[Bug c/40143] New: -ftrapv fails to generate signal for overflows in int multiplication on x86-64

2009-05-14 Thread dickinsm at gmail dot com
Product: gcc Version: 4.4.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: dickinsm at gmail dot com GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40143

[Bug c/44683] New: Optimization bug with copysign builtin

2010-06-26 Thread dickinsm at gmail dot com
-lgcc_eh /usr/local/lib/gcc/i386-pc-solaris2.11/4.4.4/amd64/crtend.o /usr/lib/amd64/crtn.o ld: Software Generation Utilities - Solaris Link Editors: 5.11-1.1689 -- Summary: Optimization bug with copysign builtin Product: gcc Version: 4.4.4 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: dickinsm at gmail dot com GCC build triplet: i386-pc-solaris2.11 GCC host triplet: i386-pc-solaris2.11 GCC target triplet: i386-pc-solaris2.11 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44683

[Bug c/44683] Optimization bug with copysign builtin

2010-06-26 Thread dickinsm at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from dickinsm at gmail dot com 2010-06-26 17:01 --- Created an attachment (id=21012) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21012&action=view) Preprocessed source file -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44683

[Bug c/44683] Optimization bug with copysign builtin

2010-06-26 Thread dickinsm at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from dickinsm at gmail dot com 2010-06-26 18:16 --- I'm also seeing this bug in gcc 4.5.0 on OS X, and it's been independently confirmed in gcc 4.4.3 on Fedora 12 (see http://bugs.python.org/issue9069). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44683

[Bug c/44683] Optimization bug with copysign builtin

2010-06-26 Thread dickinsm at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from dickinsm at gmail dot com 2010-06-26 18:26 --- Apologies; I seem to have messed up the original bug report, by accidentally pasting a slightly edited version of the original bug file. The minimal test-case is as follows: #include #include int copysign_bug

[Bug c/37714] Sign of sin(-0.0) depends on optimization level

2009-08-29 Thread dickinsm at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from dickinsm at gmail dot com 2009-08-29 07:05 --- A quick note for anyone else who comes across this: this libm bug is fixed in Snow Leopard (darwin 10). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37714

[Bug c/37714] New: Sign of sin(-0.0) depends on optimization level

2008-10-02 Thread dickinsm at gmail dot com
double gamma ( double ); extern int matherr ( struct exception * ); extern double significand ( double ); extern double drem ( double, double ); # 29 "/usr/include/math.h" 2 3 4 # 3 "main.c" 2 typedef struct { double real; double imag; } my_complex; static my_comple

[Bug c/37714] Sign of sin(-0.0) depends on optimization level

2008-10-02 Thread dickinsm at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from dickinsm at gmail dot com 2008-10-02 14:34 --- Thanks for the response! It does appear to be true that cexp doesn't follow Annex G of C99, on OS X 10.5.5. I agree that this is undesirable, but I can't see why it should be considered a bug. Annex G of C99

[Bug c/37714] Sign of sin(-0.0) depends on optimization level

2008-10-02 Thread dickinsm at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from dickinsm at gmail dot com 2008-10-02 15:53 --- Makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. I'll go and file a bug with Apple. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37714