[Bug preprocessor/53525] Performance regression due to enabling track-macro-expansion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53525 --- Comment #7 from jimis jimis at gmx dot net 2012-05-30 06:01:23 UTC --- Now time for the most intrusive and problematic patches. I tried moving all virt_locs, expanded, expanded_virt_locs to obstacks for allocation. After many failures to work

[Bug preprocessor/53525] Performance regression due to enabling track-macro-expansion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53525 --- Comment #8 from jimis jimis at gmx dot net 2012-05-30 06:06:16 UTC --- Created attachment 27522 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27522 Introduce obstack_{mark,release} functions.

[Bug preprocessor/53525] Performance regression due to enabling track-macro-expansion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53525 --- Comment #9 from jimis jimis at gmx dot net 2012-05-30 06:10:38 UTC --- Created attachment 27523 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27523 Move all location/expansion vectors to obstacks. Warning MEMLEAKS!

[Bug preprocessor/53525] Performance regression due to enabling track-macro-expansion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53525 --- Comment #10 from jimis jimis at gmx dot net 2012-05-30 06:23:56 UTC --- Here is how this last patch (macro4) compares to trunk (TME) and to completely disabling track-macro-expansion (noTME): time M instr noTME 0.744s

[Bug c++/53494] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE with invalid initializer list

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53494 --- Comment #18 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com 2012-05-30 06:25:27 UTC --- (In reply to comment #16) If the initializer-list begins with a left brace, which it does then the succeeding comma-separated list of

[Bug c++/53356] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE in verify_gimple_stmt, at tree-cfg.c:4258

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53356 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 06:47:13 UTC --- Created attachment 27524 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27524 gcc48-pr53356.patch Untested fix. As the TARGET_EXPR for which the

[Bug rtl-optimization/53519] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ice in do_SUBST, at combine.c:707

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53519 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 06:53:53 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Wed May 30 06:53:46 2012 New Revision: 188001 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188001 Log: PR

[Bug rtl-optimization/53519] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ice in do_SUBST, at combine.c:707

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53519 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 06:58:05 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Wed May 30 06:58:00 2012 New Revision: 188002 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188002 Log: PR

[Bug rtl-optimization/53519] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ice in do_SUBST, at combine.c:707

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53519 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug c++/46836] reporting locations for names in std namespace could be improved

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46836 --- Comment #8 from dodji at seketeli dot org dodji at seketeli dot org 2012-05-30 07:34:17 UTC --- manu at gcc dot gnu.org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org a écrit: Well, we already have pragma system_header, we could extend it with an optional

[Bug c++/51927] [C++0x] Cannot access non-static members in initializer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51927 --- Comment #1 from gccearlyadop...@trash-mail.com 2012-05-30 07:48:35 UTC --- This Bug still exists in the latest GCC 4.7 release.

[Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsupressable enum comparison warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53524 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug c++/53494] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE with invalid initializer list

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53494 --- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 08:17:07 UTC --- (In reply to comment #13) Am I interpreting correctly that double braces are /required/ for std::array init lists but only when the subtype has has a

[Bug fortran/53521] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Zero-byte memory leak with zero-sized array constructor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53521 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5

[Bug preprocessor/53525] Performance regression due to enabling track-macro-expansion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53525 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug c++/51927] [C++0x] Cannot access non-static members in initializer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51927 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid

[Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsuppressible enum comparison warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53524 --- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-05-30 08:52:09 UTC --- Note that in any case in current mainline the location is exactly the '?' of the conditional expression: maybe the error message doesn't make sense but

[Bug c++/53494] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE with invalid initializer list

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53494 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug bootstrap/53522] [4.8 Regression] Bootstrap is broken for x86_64-apple-darwin10 at r187977

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53522 --- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-05-30 09:11:53 UTC --- On Tue, 29 May 2012, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53522 Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot

[Bug bootstrap/53522] [4.8 Regression] Bootstrap is broken for x86_64-apple-darwin10 at r187977

