[Bug debug/56502] entry-value: Missing DW_AT_linkage_name for C-C++ calls

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56502 Jan Kratochvil jan.kratochvil at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #29564|0

[Bug fortran/55362] [4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE with size() on character pointer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55362 Igor Zamyatin izamyatin at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug middle-end/56589] Array bounds violation is very end-user unfriendly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56589 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at

[Bug fortran/55362] [4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE with size() on character pointer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55362 --- Comment #12 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 08:30:42 UTC --- (In reply to comment #11) r196583 seems to break 4_6 branch bootstrap with [...] I believe that this has been fixed by Rev. 196584 (comment 10),

[Bug tree-optimization/56522] [4.8 Regression] Bytemark ASSIGNMENT 9% / 11% slower

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56522 --- Comment #14 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 08:45:04 UTC --- (In reply to comment #13) There is almost no difference with reduced test case. Assignment in nbench can be tested with: ./nbench -cCOM.DAT

[Bug middle-end/56589] Array bounds violation is very end-user unfriendly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56589 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc

[Bug libstdc++/56557] [4.8 Regression] Link error about `std::fstream' or `std::stringstream' with `-flto' and `-rdynamic' options

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56557 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at

[Bug libstdc++/56557] [4.8 Regression] Link error about `std::fstream' or `std::stringstream' with `-flto' and `-rdynamic' options

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56557 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 09:36:24 UTC --- BTW, even stock cc1plus (i.e. no the above class.c change) against latest 4.8.0 libstdc++ shows the myriads of useless SHN_UNDEF symbols with -flto alone

[Bug middle-end/39326] Segmentation fault with -O1, out of memory with -O2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39326 --- Comment #45 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 09:40:18 UTC --- Patches posted: * Restrict GIMPLE loop invariant code motion of loop-invariant loads and stores to loops with fewer memory references than a

[Bug middle-end/56589] Array bounds violation is very end-user unfriendly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56589 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 09:45:07 UTC --- Of course there is benefit, one performance benefit for properly written code, and also people will very quickly fix up their broken code, as has been

[Bug middle-end/56589] Array bounds violation is very end-user unfriendly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56589 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 09:51:44 UTC --- Also, note that gcc 4.8 isn't the first version to actually use undefined behavior in computation of the number of iterations, just gcc 4.8 now uses the

[Bug libstdc++/56557] [4.8 Regression] Link error about `std::fstream' or `std::stringstream' with `-flto' and `-rdynamic' options

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56557 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 10:05:39 UTC --- Note that this behavior (tons of undesirable SHN_UNDEF symbols in binaries linked with -flto) seems to be specific to ld.bfd, with gold the #c0 testcase

[Bug testsuite/54119] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vector-4.c scan-tree-dump-times gimple VEC_PERM_EXPR a, b, { 0, 4, 1, 5 }; 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54119 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 10:12:36 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) Fixed. -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times VEC_PERM_EXPR a, b, { 0, 4, 1, 5 }; 1 gimple} } */ +/* { dg-final {

[Bug middle-end/56589] Array bounds violation is very end-user unfriendly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56589 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/53265] Warn when undefined behavior implies smaller iteration count

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53265 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug fortran/56581] seg fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56581 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING

[Bug tree-optimization/56580] Internal compiler error when trying to compile a sequence of NOPs inside a loop

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56580 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug lto/56578] Testcase behaves differently when compiled with LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56578 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/56577] wrong code for aliased union on gcc 4.7 only

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56577 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 10:32:17 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) You cannot use union to avoid aliasing rules for normal accesses. Though some people may read the C standard as allowing

[Bug middle-end/56574] False possibly uninitialized variable warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56574 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|

[Bug middle-end/56574] False possibly uninitialized variable warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56574 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 10:45:08 UTC --- Note that the 'wrong-code' bits should not be observable but with runtime simulation tools.

[Bug rtl-optimization/56339] [4.8 Regression]: Suboptimal register allocation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56339 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

[Bug fortran/56581] Segfault when reading source file which starts with a byte-order mark (-cpp works)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56581 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED

[Bug target/56470] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE output_operand: invalid shift operand

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56470 --- Comment #7 from Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 11:48:45 UTC --- Author: rearnsha Date: Mon Mar 11 11:48:34 2013 New Revision: 196595 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=196595 Log: PR

[Bug rtl-optimization/56339] [4.8 Regression]: Suboptimal register allocation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56339 Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|uros at gcc dot gnu.org | ---

[Bug target/56546] Using the divide operator on unsigned int produces incorrect code on AVR

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56546 Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED

[Bug bootstrap/56593] New: LTO profiledbootstrap fails for Ada

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56593 Bug #: 56593 Summary: LTO profiledbootstrap fails for Ada Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: lto

[Bug rtl-optimization/56339] [4.8 Regression]: Suboptimal register allocation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56339 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P1 |P2 ---

[Bug bootstrap/56593] LTO profiledbootstrap fails for Ada

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56593 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 13:15:35 UTC --- Non-profiled LTO bootstrap works with Ada.

