[Bug tree-optimization/56984] [4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE in tree_vrp.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56984 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug rtl-optimization/56957] [4.9 regression] ICE in add_insn_after, at emit-rtl.c:3783

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56957 Andrey Belevantsev abel at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug debug/53453] darwin linker expects both AT_name and AT_comp_dir debug notes

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53453 Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/56984] [4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE in tree_vrp.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56984 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/56982] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Bad optimization with setjmp()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56982 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/50789] Gather vectorization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50789 Andrey Turetskiy andrey.turetskiy at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug middle-end/36296] bogus uninitialized warning (loop representation, VRP missed-optimization)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36296 --- Comment #16 from Vincent Lefèvre vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net 2013-04-17 08:40:09 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) A way to tell gcc a variable is not uninitialized is to perform self-initialization like int i = i; this will cause

[Bug tree-optimization/56982] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Bad optimization with setjmp()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56982 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 08:48:33 UTC --- So the questions are: - is it desirable that uncprop does anything to SSA_NAME_VAR == NULL phis? sure - it is all about improving out-of-SSA

[Bug tree-optimization/50789] Gather vectorization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50789 --- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2013-04-17 08:53:21 UTC --- On Wed, 17 Apr 2013, andrey.turetskiy at gmail dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50789 Andrey Turetskiy

[Bug tree-optimization/56982] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Bad optimization with setjmp()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56982 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 08:56:00 UTC --- I don't see how we could declare the testcase invalid, why would n need to be volatile? It isn't live across the setjmp call, it is even declared after

[Bug fortran/56814] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Bogus Interface mismatch in dummy procedure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56814 --- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 08:58:25 UTC --- Alternative patch: Index: gcc/fortran/interface.c === --- gcc/fortran/interface.c(revision

[Bug bootstrap/56644] --disable-nls requires symbols from libintl

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56644 --- Comment #6 from Markus Eisenmann meisenmann@fh-salzburg.ac.at 2013-04-17 09:01:04 UTC --- Created attachment 29888 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29888 Prevent redirect to some libintl-functions if NLS isn't

[Bug tree-optimization/56982] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Bad optimization with setjmp()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56982 --- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2013-04-17 09:07:10 UTC --- On Wed, 17 Apr 2013, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56982 --- Comment #6 from Jakub

[Bug ada/40986] [4.6 regression] Assert_Failure sinfo.adb:360, error detected at a-unccon.ads:23:27

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40986 --- Comment #15 from Markus Schöpflin markus.schoepflin at comsoft dot de 2013-04-17 09:15:22 UTC --- I have bisected the problem using the git gcc repository, unfortunately 121 commits are left after bisecting, as in between the last known good

[Bug bootstrap/56644] --disable-nls requires symbols from libintl

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56644 --- Comment #7 from Markus Eisenmann meisenmann@fh-salzburg.ac.at 2013-04-17 09:17:36 UTC --- At least this error is based on some libintl-macros, which will redirect some stdio-functions (like vsnprintf ...) to their

[Bug middle-end/36296] bogus uninitialized warning (loop representation, VRP missed-optimization)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36296 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic

[Bug tree-optimization/56982] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Bad optimization with setjmp()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56982 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 09:28:55 UTC --- #include stdio.h #include setjmp.h static sigjmp_buf env; static inline int g (int x) { if (x) { fprintf (stderr, Returning 0\n);

[Bug web/44269] Search for PR number in mailing lists fails

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44269 Shakthi Kannan skannan at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||skannan

[Bug middle-end/36296] bogus uninitialized warning (loop representation, VRP missed-optimization)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36296 --- Comment #18 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 09:31:59 UTC --- In fact, we should have removed the i=i idiom a long time ago. The correct thing to do (as Linus says) is to initialize the variable to a sensible value

[Bug middle-end/36296] bogus uninitialized warning (loop representation, VRP missed-optimization)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36296 --- Comment #19 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 09:37:24 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) 1. Split the -Wuninitialized into two different warnings: one for which gcc knows that the variable is uninitialized and one

[Bug fortran/56981] Slow I/O: Unformatted 5x slower, large sys component; formatted slow as well

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56981 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 09:39:58 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) There is a seek inside next_record_w_unf. That function is used for DIRECT I/O. Looks conceptually wrong to me for

[Bug tree-optimization/56982] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Bad optimization with setjmp()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56982 --- Comment #9 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 09:57:52 UTC --- Created attachment 29889 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29889 patch Untested patch. The patch handles setjmp similar to a

[Bug translation/56985] New: gcc/fortran/resolve.c:920: '%s' in cannot appear in COMMON ...

