redriver jiang jiang.redri...@gmail.com writes:
Hi,
You mean I should define insn like this:
(define_insn *iorqi3_imm
[(set (mem:QI (match_operand:HI 0 register_operand b))
(ior:QI (mem:QI (match_operand:HI 1 register_operand b)
(mem:QI (plus: HI
Dennis Clarke dcla...@blastwave.org writes:
FYI , bug 44455 is a show stopper in the Solaris world.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44455
This is
bootstrap/44455 GCC fails to build if MPFR 3.0.0 (Release Candidate) is used
Why would this be a showstopper? Who forces you to
Mark Mitchell m...@codesourcery.com writes:
I believe that the only real fix here is (a) for the FSF to abandon the
GFDL, and relicense manuals under the GPL, or (b) for the FSF to add an
exception to the GFDL, making it compatible with the GPL in some way.
However, I have no evidence that
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov ma...@codesourcery.com wrote:
index 89743c3..047b717 100644
--- a/gcc/sched-rgn.c
+++ b/gcc/sched-rgn.c
@@ -2935,6 +2935,9 @@ schedule_region (int rgn)
if (sched_is_disabled_for_current_region_p ())
return;
+ gcc_assert
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Joern Rennecke wrote:
Quoting Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
That diff does not appear to relate to undefined behavior. GCC considers
these out-of-range conversions to yield an unspecified value, possibly
raising an exception, as per Annex F, and does not
Joern Rennecke wrote:
Quoting Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com:
Using the ieee-sf.S + this patch
OK
Is this only a proof-of-concept, because you only change the ne[sd]f2
implementation?
I changed also the unordered comparison patterns. (cmpunsf_i1,
cmpundf_i1). But yes, the
Hello,
I am interested to attend GCC summit this year, but it doesn't seem
to happen, does it?
Cheers,
Bingfeng
Bingfeng Mei b...@broadcom.com writes:
I am interested to attend GCC summit this year, but it doesn't seem
to happen, does it?
It is reportedly being held in the last week of October this year.
Ian
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Bingfeng Mei b...@broadcom.com wrote:
Hello,
I am interested to attend GCC summit this year, but it doesn't seem
to happen, does it?
Well - past attendees got date location confirmation like
The Summit will be in Ottawa from October 25th to 27th, you should
Joern Rennecke joern.renne...@embecosm.com wrote:
That's a bug, then; we shouldn't use a library function there,
but the cmpordered[sd]f_t_4 patterns.
Argh, I've missed the required patterns are incorporated already
in your patch. I'll test it again with sh-softfp-predicate-fix
when the
Dennis Clarke dcla...@blastwave.org writes:
FYI , bug 44455 is a show stopper in the Solaris world.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44455
This is
bootstrap/44455 GCC fails to build if MPFR 3.0.0 (Release Candidate) is
used
Why would this be a showstopper? Who forces
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Dennis Clarke dcla...@blastwave.org writes:
FYI , bug 44455 is a show stopper in the Solaris world.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44455
This is
bootstrap/44455 GCC fails to build if MPFR 3.0.0 (Release Candidate) is
used
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
I believe that the only real fix here is (a) for the FSF to abandon the
GFDL, and relicense manuals under the GPL, or (b) for the FSF to add an
exception to the GFDL, making it compatible with the GPL in some way.
However, I have no evidence that the FSF is considering
Mark Mitchell m...@codesourcery.com writes:
Do you think we should just ask the FSF to dual-license all of GCC?
Sure, it might at least be worth finding out whether they think there is
any problem with that.
Ian
If I go back and rebuild gmp mpfr and mpc thus :
GMP: include 5.0.1, lib 5.0.1
MPFR: include 3.0.0-p3, lib 3.0.0-p3
MPC: include 0.8.2, lib 0.8.2
Use GMP from the 4.2.x series and MPFR from the 2.3.x series. Or do
not build these libraries in-tree.
I built and tested them separate.
--
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Do you think we should just ask the FSF to dual-license all of GCC?
Sure, it might at least be worth finding out whether they think there is
any problem with that.
I've asked on the SC list.