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53522 --- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 09:14:35 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Wed May 30 09:14:27 2012 New Revision: 188005 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188005 Log: 2012-05-30 Richard

[Bug bootstrap/53522] [4.8 Regression] Bootstrap is broken for x86_64-apple-darwin10 at r187977

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53522 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsuppressible enum comparison warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53524 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic

[Bug fortran/53521] [4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Zero-byte memory leak with zero-sized array constructor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53521 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8

[Bug tree-optimization/53501] [4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] scev introduces signed overflow

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53501 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code

[Bug fortran/53526] New: [Coarray] (lib) Properly handle MOVE_ALLOC for coarrays

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53526 Bug #: 53526 Summary: [Coarray] (lib) Properly handle MOVE_ALLOC for coarrays Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/53526] [Coarray] (lib) Properly handle MOVE_ALLOC for coarrays

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53526 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc

[Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsuppressible enum comparison warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53524 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot

[Bug tree-optimization/53501] [4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] scev introduces signed overflow

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53501 --- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 10:34:50 UTC --- It's my very best friend extract_muldiv that transforms (int)((unsigned int) n.0_26 + 4294967295) * 2 to (int)(((unsigned int) n.0_26 + 2147483647) * 2)

[Bug java/53527] New: 4.7.0 release can't enable java language

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53527 Bug #: 53527 Summary: 4.7.0 release can't enable java language Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major Priority:

[Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsuppressible enum comparison warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53524 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug java/53527] 4.7.0 release can't enable java language

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53527 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug tree-optimization/53501] [4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] scev introduces signed overflow

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53501 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 12:29:31 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Wed May 30 12:29:26 2012 New Revision: 188009 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188009 Log: 2012-05-30 Richard

[Bug fortran/53521] [4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Zero-byte memory leak with zero-sized array constructor (valgrind warning)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53521 --- Comment #3 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 2012-05-30 12:31:18 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) Well, I think this is a valgrind issue and not a real leak. Whether you want to optimize code for the non-NULL

[Bug tree-optimization/53501] [4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] scev introduces signed overflow

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53501 --- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 12:32:17 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Wed May 30 12:32:10 2012 New Revision: 188010 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188010 Log: 2012-05-30 Richard

[Bug tree-optimization/53501] [4.5/4.6 Regression] scev introduces signed overflow

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53501 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.7.1, 4.8.0

[Bug c++/51927] [C++0x] Cannot access non-static members in initializer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51927 --- Comment #3 from gccearlyadop...@trash-mail.com 2012-05-30 12:34:12 UTC --- My local GCC says 4.7.0_3. :)

[Bug middle-end/48493] [4.6/4.7 Regression] ice in expand_expr_addr_expr_1 with complex types and mem_ref

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48493 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.8.0

[Bug fortran/53521] [4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Zero-byte memory leak with zero-sized array constructor (valgrind warning)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53521 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 12:46:53 UTC --- You say not doing free (0) leaks memory? What OS is this on? Note that we fold such calls away: case BUILT_IN_FREE: if (integer_zerop (arg0))

[Bug c++/53528] New: Support C++11 generalized attributes

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53528 Bug #: 53528 Summary: Support C++11 generalized attributes Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority:

[Bug c++/53528] Support C++11 generalized attributes

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53528 Dodji Seketeli dodji at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last

[Bug c++/53356] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE in verify_gimple_stmt, at tree-cfg.c:4258

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53356 Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug preprocessor/51776] fixincludes hacks around a C++ deficiency

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51776 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||53528 ---

[Bug c++/53528] Support C++11 generalized attributes

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53528 --- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot com 2012-05-30 13:47:38 UTC --- Note that the syntactic binding of C++11 attributes is different from that of GNU attributes in various cases, so the front end will

[Bug fortran/53521] [4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Zero-byte memory leak with zero-sized array constructor (valgrind warning)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53521 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot

