17 2012
New Revision: 187226
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187226
Log:
2012-05-07 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/53
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53128
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de
2012-05-07 08:43:24 UTC ---
On Fri, 4 May 2012, manu at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53128
>
> --- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-05-04
> 16:15:09
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30318
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de
2012-05-07 08:51:06 UTC ---
On Fri, 4 May 2012, glisse at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30318
>
> --- Comment #8 from glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-04 21:4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50602
--- Comment #23 from rguenther at suse dot de
2012-05-07 08:54:10 UTC ---
On Sat, 5 May 2012, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50602
>
> Jan Hubicka changed:
>
>What|Removed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27214
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53261
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
--- Comment #15 from birender.singh at hotmail dot com 2012-05-07 09:20:51 UTC
---
This error "configure: error: cannot compute suffix of object files cannot
compile" while building gcc on solaris get resolved by adding "lib" location in
the PATH
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53258
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52171
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #5 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53253
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53250
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
--- Comment #16 from birender.singh at hotmail dot com 2012-05-07 09:22:51 UTC
---
Thanks to every one, god bless all.
Regards,
-Birender
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53245
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53243
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46321
--- Comment #5 from Salvatore Filippone
2012-05-07 09:32:30 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Note: There are four cases where a polymorphic deallocate is needed - though
> some might end up in the same code path:
>
> - explicit DEALLOCATE (cf.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53239
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30318
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|paolo.carlini at oracle dot |
|com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53239
--- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther 2012-05-07
09:33:56 UTC ---
Doh. Patch looks ok.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53235
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.7.0 |4.8.0
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53195
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46321
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-07 09:49:52 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Looks to me like work on FINAL needs to be interfaced here anyway. Naive view
> is that $free points to a FINAL if there is one, or to a default whe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52282
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53262
Bug #: 53262
Summary: ICE compiling busybox 1.19.3 with gcc 4.7.0
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37336
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
AssignedTo|domob at gcc dot g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53250
--- Comment #5 from Kazumoto Kojima 2012-05-07
10:19:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Although the top level "make -k check" doesn't complete yet,
the failures for C & C++ went away. I'll mark this PR as fixed
when the test completes.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.6.3
--- Comment #16 from Hin-Tak Leung
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53195
--- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther 2012-05-07
10:27:42 UTC ---
Simpler fix:
Index: tree-inline.c
===
--- tree-inline.c (revision 187228)
+++ tree-inline.c (working cop
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53245
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53262
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i?86-*-*
--- Comment #1 from Richard G
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53261
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin 2012-05-07
11:18:06 UTC ---
Introduced in r187194.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53263
Bug #: 53263
Summary: priority_queue is very slow if -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG is
used
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42987
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42987
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2012-05-07
11:49:48 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon May 7 11:49:43 2012
New Revision: 187231
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187231
Log:
2012-05-07 Richard Guenther
PR lto/429
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53255
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2012-05-07
11:50:12 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon May 7 11:50:04 2012
New Revision: 187232
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187232
Log:
2012-05-07 Tobias Burnus
Backport from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43576
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44992
--- Comment #11 from Richard Guenther 2012-05-07
11:50:07 UTC ---
*** Bug 43576 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43823
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46502
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46503
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46578
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47181
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53263
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org
Seve
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53263
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47480
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47532
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47625
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47841
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53195
--- Comment #10 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-05-07 12:23:41 UTC ---
"unfortunately" -flto-partition=1to1 fixes the ICE for the library in question.