Thanks,
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
m...@codesourcery.com
(650)
On Jul 23, 2010, at 9:37 AM, Dennis Clarke dcla...@blastwave.org
wrote:
If I go back and rebuild gmp mpfr and mpc thus :
GMP: include 5.0.1, lib 5.0.1
MPFR: include 3.0.0-p3, lib 3.0.0-p3
MPC: include 0.8.2, lib 0.8.2
Use GMP from the 4.2.x series and MPFR from the 2.3.x series. Or
GMP: include 5.0.1, lib 5.0.1
MPFR: include 3.0.0-p3, lib 3.0.0-p3
MPC: include 0.8.2, lib 0.8.2
Use GMP from the 4.2.x series and MPFR from the 2.3.x series. Or do
not build these libraries in-tree.
I built and tested them separate.
You forgot to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
That is
On Jul 23, 2010, at 9:58 AM, Dennis Clarke dcla...@blastwave.org
wrote:
GMP: include 5.0.1, lib 5.0.1
MPFR: include 3.0.0-p3, lib 3.0.0-p3
MPC: include 0.8.2, lib 0.8.2
Use GMP from the 4.2.x series and MPFR from the 2.3.x series. Or
do
not build these libraries in-tree.
I built
On Jul 23, 2010, at 9:58 AM, Dennis Clarke dcla...@blastwave.org
wrote:
GMP: include 5.0.1, lib 5.0.1
MPFR: include 3.0.0-p3, lib 3.0.0-p3
MPC: include 0.8.2, lib 0.8.2
Use GMP from the 4.2.x series and MPFR from the 2.3.x series. Or
do
not build these libraries in-tree.
I built and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi.
I'm sorry if I chose wrong place for my question.
I would like to load debugger, attach to working process, and at some
breakpoint, instead of numerical values in the CPU registers, I would
like to see genesis of each value like result of f(arg1,
Richard Guenther wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010, Dennis Clarke wrote:
GMP: include 4.3.2, lib 4.3.2
MPFR: include 3.0.0-p3, lib 3.0.0-p3
MPC: include 0.8.2, lib 0.8.2
fails,
Richard recommends:
Use GMP from the 4.2.x series and MPFR from the 2.3.x series. Or do
not build these libraries
Richard Guenther wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010, Dennis Clarke wrote:
GMP: include 4.3.2, lib 4.3.2
MPFR: include 3.0.0-p3, lib 3.0.0-p3
MPC: include 0.8.2, lib 0.8.2
fails,
Richard recommends:
Use GMP from the 4.2.x series and MPFR from the 2.3.x series. Or do
not build these
Dennis Clarke wrote:
I wrote:
[ You can't imagine the pain working with a 1.5 year old OS ]
Have you seen Solaris 8 ?
[titan]uname -a
SunOS titan 5.8 Generic_127722-03 i86pc i386 i86pc
[titan]cat /etc/release
Solaris 8 2/02 s28x_u7wos_08a INTEL
Use GMP from the 4.2.x series and MPFR from the 2.3.x series. Or do
not build these libraries in-tree.
Yes, and verify that GMP and MPFR are correctly compiled with make check.
Recent versions are miscompiled on SPARC/Solaris by GCC 4.3.x for x 3 or 4.
The recommended versions (GMP 4.3.2,
Use GMP from the 4.2.x series and MPFR from the 2.3.x series. Or do
not build these libraries in-tree.
Yes, and verify that GMP and MPFR are correctly compiled with
make check. Recent versions are miscompiled on SPARC/Solaris
by GCC 4.3.x for x 3 or 4.
The recommended versions (GMP
=== gcc Summary ===
# of expected passes57009
# of unexpected failures67
# of unexpected successes 7
# of expected failures 197
# of unsupported tests 518
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes
=== gcc Summary ===
# of expected passes57009
# of unexpected failures67
# of unexpected successes 7
# of expected failures 197
# of unsupported tests 518
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes
Äú ºÃ £¡
±¾¹«Ë¾ÏÖÓи÷ÐÐÒµ¹ú/µØË°
ÔöÖµ¡£ÆÕͨ¡£½¨Öþ£¬¹ã¸æ¡£·þÎñ¡£¹¤³Ì¡£ÔËÊäµÈа淢 Øâ ´ú¿ª ¿ÉÓúø¶¿î ´¹Ñ¯µç»°
13528406753 ÁõÉú
--- Comment #3 from swapnil dot tiwari1979 at gmail dot com 2010-07-23
06:33 ---
this problem is not occuring with gcc-4.2 using any arm toolchain
but this occurs with the latest gcc version 4.4.1 why is so.
(In reply to comment #1)
Can you reproduce this with GCC built using sources
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 07:42 ---
This isn't a mere debug info quality regression, a movl $2, (%esp) is now
optimized away, eventhough it is needed by asm volatile following it.
Here is a testcase that at -O1 -m32 now fails at runtime, while it
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |steven at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #11 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 08:40 ---
Subject: Bug 45019
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Jul 23 08:40:00 2010
New Revision: 162448
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162448
Log:
2010-07-23 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de
PR
--- Comment #37 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2010-07-23 08:43 ---
(In reply to comment #31)
Please refrain from fiddling with the bug status: whoever does the backport
will
do this himself.
Thanks.
Rainer
I have no interest in your posts and have marked your emails to me as
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 08:49 ---
Mine. IPA-CP makes us produce
MEM[(unnamed-signed:64[0:] * restrict)C.3242][__result_find52_49]
but nobody folds this (C.3242 is constant zero) because the access is likely
undefined.
--
rguenth at gcc dot
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 08:51 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 08:55 ---
PR 44709 comment 0 contains a small test case, which also applies here.
(That PR fixed exit loop_label in BLOCK and try-finally cleanup in BLOCK.)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44602
--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 08:58 ---
Somehow managed to make a mistake in the merge for the case that x_addr is
non-NULL.
Index: alias.c
===
--- alias.c (revision 162430)
+++ alias.c
--- Comment #23 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE 2010-07-23
08:59 ---
Subject: Re: [4.6 regression] ICE building 64-bit libjava on Solaris 2/SPARC:
output_operand: invalid expression as operand
The sparc-sun-solaris2.10 bootstrap completed successfully with your
patch and
--- Comment #12 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 09:52 ---
Fixed on the trunk and the 4.4 branch. Waiting for 4.5.1 release to apply for
4.5.2 (delay requested by RM as there is already a 4.5.1rc1).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45019
--- Comment #6 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 09:53 ---
Subject: Bug 44709
Author: domob
Date: Fri Jul 23 09:53:45 2010
New Revision: 162450
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162450
Log:
2010-07-23 Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu
PR fortran/44709
--- Comment #7 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 09:55 ---
Fixed.
--
domob at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 10:15 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 10:15 ---
Subject: Bug 45037
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jul 23 10:15:27 2010
New Revision: 162451
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162451
Log:
2010-07-23 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
PR
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 10:25 ---
Reduced testcase:
struct JSContext;
struct JSObject;
class WorkerHooks {
virtual JSObject *newGlobalObject(JSContext *cx) = 0;
};
int
shell(JSContext *cx, int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
{
class
/home/segher/buildall-4.5.1-RC1/score/gcc/./gcc/xgcc
-B/home/segher/buildall-4.5.1-RC1/score/gcc/./gcc/
-B/n/10/segher/cross-4.5.1-rc1/score-elf/bin/
-B/n/10/segher/cross-4.5.1-rc1/score-elf/lib/ -isystem
/n/10/segher/cross-4.5.1-rc1/score-elf/include -isystem
--- Comment #1 from segher at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 10:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=21292)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21292action=view)
preprocessed source code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45040
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Summary|ICE in cselib_record_set|[4.5
--- Comment #3 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-07-23 11:11
---
(In reply to comment #1)
const int i; -fno-zero-initialized-in-bss - .bss= FAIL
You need -fno-common also to get it out of the BSS.
-fno-common now at least correctly reports:
echo 'const int
--- Comment #2 from segher at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:19 ---
Without -mscore3, it fails with:
libgcc2.i:1:0: internal compiler error: in score_hard_regno_mode_ok, at
config/score/score.c:434
--
segher at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:20 ---
Confirmed. But I think this might trigger undefined behavior according to
the C standard as you are doing
v.e.b = v.d.b;
which has overlapping lhs/rhs. And we end up with
rp:
.LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:24 ---
Created an attachment (id=21293)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21293action=view)
Draft patch
Draft patch. I was wondering whether one needs to take care of
(a) use names in case of use
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:36 ---
We still need to deal with it in the middle-end. I have a patch.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:40 ---
Hm, no. I think tree-nrv.c is correct. I was playing with
Index: gcc/tree-nrv.c
===
--- gcc/tree-nrv.c (revision 162450)
+++ gcc/tree-nrv.c
--- Comment #34 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:41
---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:47 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:48 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:48 ---
*** Bug 45040 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43437
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:48 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 43437 ***
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:50 ---
I don't see the failure anymore.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:52 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:52 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:53
---
This seems fixed?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:55 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:56
---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from segher at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:57 ---
Liqin, could you look at this please?