[Bug fortran/53521] [4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Zero-byte memory leak with zero-sized array constructor (valgrind warning)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53521 --- Comment #6 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 2012-05-30 14:37:09 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) You say not doing free (0) leaks memory? What OS is this on? I'm observing on a Linux box that : MODULE TEST

[Bug lto/53019] [4.7 regression] ICE (segfault) with -flto=jobserver -fwhole-program

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53019 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING ---

[Bug c++/53356] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE in verify_gimple_stmt, at tree-cfg.c:4258

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53356 --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 14:50:49 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Wed May 30 14:50:44 2012 New Revision: 188019 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188019 Log: PR c++/53356 *

[Bug c++/53220] [4.7/4.8 Regression] g++ mis-compiles compound literals

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53220 --- Comment #16 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 14:51:58 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Wed May 30 14:51:54 2012 New Revision: 188020 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188020 Log: PR c++/53220 gcc/ *

[Bug c++/53356] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE in verify_gimple_stmt, at tree-cfg.c:4258

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53356 --- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 14:52:06 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Wed May 30 14:52:02 2012 New Revision: 188021 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188021 Log: PR c++/53356 *

[Bug lto/53471] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE in pp_base_format, at pretty-print.c:510 (-flto -g)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53471 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc

[Bug middle-end/48124] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] likely wrong code bug

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48124 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #23837|0 |1 is

[Bug middle-end/53518] [4.8 regression] testsuite_abi_check.cc doesn't compile

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53518 Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug c/53529] New: assembler errors while building a cross compiler if . (dot) is in your PATH

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53529 Bug #: 53529 Summary: assembler errors while building a cross compiler if . (dot) is in your PATH Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status:

[Bug middle-end/48124] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] likely wrong code bug

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48124 --- Comment #22 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 15:28:14 UTC --- Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. This also needs to be tested on 32-bit and strict-alignment platforms.

[Bug c/53529] assembler errors while building a cross compiler if . (dot) is in your PATH

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53529 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot

[Bug c/53530] New: const variables not constant enough to be used as initializers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53530 Bug #: 53530 Summary: const variables not constant enough to be used as initializers Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/53529] assembler errors while building a cross compiler if . (dot) is in your PATH

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53529 --- Comment #2 from Bernard van Duijnen bernard.van.duijnen at oracle dot com 2012-05-30 15:49:43 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) Don't do it then? Having . in $PATH is a severe security issue anyway. Typically it is unsecure yes, but not

[Bug preprocessor/53525] Performance regression due to enabling track-macro-expansion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53525 --- Comment #12 from jimis jimis at gmx dot net 2012-05-30 15:55:19 UTC --- I should probably explain where the problem is and why I've left a memory leak. In tokens_buff_new() I can't use XOBNEWVEC() instead of XNEWVEC() because it is not guarded

[Bug c/53530] const variables not constant enough to be used as initializers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53530 Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug c/53091] static initializer accepted by clang but not by gcc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53091 Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cpy.prefers.you at

[Bug c++/53531] New: ,,,, accepted as template arguments for variadic template

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53531 Bug #: 53531 Summary: accepted as template arguments for variadic template Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsuppressible enum comparison warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53524 --- Comment #8 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 16:29:08 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) The warnings are an unintended effect of my fix for PR16603. So, before your fix, same_type_p was returning true? enum { e1 =

[Bug c/53502] [4.8 Regression] Bootstrap broken with --disable-build-poststage1-with-cxx

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53502 --- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 16:44:49 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Wed May 30 16:44:42 2012 New Revision: 188024 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188024 Log: 2012-05-30 Tobias Burnus

[Bug c/53532] New: function call ignored when called with argument of incompatible, undefined structure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53532 Bug #: 53532 Summary: function call ignored when called with argument of incompatible, undefined structure Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0

[Bug c/53502] [4.8 Regression] Bootstrap broken with --disable-build-poststage1-with-cxx

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53502 --- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 16:52:17 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) New Revision: 188024 That patch removed the typedef from gcc/fortran/decl.c. Hence, --disable-build-poststage1-with-cxx should work

[Bug middle-end/48493] [4.6/4.7 Regression] ice in expand_expr_addr_expr_1 with complex types and mem_ref

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48493 --- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 17:05:49 UTC --- on arm? That's pre-approved if it passes bootstrap regtest I will try it on MIPS since I saw the exact same ICE and the exact same (concat:SC (reg/v:SF

[Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsuppressible enum comparison warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53524 --- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-05-30 17:22:45 UTC --- I think there is a largely linguistic misunderstanding: when I said unintended I meant that I did not *anticipate* that after my patch, which was fixing

[Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsuppressible enum comparison warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53524 --- Comment #10 from Lawrence Crowl crowl at google dot com 2012-05-30 17:37:37 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) The warnings are an unintended effect of my fix for PR16603. We warn at the end of the below lines of call.c. At the moment isn't

[Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsuppressible enum comparison warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53524 --- Comment #11 from Lawrence Crowl crowl at google dot com 2012-05-30 17:42:14 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) Let's add in CC Gaby, in the testsuite I see the warning triggering outside templates for a testcase coming from a bug report of

[Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsuppressible enum comparison warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53524 --- Comment #12 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 17:43:38 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) I think there is a largely linguistic misunderstanding: when I said unintended I meant that I did not *anticipate* that after

[Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsuppressible enum comparison warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53524 --- Comment #13 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-05-30 17:55:07 UTC --- Thanks Manuel and Lawrence. If I understand correctly what L said, the simpler and more urgent thing to do is making the warning code a bit smarter,

[Bug libstdc++/21334] Lack of Posix compliant thread safety in std::basic_string

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21334 tlknv at yandex dot ru changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tlknv at yandex dot ru ---

[Bug c++/50134] -Wmissing-prototypes doesn't work for C++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50134 --- Comment #15 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 18:52:18 UTC --- This bug results in real warnings being introduced unnoticed, see: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg02005.html

[Bug c++/50134] -Wmissing-prototypes doesn't work for C++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50134 --- Comment #16 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 18:58:29 UTC --- (In reply to comment #15) This bug results in real warnings being introduced unnoticed, see: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg02005.html I

[Bug c/53532] function call ignored when called with argument of incompatible, undefined structure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53532 --- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot com 2012-05-30 19:08:18 UTC --- This looks like another case of bug 51034.

[Bug middle-end/48493] [4.6/4.7 Regression] ice in expand_expr_addr_expr_1 with complex types and mem_ref

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48493 --- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 19:08:58 UTC --- (In reply to comment #12) on arm? That's pre-approved if it passes bootstrap regtest I will try it on MIPS since I saw the exact same ICE and the

[Bug c++/52841] [4.7/4.8 Regression] error: type 'Solvable' is not a base type for type 'Resolvable'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52841 --- Comment #15 from Paul Pluzhnikov ppluzhnikov at google dot com 2012-05-30 19:13:02 UTC --- I've got another small reproducer, that shows up as a slightly different failure, but very likely is the same problem: namespace util { } // comment

[Bug libstdc++/21334] Lack of Posix compliant thread safety in std::basic_string

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21334 Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||glisse at gcc dot

[Bug lto/53019] [4.7 regression] ICE (segfault) with -flto=jobserver -fwhole-program

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53019 --- Comment #5 from Adam Borowski kilobyte at angband dot pl 2012-05-30 21:56:36 UTC --- The changelog for Debian upload which included the fix is: * Update to SVN 20120509 (r187339) from the gcc-4_7-branch. - Fix PR libstdc++/53193, PR

[Bug c++/53356] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE in verify_gimple_stmt, at tree-cfg.c:4258

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53356 --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 22:07:28 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Wed May 30 22:07:23 2012 New Revision: 188029 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188029 Log: PR c++/53356 *