I do not have any other standing ICE at the moment.
btw
I've applied the patch in comment 9 on th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48005
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48180
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29442
--- Comment #18 from Michael Matz 2012-05-07 12:27:18
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> While looking for ways to speed up genattrtab itself, I found this patch,
> which
> doesn't speed up genattrtab, but would make the insn-*tab.c files small
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48423
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48724
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48833
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48983
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49059
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53239
--- Comment #10 from proski at gnu dot org 2012-05-07 12:35:40 UTC ---
I applied the patch to gcc 4.7.0 and tested it with my example and GNU
Lilypond. Both are fixed. Thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49612
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29442
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-07
12:36:21 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> (In reply to comment #15)
> Meanwhile Jakub implemented a different mean which doesn't call the get_attr_
> functions dynamically more often (which my appr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49697
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49700
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #17 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-05-07 12:37:37 UTC ---
While the checksum files are expected to differ (thus there are only
warnings about them), the size increase looks really strange: in my
current 4.6.4 build on alp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49922
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53263
--- Comment #3 from dominik.stras...@onespin-solutions.com 2012-05-07 12:38:26
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I don't think we are making any promises in terms of debug-mode performance.
> Is
> it better for other debug-mode implementations d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49844
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52391
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Depends on|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50147
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50366
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53263
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2012-05-07
12:54:36 UTC ---
I see, I see.
First, I notice that we don't have a specific debug/ version of it, thus you
are using the normal version + debug-mode std::vector and std::_heap
algorithms as imple
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50383
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50430
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto, missed-optimization
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53195
--- Comment #11 from Richard Guenther 2012-05-07
12:59:10 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon May 7 12:59:05 2012
New Revision: 187235
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187235
Log:
2012-05-07 Richard Guenther
PR tree-o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50468
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53195
--- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther 2012-05-07
13:00:44 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon May 7 13:00:39 2012
New Revision: 187237
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187237
Log:
2012-05-07 Richard Guenther
PR tree-o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50620
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48423
--- Comment #9 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-05-07 13:01:51 UTC ---
For what "we" are concerned it is obsolete.
1) things changed somehow between 4.6.0 and 4.6.1
2) is not there anymore in 4.7 and 4.8
in any case the original problem was most pro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53195
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
--- Comment #11 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-05-07 13:05:18 UTC ---
Please post on this PR when a version of 4.8 exists that supports the feature
(I saw several patches proposed and even committed)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50602
--- Comment #24 from andi at firstfloor dot org 2012-05-07 13:08:08 UTC ---
On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 08:54:10AM +, rguenther at suse dot de wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50602
>
> --- Comment #23 from rguenther at suse do
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52322
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53250
Kazumoto Kojima changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52776
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52778
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53195
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhezherun at yandex dot ru
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48423
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53239
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.7 Regression] VRP vs |[4.7/4.8 Regression] VRP vs
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53236
--- Comment #8 from Fernando Pelliccioni
2012-05-07 13:24:02 UTC ---
Sorry, the comments were wrong.
Here the corrected code with proper comments.
Tested with GCC 4.7.1 and GCC 4.6.3
// g++ -std=c++0x gcc_error_simple.cpp
// g++ -DWITH_USING_D
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49922
--- Comment #3 from xunxun 2012-05-07 13:27:43
UTC ---
Using gcc4.7 can't reproduce the issue.
Mark it invalid or resolved?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53239
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-07
13:31:08 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon May 7 13:31:00 2012
New Revision: 187240
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187240
Log:
PR tree-optimization/53239
* tree-vrp.c (g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53239
David Kastrup changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dak at gnu dot org
--- Comment #12 from D
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53218
--- Comment #3 from Tom Callaway 2012-05-07
13:31:47 UTC ---
No, the system libstdc++ was compiled with gcc-4.6. How would I find out what
they do differently? (Compiler debugging is rather far from my area of
expertise.)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53239
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-07
13:33:34 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon May 7 13:33:27 2012
New Revision: 187241
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187241
Log:
PR tree-optimization/53239
* tree-vrp.c (g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53255
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53263
--- Comment #5 from Pawel Sikora 2012-05-07 13:34:43
UTC ---
callgrind shows that n*10e3 of pq.push() generates m*10e6 (m>n)
_M_can_advance() calls and growing fast :)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53218
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou 2012-05-07
13:37:05 UTC ---
> No, the system libstdc++ was compiled with gcc-4.6. How would I find out what
> they do differently? (Compiler debugging is rather far from my area of
> expertise.)
Do you know the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53219
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
1 - 100 of 175 matches
Mail list logo