http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54735
Markus Trippelsdorf markus at trippelsdorf dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54743
Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54743
--- Comment #2 from 顏烈彬 slbyan at gmail dot com 2012-09-29 07:48:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
You mean that i (as most INT_MAX) is always less than 300L?
And, in a RH 2.6.18-164.el5, gcc Red Hat 4.1.2-52, it runs as (was) expected,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54743
--- Comment #3 from 顏烈彬 slbyan at gmail dot com 2012-09-29 07:49:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
You mean that i (as most INT_MAX) is always less than 300L?
And, in a RH 2.6.18-164.el5, gcc Red Hat 4.1.2-52, it runs as (was) expected,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54743
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-09-29
08:08:32 UTC ---
The condition is always to true thus the signed integer overflows and anything
can happen, maybe something different for different release series
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54744
Bug #: 54744
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault, by
dependent base, member typedef and ctor-initializer
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54745
Bug #: 54745
Summary: gcc/c/c-typeck.c: CASE_CONVERT possible coding bug ?
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54745
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2012-09-29
10:29:35 UTC ---
More of the same over in trunk/gcc/c-family/c-pretty-print.c
[dcb@zippy src]$ fgrep CASE_CONVERT !$
fgrep CASE_CONVERT
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54746
Bug #: 54746
Summary: config/s390/s390.c:1583: possible missing break in
switch ?
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54745
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54746
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54744
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54747
Bug #: 54747
Summary: config/bfin/bfin.c:2721: possible missing break ?
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54748
Bug #: 54748
Summary: libmudflap/mf-hooks2.c:1776: possible missing break ?
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749
Bug #: 54749
Summary: libbacktrace
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54750
Bug #: 54750
Summary: conflicting float.h on windows using mingw
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54744
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54751
Bug #: 54751
Summary: [4.8 Regression] slow compile time with rtl loop
unroller
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54752
Bug #: 54752
Summary: lto-wrapper: internal compiler error in convert_move
at expr.c:327
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54753
Bug #: 54753
Summary: assumed-rank dummies: Reject assumed-size actuals in
in some cases (C535c)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com 2012-09-29 16:59:02
UTC ---
You filed this against the go component, but it seems that Go is not
involved. Is that right? This is just about a backtrace printed after a run
of the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749
--- Comment #2 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-09-29 17:34:04 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
You filed this against the go component, but it seems that Go is not
involved. Is that right? This is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52724
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-29
17:38:50 UTC ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sat Sep 29 17:38:46 2012
New Revision: 191854
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=191854
Log:
2012-09-29 Thomas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749
Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |other
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749
--- Comment #4 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ian at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-29
17:51:01 UTC ---
Author: ian
Date: Sat Sep 29 17:50:54 2012
New Revision: 191855
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=191855
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749
Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34106
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-29
17:58:42 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Sat Sep 29 17:58:34 2012
New Revision: 191856
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=191856
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54754
Bug #: 54754
Summary: [parallel mode] 'make check-parallel' only works on
x86-64
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34106
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54755
Bug #: 54755
Summary: Template instantiation confused by actual template
argument definitions before and after template
definition
Classification: Unclassified
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54756
Bug #: 54756
Summary: [OOP] Should reject CLASS, intent(out) in PURE
procedures
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54744
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54756
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54756
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-29
18:33:32 UTC ---
As follow up - and side note: The following constraint ensures that there is a
compile-time error if one tries this with a nonpolymorphic entries. I am
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54755
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-29
19:06:09 UTC ---
I haven't bothered analysing the code, but Comeau and Clang agree it's
ambiguous, so GCC is probably right.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54754
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-29
20:37:59 UTC ---
Created attachment 28301
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28301
Use built-in atomics on non-x86_64 targets.
This patch uses
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21161
Thorsten Glaser tg at mirbsd dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tg at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54739
John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54148
John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|plugins
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54754
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-09-29
22:53:36 UTC ---
Jon, please, pursue the approach you like better and let's make progress on
this: remember that we are still in Stage 1, we can also take some
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54738
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-09-29 22:58:36 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Sat Sep 29 22:58:31 2012
New Revision: 191862
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=191862
Log:
/cp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54738
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54755
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54757
Bug #: 54757
Summary: FAIL: ext/random/beta_distribution/cons/default.cc
(test for excess errors)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54755
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54757
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-09-29
23:34:20 UTC ---
I suppose _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_MATH_TR1 remains undefined on hppa-hpux, right?
In that case, I would pre-approve a patch changing each of the three
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53636
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54757
--- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-09-30 00:50:17 UTC ---
On 29-Sep-12, at 7:34 PM, paolo.carlini at oracle dot com wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54757
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini
48 matches
Mail list logo