--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-15 01:43
---
Subject: Bug 27489
Author: pinskia
Date: Tue Aug 15 01:43:28 2006
New Revision: 116148
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=116148
Log:
2006-07-14 Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-14 02:29
---
Testing the patch right now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27489
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-30 06:08 ---
Mine, I will bootstrap and test my patch tomorrow (Friday).
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-04 17:16 ---
The patch in comment#2 is OK for 4.1 and mainline with the change to comparing
expr2 == error_mark_node, provided the testcases from this bug and bug 27490
are added to the testsuite.
Regarding that referenced in
--- Comment #7 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-25 02:34
---
Will not be fixed in 4.1.1; adjust target milestone to 4.1.2.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from reichelt at igpm dot rwth-aachen dot de 2006-05-15
14:31 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 regression] ICE on broken switch condition
On 14 May, mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-14 22:35
---
Is
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27489
--- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-14 22:35
---
Is there a URL for the patch posted for this bug?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27489
--- Comment #4 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-10 16:49 ---
Assigning to Volker as he posted a patch.
--
kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-09 08:03 ---
Confirmed. The compound_expr should not have been created as the RHS is an
error mark nodes. Fixing that should fix this one without adding a new error
mark check this far done.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-09 08:11 ---
Doing this:
Index: c-typeck.c
===
--- c-typeck.c (revision 113594)
+++ c-typeck.c (working copy)
@@ -3379,6 +3379,9 @@ build_compound_expr (tree
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-09 08:18 ---
This was caused by the new parser doing a little better error recovery (or at
least trying to).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27489
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.1
13 matches
Mail list logo