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56985 Bug #: 56985 Summary: gcc/fortran/resolve.c:920: '%s' in cannot appear in COMMON ... Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status:

[Bug web/45655] GCC WIki Needs Text Colorizing Capability

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45655 Shakthi Kannan skannan at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||skannan

[Bug web/45688] Typo in __attribute__((version-id)) docs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45688 Shakthi Kannan skannan at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||skannan

[Bug fortran/56981] Slow I/O: Unformatted 5x slower, large sys component; formatted slow as well

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56981 --- Comment #4 from Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 10:50:07 UTC --- The reason why gfortran is slow here is that for non-regular files we use unbuffered I/O. If you write to a regular file instead of /dev/null, you'll see

[Bug middle-end/36296] bogus uninitialized warning (loop representation, VRP missed-optimization)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36296 --- Comment #20 from Vincent Lefèvre vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net 2013-04-17 11:17:14 UTC --- (In reply to comment #18) In fact, we should have removed the i=i idiom a long time ago. The correct thing to do (as Linus says) is to initialize

[Bug middle-end/36296] bogus uninitialized warning (loop representation, VRP missed-optimization)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36296 --- Comment #21 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 11:26:01 UTC --- (In reply to comment #20) OK, so a solution would be to add a configure test for projects that don't want such warnings (while still using -Wall) to

[Bug middle-end/36296] bogus uninitialized warning (loop representation, VRP missed-optimization)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36296 --- Comment #22 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 11:31:29 UTC --- (In reply to comment #20) (In reply to comment #18) In fact, we should have removed the i=i idiom a long time ago. The correct thing to do (as

[Bug fortran/56814] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Bogus Interface mismatch in dummy procedure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56814 --- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 11:41:21 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) Alternative patch: In contrast to the patch in comment #3, this one regtests cleanly ...

[Bug rtl-optimization/56921] [4.9 Regression] ICE in rtx_cost called by doloop_optimize_loops for PPC

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56921 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug middle-end/36296] bogus uninitialized warning (loop representation, VRP missed-optimization)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36296 --- Comment #23 from Vincent Lefèvre vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net 2013-04-17 12:24:56 UTC --- (In reply to comment #21) When an unrecognized warning option is requested (e.g., -Wunknown-warning), GCC will emit a diagnostic stating that the

[Bug middle-end/36296] bogus uninitialized warning (loop representation, VRP missed-optimization)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36296 --- Comment #24 from Vincent Lefèvre vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net 2013-04-17 12:34:40 UTC --- BTW, since with the latest GCC versions (such as Debian's GCC 4.7.2), the warning is no longer issued with -Wno-maybe-uninitialized, perhaps the bug

[Bug web/45688] Typo in __attribute__((version-id)) docs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45688 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug target/56948] PPC V2DI ICE when loading zero into GPRs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56948 David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug web/45688] Typo in __attribute__((version-id)) docs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45688 --- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 13:30:35 UTC --- Actually, the bug was version level functioning. Since it is obvious, I fixed it. http://gcc.gnu.org/r198028

[Bug fortran/40958] module files too large

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40958 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus

[Bug fortran/40958] module files too large

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40958 --- Comment #10 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 13:50:58 UTC --- Author: jb Date: Wed Apr 17 10:19:40 2013 New Revision: 198023 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=198023root=gccview=rev Log: PR 40958 Compress

[Bug c++/54320] [c++11] range access to VLA

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54320 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/54320] [c++11] range access to VLA

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54320 --- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-04-17 14:16:40 UTC --- Sorry, the most recent paper in the series is actually N3639.

[Bug c++/55149] capturing VLA in lambda

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55149 --- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-04-17 14:19:07 UTC --- Likewise capturing VLAs is covered in N3639 (only capture by reference allowed)

[Bug fortran/56981] Slow I/O: Unformatted 5x slower, large sys component; formatted slow as well

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56981 --- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 14:50:16 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) The reason why gfortran is slow here is that for non-regular files we use unbuffered I/O. If you write to a regular file

[Bug c/35649] Incorrect printf warning: expect double has float

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35649 Trevor Morgan trevmrgn+bug at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Target|h8300-elf

[Bug translation/56986] New: config/epiphany/epiphany.opt:108: floatig

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56986 Bug #: 56986 Summary: config/epiphany/epiphany.opt:108: floatig Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug translation/56987] New: gcc/config/avr/avr.opt:80: change - changed?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56987 Bug #: 56987 Summary: gcc/config/avr/avr.opt:80: change - changed? Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/10474] shrink wrapping for functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10474 Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm

[Bug debug/53453] darwin linker expects both AT_name and AT_comp_dir debug notes

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53453 m...@gcc.gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.7.4

[Bug middle-end/42371] dead code not eliminated during folding with whole-program

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42371 Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added URL|

[Bug tree-optimization/56718] Early inlining prevents type based devirtualization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56718 Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added URL|

[Bug fortran/56814] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Bogus Interface mismatch in dummy procedure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56814 --- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 16:15:06 UTC --- Fixed on trunk with: Author: janus Date: Wed Apr 17 16:13:07 2013 New Revision: 198032 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=198032root=gccview=rev Log:

[Bug debug/53453] darwin linker expects both AT_name and AT_comp_dir debug notes

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53453 --- Comment #19 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 16:21:39 UTC --- I've sent a message to the gcc-patches list with a pointer to the gcc-patches list for the work.

