--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 07:03 ---
Using a copy constructor and returning by value is of limited
applicability. Having to invoke a copy constructor to simulate a
post rvalue operation is not an option for objects that do not support
copy, and
--- Comment #11 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-04-22 07:25 ---
Subject: Bug number PR30957
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01378.html
--
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
Hello there,
I just tried to compile Linux kernel 2.6.20.7 with the
GNU C compiler 4.3 snapshot 20070420.
It said
drivers/w1/w1.c: In function 'w1_slave_read_id':
drivers/w1/w1.c:118: error: cannot take address of bit-field 'family'
drivers/w1/w1.c:118: error: cannot take address of bit-field
--- Comment #1 from dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2007-04-22 09:08 ---
Created an attachment (id=13414)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13414action=view)
C source code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31654
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 09:10 ---
*** Bug 31654 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 09:10 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 31541 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
src/p_translate.c:268: warning: passing argument 2 of âstrmncpyâ discards
qualifiers from pointer target type
src/p_translate.c:270: warning: passing argument 2 of âstrmncpyâ discards
qualifiers from pointer target type
src/p_translate.c:279: warning: passing argument 2 of âstrmncpyâ discards
--- Comment #1 from coolbit at rootsp dot com 2007-04-22 09:23 ---
src/p_translate.c:54: warning: passing argument 3 of â__pmallocâ discards
qualifiers from pointer target type
src/p_translate.c:66: warning: passing argument 3 of â__pmallocâ discards
qualifiers from pointer target type
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 09:34 ---
Can you explain why you think these warnings are incorrect?
Also do you have the preprocessed source for this code.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31655
--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 10:10 ---
Waiting for feedback, so bug is WAITING.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-04-22 10:35 ---
Subject: Bug number PR diagnostic/25923
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01388.html
--
--- Comment #4 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-04-22 11:13 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
In fact, the problem cannot be reproduced on ia64, with current mainline.
I tried revision 123217, just a few revisions before C++/30500. Glad to
hear it's no longer there.
--
Left shift of width 32, 33, 64, 65 etc produces inconsistencies.
const int j = 33;
printf(%d\n, 1 j);
Output:
0
int j = 33;
printf(%d\n, 1 j);
Output:
2
Same with C. Runtime shift instruction emmitted incorrectly.
--
Summary: Left shift error
Product: gcc
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 12:19 ---
No, this code is undefined by both the C and C++ standards.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 12:27 ---
Subject: Bug 29789
Author: rguenth
Date: Sun Apr 22 12:26:49 2007
New Revision: 124042
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=124042
Log:
2007-04-22 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
1)
if (X (1 a))
if (X (1 b))
should be combined to
tmp = (1 a) | (1 b)
if (X tmp == tmp)
2)
if (X a)
goto doit;
else
if (X b)
goto doit
doit:
(i.e. the CFG form of (X a || X b))
should be combined to
if (X (a | b))
goto doit
The first
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 12:35 ---
Fixed. The combining the bit-test issue is split to PR31657.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 12:49 ---
Loop header copying allows dom to duplicate the latch and thus we can now
eliminate the NotFound check:
;; Function t (t)
t (l, y)
{
int i;
bb 2:
o ();
if (l 0) goto L15; else goto L4;
L15:;
i = 0;
--- Comment #17 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 13:19
---
This looks fixed - we eliminate the tail recursion for Fib(n-1).
/usr/bin/time /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.5.0-sun-1.5.0.11/jre/bin/java Fib
267914296
3.97user 0.02system 0:04.02elapsed 99%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata
--- Comment #12 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-22
17:47 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_date/wchar_t/4.cc execution test
--- Comment #11 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-04-02 10:32 ---
Ok, therefore we cannot consider anymore the issue
--- Comment #6 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 17:50 ---
I believe that this bug should not be RESOLVED/INVALID at least until a C++
front end maintainer has looked at it.
--
drow at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-04-22 17:50 ---
And you are volunteering to fix the testsuite issue, right? ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31413
--- Comment #5 from hayward at loup dot net 2007-04-22 16:37 ---
Subject: Re: postfix increment semantics implemented incorrectly
Why do you say could blow the stack, the C++ standard actually mentions an
optimization where the copy constructored is removed and there is no extra
--- Comment #14 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-22
18:17 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_date/wchar_t/4.cc execution test
--- Comment #13 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-04-22 17:50 ---
And you are volunteering to fix the testsuite
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 18:18 ---
13.5.1/1 explains that:
@x is the same as operator@(x) or x.operator@() [depending on if x has a member
function for operator@ or not] .
So:
a = b++; is the exactly the same as:
a = b.operator++(0);
so function
--- Comment #15 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-04-22 18:20 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
No, I know nothing about locales and I've got lot's of real PA bugs
to investigate. I just got lucky finding the origin of this bug.
Everything that affects x86 gets fixed, right? ;)
--- Comment #5 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-04-22 18:20 ---
Subject: Bug number PR31532
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01415.html
--
--- Comment #3 from tbm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 18:23 ---
Confirmed, still there as of 4.1.3 20070420.
--
tbm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-04-22 18:24 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
I'm not aware of an easy way to check for Debian linux and its glibc
version. So, the only fix that I can see is to check in the testcase
for U897FU5143 and change wstr accordingly.