--
segher at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 11:58
---
Invalid. (alt source works)
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:01 ---
Probably related. Honza?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:02 ---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:04 ---
CCing another IA64 maintainer.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
Priority|P3 |P5
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:05 ---
Ping?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44691
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:06 ---
Fixed?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44701
For a while, the autoconf testsuite failed on cygwin, because asking gcc to run
the preprocessor with an explicit output of '-' for stdout instead created a
text file ./-.exe containing the preprocessor output [1].
While the autoconf workaround was simple (remove '-o -' since -E already
implies a
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:10 ---
Failure is gone.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:11 ---
Failure is gone.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:13 ---
Failure is gone.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:14
---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:21 ---
Patch can be backported and tested. But since 4.5 is frozen right now, needs RM
permission.
Adding RM to CC.
cheers
Ramana
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #8 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-23 12:22 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Fixed?
No, the test case itself needs a fix too. Jakub posted it to gcc-patches, but
it was never approved AFAIK and is still not applied.
--
--- Comment #16 from rguenther at suse dot de 2010-07-23 12:27 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5/4.6 Regression] Wrong use of ARMv6 REV
instruction for endian bytewapping with -Os or -O2 optimizations
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010, ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #15 from ramana at
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:28
---
I was getting back to this and noticed that we no longer ICE on the original
test case. I suppose then this has become an accepts invalid or there is
something not being initialized and the behavior is random.
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:35 ---
Confirmed. We end up vectorizing
void
foo (int *a, int n)
{
int *lasta = a + n;
for (; a != lasta; a++)
{
*a *= 2;
a[1] = a[-1] + a[-2];
}
}
not seeing the dependence of *a vs a[-1]
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:37
---
This bug is no longer about bootstrap failure. Which is fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:40 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] IPA-split
causes crash due to null pointer deref
CDDCE removes the single store in the loop but doesn't remove the virtual
PHI nodes. But you
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:50 ---
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x00a293b1 in gimple_default_def (fn=0x77ee1480,
var=0x77edb880) at /space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/tree-dfa.c:538
538 return (tree)
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 12:56 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 13:15 ---
(In reply to comment #15)
This seems fixed?
well certainly not for 32 bit versions:
as of r162456 (i686) just tested locally and...
... ppc (162433) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-07/msg02130.html
--
--- Comment #8 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 13:17 ---
Test fails on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On Linux/ia32, revision 162447 gave
cc1: warnings being treated as errors
../../src-trunk/lto-plugin/lto-plugin.c: In function 'translate':
../../src-trunk/lto-plugin/lto-plugin.c:215: error: format '%lu' expects type
'long unsigned int', but argument 5 has type 'int'
make[6]: *** [lto-plugin.lo]
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-07-23 13:20 ---
It is caused by revision 162443:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg00797.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45042
--- Comment #35 from justinmattock at gmail dot com 2010-07-23 13:26
---
yep.. although I did hit something similar while building the staging drivers
for the kernel. but keep in mind this could be fixed already with the latest
gcc.
(I can try and see, but first need to finish up on a
--- Comment #7 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 13:51 ---
Subject: Bug 43016
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jul 23 13:51:12 2010
New Revision: 162458
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162458
Log:
PR c++/43016
PR c++/45008
* decl.c
--- Comment #7 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 13:51 ---
Subject: Bug 45008
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jul 23 13:51:12 2010
New Revision: 162458
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162458
Log:
PR c++/43016
PR c++/45008
* decl.c
--- Comment #8 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 13:51 ---
Fixed for 4.5.1. Thanks for tracking down the patch that fixed it on the
trunk!
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 13:54 ---
Subject: Bug 45008
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jul 23 13:54:01 2010
New Revision: 162459
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162459
Log:
PR c++/45008
* g++.dg/abi/mangle44.C: New.
Added:
--- Comment #4 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 14:00 ---
I have submitted a proposed fix to the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-07/msg01859.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44915
Command line:
$ g++ testcase.C
- testcase.C -
template typename class A;
template typename T A T ::B::~B ()
{}
--
Compiler output:
$ g++ testcase.C
testcase.C:2:25: error: 'A template-parameter-1-1 ::B' is not a type
testcase.C:2:41: internal compiler error: tree
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 14:26 ---
Subject: Bug 24524
Author: pault
Date: Fri Jul 23 14:25:55 2010
New Revision: 162462
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162462
Log:
2009-07-23 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR
1 - 100 of 158 matches
Mail list logo