[Bug middle-end/53008] abort in _ITM_getTMCloneSafe

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53008 --- Comment #11 from Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 22:13:48 UTC --- Author: aldyh Date: Wed May 30 22:13:43 2012 New Revision: 188030 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188030 Log: Backport from

[Bug middle-end/53008] abort in _ITM_getTMCloneSafe

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53008 Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/53356] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE in verify_gimple_stmt, at tree-cfg.c:4258

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53356 Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug target/52999] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE, segmentation fault in c_tree_printer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52999 --- Comment #15 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 22:54:24 UTC --- Author: danglin Date: Wed May 30 22:54:20 2012 New Revision: 188031 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188031 Log: 2012-05-30 John

[Bug target/52999] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE, segmentation fault in c_tree_printer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52999 --- Comment #16 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-30 23:04:04 UTC --- Author: danglin Date: Wed May 30 23:03:59 2012 New Revision: 188032 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188032 Log: PR target/52999

[Bug target/48308] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] crosscompiling to arm fails with assembler: can't resolve '.LC4' {.rodata.str1.1 section} - '.LPIC4' {*UND* section}

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48308 Matt Heck breakpoint at runbox dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||breakpoint at

[Bug middle-end/53533] New: [4.7 regression] loop unrolling as measured by Adobe's C++Benchmark is twice as slow versus 4.4-4.6

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53533 Bug #: 53533 Summary: [4.7 regression] loop unrolling as measured by Adobe's C++Benchmark is twice as slow versus 4.4-4.6 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version:

[Bug middle-end/53533] [4.7 regression] loop unrolling as measured by Adobe's C++Benchmark is twice as slow versus 4.4-4.6

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53533 --- Comment #1 from Matt Hargett matt at use dot net 2012-05-31 00:55:36 UTC --- Created attachment 27526 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27526 tarball containing buildable sources and binaries that demonstrate the severe

[Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsuppressible enum comparison warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53524 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at

[Bug java/53527] 4.7.0 release can't enable java language

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53527 --- Comment #2 from licheng.1212 at gmail dot com licheng.1212 at gmail dot com 2012-05-31 03:01:01 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) mips-unknown-elf is not a hosted platform and thus does not support Java. But why the GCC 4.4.2 is OK,and I

[Bug gcov-profile/53534] New: gcov erroneously reporting opening brace of constructor is never executed.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53534 Bug #: 53534 Summary: gcov erroneously reporting opening brace of constructor is never executed. Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.4.3 Status:

[Bug c++/53534] gcov erroneously reporting opening brace of constructor is never executed.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53534 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Component|gcov-profile|c++ ---

[Bug middle-end/53535] New: non-aligned memset on non-strict-alignment targets not optimized where aligned memset is

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53535 Bug #: 53535 Summary: non-aligned memset on non-strict-alignment targets not optimized where aligned memset is Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0

[Bug middle-end/53535] non-aligned memset on non-strict-alignment targets not optimized where aligned memset is

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53535 --- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-31 04:30:08 UTC --- Created attachment 27528 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27528 Modified gcc.dg/pr46647.c

[Bug middle-end/53535] non-aligned memset on non-strict-alignment targets not optimized where aligned memset is

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53535 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-31 04:32:00 UTC --- alignment of data should not make a difference for emitted code Unless the loading of unalignment makes it much slower. I thinking where two aligned half

[Bug middle-end/53535] non-aligned memset on non-strict-alignment targets not optimized where aligned memset is

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53535 --- Comment #3 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-31 04:37:37 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) Observe the emitted assembly code, which uses the same instructions for aligned and unaligned code ...(compare with the code

[Bug middle-end/53535] non-aligned memset on non-strict-alignment !SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS targets not optimized where aligned memset is

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53535 Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|non-aligned memset on |non-aligned

[Bug middle-end/53535] non-aligned memset on non-strict-alignment targets not optimized where aligned memset is

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53535 Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|non-aligned memset on |non-aligned