[Bug fortran/56594] New: Invalid read of size 1 for gfortran.dg/realloc_on_assign_5.f03

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56594 Bug #: 56594 Summary: Invalid read of size 1 for gfortran.dg/realloc_on_assign_5.f03 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status:

[Bug tree-optimization/56595] New: Tree-ssa-pre can create loop carried dependencies which prevent loop vectorization.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56595 Bug #: 56595 Summary: Tree-ssa-pre can create loop carried dependencies which prevent loop vectorization. Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0

[Bug tree-optimization/56595] Tree-ssa-pre can create loop carried dependencies which prevent loop vectorization.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56595 --- Comment #1 from Yuri Rumyantsev ysrumyan at gmail dot com 2013-03-11 13:38:25 UTC --- Created attachment 29636 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29636 testcase This test must be compiled with the following options

[Bug fortran/56596] New: Invalid read of size 4 gfortran.dg/class_array_7.f03

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56596 Bug #: 56596 Summary: Invalid read of size 4 gfortran.dg/class_array_7.f03 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug libstdc++/56557] [4.8 Regression] Link error about `std::fstream' or `std::stringstream' with `-flto' and `-rdynamic' options

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56557 --- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2013-03-11 13:58:07 UTC --- Yes, I agree it is GNU LD bug. There is also GCC problem: this particular symbol should not appear in the LTO symtab. It appears because we see the

[Bug tree-optimization/53265] Warn when undefined behavior implies smaller iteration count

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53265 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 14:14:06 UTC --- The following avoids the miscompile in these obvious cases: Index: gcc/tree-ssa-loop-niter.c

[Bug tree-optimization/53265] Warn when undefined behavior implies smaller iteration count

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53265 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 14:16:20 UTC --- To warn, 1) add a flag to struct loop whether we warned for the loop already 2) in both discover_iteration_bound_by_body_walk and

[Bug tree-optimization/53265] Warn when undefined behavior implies smaller iteration count

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53265 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 14:17:28 UTC --- When warnings are disabled the whole function can be skipped and both estimate and bound be initialized by the result from number_of_latch_executions

[Bug tree-optimization/56595] Tree-ssa-pre can create loop carried dependencies which prevent loop vectorization.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56595 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug target/56470] [4.7 Regression] ICE output_operand: invalid shift operand

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56470 Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE

[Bug rtl-optimization/55611] Operand swapping for commutative operators

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55611 --- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 14:44:09 UTC --- The fortran test that fails is equivalent to the following (use -Ofast -g, surprisingly it only fails in var tracking) float f(double*a,double*b){

[Bug target/54407] FAIL: 30_threads/condition_variable/54185.cc execution test program timed out on powerpc-apple-darwin9 and x86_64-apple-darwin10

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54407 --- Comment #18 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2013-03-11 14:51:01 UTC --- (In reply to comment #17) Jack, I see at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-11/msg00331.html that you have tested a fix for this

[Bug rtl-optimization/55611] Operand swapping for commutative operators

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55611 --- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 15:14:46 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) I also tried the reverse order (just swap x and y in the GET_CODE comparison). It got a crazy process during stage3 compiling

[Bug tree-optimization/53265] Warn when undefined behavior implies smaller iteration count

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53265 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 15:49:00 UTC --- Created attachment 29637 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29637 gcc48-pr53265.patch Untested patch. Not sure about the warning

[Bug tree-optimization/53265] Warn when undefined behavior implies smaller iteration count

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53265 --- Comment #9 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 15:58:41 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) Created attachment 29637 [details] gcc48-pr53265.patch Untested patch. Not sure about the warning wording, plus no

[Bug tree-optimization/53265] Warn when undefined behavior implies smaller iteration count

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53265 --- Comment #10 from Alexander Monakov amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 16:15:36 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) Not sure about the warning wording What about (... iteration %E invokes undefined behavior, max)? plus no idea

[Bug c++/56567] [4.8 Regression] ICE with lambda return type deduction and braced-init-list