[Bug middle-end/56988] New: ipa-cp incorrectly propagates a field of an aggregate

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56988 Bug #: 56988 Summary: ipa-cp incorrectly propagates a field of an aggregate Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug ada/40986] [4.6 regression] Assert_Failure sinfo.adb:360, error detected at a-unccon.ads:23:27

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40986 Ludovic Brenta ludo...@ludovic-brenta.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED

[Bug target/56866] gcc 4.7.x/gcc-4.8.x with '-O3 -march=bdver2' misscompiles glibc-2.17/crypt/sha512.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866 --- Comment #9 from Winfried Magerl winfried.mag...@t-online.de 2013-04-17 18:41:06 UTC --- Hi, at least one confirmation. I've done some further checks about float-errors in glibc and that FAM/FAM4 are the extension responsible for the

[Bug c/56989] New: wrong location in error message

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56989 Bug #: 56989 Summary: wrong location in error message Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug sanitizer/56990] New: ICE: SIGFPE with -fsanitize=thread and empty struct

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56990 Bug #: 56990 Summary: ICE: SIGFPE with -fsanitize=thread and empty struct Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug fortran/40958] module files too large

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40958 --- Comment #11 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 2013-04-17 19:36:45 UTC --- With these patches in, parallel compilation of multi-file cp2k becomes significantly faster. Time for a full build goes from 70s to

[Bug ada/56909] [4.8 regression] s-atopri.adb:multiple undefined references on mingw32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56909 Arthur Zhang mail2arthur at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW

[Bug c++/56991] New: constexpr std::initializer_list crashes on too complex initialization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56991 Bug #: 56991 Summary: constexpr std::initializer_list crashes on too complex initialization Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0

[Bug target/56866] gcc 4.7.x/gcc-4.8.x with '-O3 -march=bdver2' misscompiles glibc-2.17/crypt/sha512.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866 --- Comment #10 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2013-04-17 20:15:47 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) How to proceed? Derive a stand-alone test case from the failing glibc module and whatever glibc code it requires, then

[Bug ada/56909] [4.8 regression] s-atopri.adb:multiple undefined references on mingw32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56909 Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug ada/56909] [4.8 regression] s-atopri.adb:multiple undefined references on mingw32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56909 --- Comment #14 from Arthur Zhang mail2arthur at gmail dot com 2013-04-17 21:02:14 UTC --- (In reply to comment #13) What is the benefit to use '--build=i686-pc-mingw32' than '--with-arch=i686'? It doesn't force -march=i686 by

[Bug target/56866] gcc 4.7.x/gcc-4.8.x with '-O3 -march=bdver2' misscompiles glibc-2.17/crypt/sha512.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866 --- Comment #11 from Winfried Magerl winfried.mag...@t-online.de 2013-04-17 21:02:38 UTC --- Hi Mike, On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 08:15:47PM +, mikpe at it dot uu.se wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866

[Bug c/56989] wrong location in error message

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56989 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug ada/56909] [4.8 regression] s-atopri.adb:multiple undefined references on mingw32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56909 --- Comment #15 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 21:35:54 UTC --- Why below output has '-march=pentiumpro'? I think it's the autodetected arch, but maybe I'm confused. Never mind.

[Bug target/56866] gcc 4.7.x/gcc-4.8.x with '-O3 -march=bdver2' misscompiles glibc-2.17/crypt/sha512.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866 --- Comment #12 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-17 21:49:15 UTC --- (In reply to comment #11) If fixing broken gcc's XOP/FMA/FMA4-extensions on AMD-CPUs depends on my ability to extract a stand-alone-test from

[Bug rtl-optimization/56847] [4.8/4.9 Regression] '-fpie' triggers - internal compiler error: in gen_add2_insn, at optabs.c:4705

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56847 --- Comment #8 from Han Shen shenhan at google dot com 2013-04-17 23:42:22 UTC --- Hi, any progress on this? Thanks!

[Bug c/56992] New: building Wine with -Og causes GCC to seg fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56992 Bug #: 56992 Summary: building Wine with -Og causes GCC to seg fault Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/56992] building Wine with -Og causes GCC to seg fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56992 --- Comment #1 from James Eder jimportal at gmail dot com 2013-04-17 23:47:39 UTC --- Created attachment 29892 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29892 testcase-min.c

[Bug target/56993] New: power gcc built 416.gamess generates wrong result

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56993 Bug #: 56993 Summary: power gcc built 416.gamess generates wrong result Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/56982] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Bad optimization with setjmp()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56982 --- Comment #10 from Leif Leonhardy bugfeed at online dot de 2013-04-18 01:17:31 UTC --- One proposed requirement on setjmp is that it be usable like any other function, that is, that it be callable in *any* expression context, and that

[Bug fortran/56981] Slow I/O: Unformatted 5x slower, large sys component; formatted slow as well

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56981 --- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-18 01:21:42 UTC --- I like Jannes idea with the flags. Also, it seems that at the time we open a file we know it is /dev/null or /dev/nul in some cases by the file

[Bug c/56682] -fsanitize documentation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56682 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-18 01:58:03 UTC --- -fsanitize=thread I think it requires -fPIE but really it should not.

[Bug fortran/56994] New: Incorrect documentation for Fortran NEAREST intrinsic function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56994 Bug #: 56994 Summary: Incorrect documentation for Fortran NEAREST intrinsic function Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: