--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-15 09:03
---
Fixed on mainline.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-15 08:59
---
Subject: Bug 18817
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Sep 15 08:59:02 2006
New Revision: 116964
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=116964
Log:
PR ada/18817
* utils.c (max_size): Perfo
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-05 14:06
---
Investigating Roger's patch again:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-05/msg01249.html
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #6 from laurent at guerby dot net 2006-03-05 11:10 ---
Still fails as of 4.2.0 20060304
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18817
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-20
15:29 ---
Until after it is removed from the norun.lst file.
--
What|Removed |Added
Sta
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-01-14 12:10
---
Note that this test has been deactivated vi testsuite/ada/acats/norun.lst
so it doesn't show up in testresults anymore.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18817
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-09
19:01 ---
Confirmed, via the testsuite run and moving to minor as this is a off in left
field case.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-01-07 21:17
---
>From Robert Dewar:
<<
we should probably just reject such a large array of entries as being
a capacity limitation. It's plain silly to spend time on this :-)
>>
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?i
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2004-12-23 21:53
---
Richard Kenner in:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-12/msg01832.html
<<
Note that C380004 "doesn't count" and should be made a XFAIL because it
raises a complex implementation issue with arrays of protecte