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56567 --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 16:22:28 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Mon Mar 11 16:22:16 2013 New Revision: 196600 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=196600 Log: PR c++/56567

[Bug c++/56346] FAIL: g++.dg/tls/thread_local3.C -std=gnu++11 (test for excess errors)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56346 --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 16:33:18 UTC --- Created attachment 29638 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29638 tentative patch __cxa_thread_atexit is in libstdc++; the default

[Bug tree-optimization/53265] Warn when undefined behavior implies smaller iteration count

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53265 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc

[Bug tree-optimization/53265] Warn when undefined behavior implies smaller iteration count

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53265 --- Comment #12 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 16:49:25 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) (In reply to comment #8) Not sure about the warning wording What about (... iteration %E invokes undefined behavior,

[Bug c++/56597] New: unaligned local variable used by implicit sse instructions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56597 Bug #: 56597 Summary: unaligned local variable used by implicit sse instructions Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status:

[Bug tree-optimization/53265] Warn when undefined behavior implies smaller iteration count

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53265 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #29637|0 |1

[Bug c++/56597] unaligned local variable used by implicit sse instructions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56597 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at

[Bug fortran/55362] [4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE with size() on character pointer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55362 Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug rtl-optimization/56598] New: Optimizer can't invert conditional when inlining a bool function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56598 Bug #: 56598 Summary: Optimizer can't invert conditional when inlining a bool function Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status:

[Bug c/56599] New: very confusing compiler diagnostics (for stupid bug on my part)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56599 Bug #: 56599 Summary: very confusing compiler diagnostics (for stupid bug on my part) Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.5.2 Status:

[Bug libstdc++/56557] [4.8 Regression] Link error about `std::fstream' or `std::stringstream' with `-flto' and `-rdynamic' options

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56557 --- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 18:10:57 UTC --- I am testing the following that should prevent references from external vtables to land in LTO symbol table. Index: lto-streamer-out.c

[Bug c/56599] very confusing compiler diagnostics (for stupid bug on my part)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56599 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 18:11:17 UTC --- No info in bug.

[Bug libstdc++/56557] [4.8 Regression] Link error about `std::fstream' or `std::stringstream' with `-flto' and `-rdynamic' options

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56557 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 18:21:19 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) Sorry for nitpicking ;) : + /* Ignore all referrences from external vars initializers - they are not really references

[Bug target/54083] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr53922.c on *-apple-darwin*

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54083 --- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2013-03-11 18:22:34 UTC --- (In reply to comment #15) Would this be needed for darwin8 as well? I don't recall the status of D8, .. I suspect that, in this case,

[Bug translation/56591] Missing space

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56591 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/56599] very confusing compiler diagnostics (for stupid bug on my part)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56599 --- Comment #2 from Dave davecat49 at gmail dot com 2013-03-11 18:32:51 UTC --- Created attachment 29641 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29641 preprocesser output for first program

[Bug c/56599] very confusing compiler diagnostics (for stupid bug on my part)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56599 --- Comment #3 from Dave davecat49 at gmail dot com 2013-03-11 18:34:05 UTC --- Created attachment 29642 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29642 preprocesser output for second program

[Bug c/56599] very confusing compiler diagnostics (for stupid bug on my part)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56599 --- Comment #4 from Dave davecat49 at gmail dot com 2013-03-11 18:42:41 UTC --- It looks as though it threw away everything I'd typed in when I added an attachment, then submitted the empty report. sigh gcc produced extremely confusing

[Bug c/56599] very confusing compiler diagnostics (for stupid bug on my part)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56599 --- Comment #5 from Dave davecat49 at gmail dot com 2013-03-11 18:44:44 UTC --- Created attachment 29643 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29643 first offending program The compiler error output is as follows:

[Bug target/56591] Missing space

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56591 Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target||avr

[Bug c/56599] very confusing compiler diagnostics (for stupid bug on my part)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56599 --- Comment #6 from Dave davecat49 at gmail dot com 2013-03-11 18:46:35 UTC --- Created attachment 29644 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29644 second offending program Compiler error output for this one puts the error

[Bug target/56591] Missing space

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56591 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW

[Bug c/56599] very confusing compiler diagnostics (for stupid bug on my part)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56599 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 18:49:38 UTC --- Works on the trunk on x86_64-linux-gnu just fine: dlt8.c:4:25: error: expected ‘,’ or ‘;’ before numeric constant #define SAMPLELONGLONG 123456789012345

[Bug c/56599] very confusing compiler diagnostics (for stupid bug on my part)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56599 --- Comment #8 from dave at firstcomp dot biz 2013-03-11 18:51:12 UTC --- On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 2:11 PM, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56599 --- Comment #1

[Bug c/56599] very confusing compiler diagnostics (for stupid bug on my part)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56599 --- Comment #9 from dave at firstcomp dot biz 2013-03-11 18:54:10 UTC --- As shown in other attachments, for me it generated references to other lines (many lines away in the big program I tried to reduce this to), if I removed all earlier lines

[Bug target/56591] Missing space

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56591 --- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 18:57:35 UTC --- Author: gjl Date: Mon Mar 11 18:57:27 2013 New Revision: 196604 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=196604 Log: PR

[Bug c/56599] very confusing compiler diagnostics (for stupid bug on my part)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56599 --- Comment #10 from dave at firstcomp dot biz 2013-03-11 18:58:00 UTC --- I forgot to add when I reentered stuff. This was from MinGW running on Windows XP, but got same error messages on a Linux machine (sent it to someone to check).

[Bug target/56591] Missing space

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56591 Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|

[Bug target/56560] [4.6/4.7 regression] vzeroupper clobbers argument with AVX

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56560 --- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-03-11 19:34:29 UTC --- Created attachment 29645 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29645 A patch This patch adds expand_args to track library calls to expend

[Bug target/40797] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE in df_refs_verify, at df-scan.c:4361

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40797 Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug target/13423] sh-elf: V4SFmode passed in integer registers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13423 --- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-11 19:56:20 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) ideally, this would be something like (no insn scheduling applied): fmov.s @r4+,fr0 fmov.s @r4+,fr1

[Bug target/49880] SuperH: ICE when -m4 is used with -mdiv=call-div1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49880 Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||olegendo

[Bug c++/56039] ICE in iterative_hash_template_arg, at cp/pt.c:1606

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56039 Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|ice-on-valid-code

[Bug bootstrap/53728] [4.6 regression] Bootstrap comparison failure (gcc/varasm.o differs) with CFLAGS=-O2 -march=pentium3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53728 --- Comment #5 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2013-03-11 21:11:00 UTC --- Created attachment 29646 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29646 Preprocessed source of the file that miscompares during bootstrap

[Bug bootstrap/53728] [4.6 regression] Bootstrap comparison failure (gcc/varasm.o differs) with CFLAGS=-O2 -march=pentium3

-march=pentium3 -fcompare-debug -m32 varasm.i xgcc: error: varasm.i: -fcompare-debug failure (length) xgcc (GCC) 4.6.4 20130311 (prerelease) [gcc-4_6-branch revision 196601]

[Bug c++/56567] [4.8 Regression] ICE with lambda return type deduction and braced-init-list

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56567 --- Comment #7 from David Krauss potswa at mac dot com 2013-03-11 22:42:46 UTC --- Created attachment 29647 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29647 alternative fix Yes. However, the above fix doesn't catch all instances

[Bug bootstrap/53728] [4.6 regression] Bootstrap comparison failure (gcc/varasm.o differs) with CFLAGS=-O2 -march=pentium3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53728 --- Comment #7 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2013-03-11 22:43:38 UTC --- Testcase: --cut here-- extern int global_options; extern unsigned char *mode_size; extern int printf (const char *, ...); void

[Bug c++/56567] [4.8 Regression] ICE with lambda return type deduction and braced-init-list

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56567 --- Comment #8 from David Krauss potswa at mac dot com 2013-03-11 22:51:12 UTC --- Oops, I didn't see the preceding comment checkin before submitting that. Maybe that's a better place to check, but we might keep the extra test cases. Make

[Bug rtl-optimization/53728] [4.6 regression] Bootstrap comparison failure (gcc/varasm.o differs) with CFLAGS=-O2 -march=pentium3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53728 Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vmakarov at

[Bug c/56599] very confusing compiler diagnostics (for stupid bug on my part)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56599 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc

[Bug c/56599] very confusing compiler diagnostics (for stupid bug on my part)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56599 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug lto/56578] Testcase behaves differently when compiled with LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56578 --- Comment #2 from Dmitry Gorbachev d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com 2013-03-12 00:46:13 UTC --- GCC 4.8.0, 4.7.3, 4.6.4; build = host = target = i686-pc-linux-gnu; configured with --enable-languages=c,c++

[Bug libstdc++/56557] [4.8 Regression] Link error about `std::fstream' or `std::stringstream' with `-flto' and `-rdynamic' options

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56557 --- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-12 00:58:48 UTC --- BTW, one thing i do not understand is why the construction vtables are not static when they can not be used across .o boundary?