It would
--- Comment #4 from tbm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 18:27 ---
isn't this a duplicate of 29443?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30472
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 18:29 ---
*** Bug 30472 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 18:29 ---
Indeed.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 29443 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|4.2.0 |4.1.2 4.2.0
Known to work||3.3.3
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 18:39 ---
So, fixed. Since 4.1 actually.
No, the example in comment #2 is not fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 18:49 ---
Subject: Re: postfix increment semantics implemented
incorrectly
On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 05:18:09PM -, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
13.5.1/1 explains that:
@x is the same as operator@(x) or
--
eedelman at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |eedelman at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #9 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 18:49
---
Daniel asked me to look at this issue.
Andrew is correct:
b = a++;
is exactly equivalent to:
b = a.operator++(0);
It is completely up to the operator to implement the postfix semantics; it's
just a
--- Comment #6 from jbglaw at lug-owl dot de 2007-04-22 18:54 ---
This was introduced (or the effect came up) with the inline rewriting at
r120835.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30563
--- Comment #9 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 19:45 ---
Subject: Bug 24659
Author: uros
Date: Sun Apr 22 19:45:06 2007
New Revision: 124045
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=124045
Log:
2007-04-22 Uros Bizjak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #10 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-04-22 20:08 ---
float-double and double-float conversions are new vectorized. For a slightly
different test:
--cut here--
void test_fp (float *a, double *b)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i 4; i++)
b[i] = (double) a[i];
}
void
--- Comment #11 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-04-22 20:10 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
float-double and double-float conversions are new vectorized. For a slightly
different test:
The test is actually:
--cut here--
float a[16];
int b[16];
double c[16];
void test_fd (void)
{
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 20:24
---
Created an attachment (id=13425)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13425action=view)
Patch to improve read-sf
This patch knocks read_sf off the profile. Thats a start.
--
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 21:18
---
Created an attachment (id=13426)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13426action=view)
Modified patch for further improvement
This modified patch, gets the time for the test case on my system from
/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc -B/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc
-nos
tdinc++ -L/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/src
-L/test/gn
u/gcc/objdir/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/src/.libs
-B/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.3
.0/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11/bin/
--- Comment #1 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 21:53 ---
This was probably introduced by this change:
2006-01-04 Dalibor Topic [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* configure.ac: Added AX_CREATE_STDINT_H
* include/Makefile.am (DISTCLEANFILES): Remove config-int.h.
--- Comment #6 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-04-22 22:05 ---
Subject: Bug number PR31620
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01431.html
--
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 22:05 ---
I just posted a patch.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 22:09
---
Created an attachment (id=13427)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13427action=view)
Refinement on the previous, using macros
With this patch I replaced is_array_io, is_internal_unit, and
--- Comment #7 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-04-22 22:10 ---
Subject: Bug number PR 31618
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01432.html
--
gcc -c -g -fkeep-inline-functions -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings
-Wstrict
-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -fno-common -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -Iada
-I.
./../gcc/gcc -I../../gcc/gcc/ada -I../../gcc/gcc/../include
-I../../gcc/gcc/../l
ibcpp/include -I../../gcc/gcc/../libdecnumber
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 23:33 ---
Mine, patch in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01390.html
Just have not got around to committing it yet.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #8 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-04-22 23:40 ---
Subject: Bug number PR31501
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01439.html
--
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-22
23:42 ---
Subject: Re: config-int.h:327:1: error: INT8_MIN redefined
I'm testing the attached fix.
Dave
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-22
23:42 ---
Created an
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-22
23:46 ---
Subject: Re: New: TRUE or FALSE defined
I'm testing the attached fix. platform.h needs to be included before
javaprims.h. platform.h includes gcj/cni.h.
Dave
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1
--- Comment #6 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-23 00:20
---
Indeed fixed.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-23 02:13 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-23 02:13 ---
Subject: Bug 31660
Author: pinskia
Date: Mon Apr 23 02:13:36 2007
New Revision: 124052
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=124052
Log:
2007-04-22 Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #5 from mark at codesourcery dot com 2007-04-23 02:19 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] string usage leads
to warning with -Wcast-align
pcarlini at suse dot de wrote:
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-04-22 01:19 ---
In fact, the problem
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-23 02:54 ---
Subject: Bug 31448
Author: pinskia
Date: Mon Apr 23 02:53:56 2007
New Revision: 124054
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=124054
Log:
2007-04-22 Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-23 02:57 ---
Subject: Bug 31448
Author: pinskia
Date: Mon Apr 23 02:57:48 2007
New Revision: 124055
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=124055
Log:
2007-04-22 Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-23 02:59 ---
Subject: Bug 31448
Author: pinskia
Date: Mon Apr 23 02:58:55 2007
New Revision: 124056
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=124056
Log:
2007-04-22 Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-23 02:59 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
hi,
this thread:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2007-04/msg00201.html
details my problems. (duplicated here)
i want to sum an array of longs using mmx. i use the functions:
_mm_set_pi32 and _m_paddd
but the resultant binary contains significantly less efficient code
than inline asm or even
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-23 03:04 ---
the main reason why it is slower is because taking the address messes up the
lots of stuff.
And also MMX is slower because we try not to reload it so this is a target
issue.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
Originally reported at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-04/msg00539.html,
bootstrap fails with a redefinition error for the macro _EXFUN.
In file included from ../../../gcc/libjava/classpath/native/fdlibm/fdlibm.h:29,
from ../../../gcc/libjava/java/lang/natVMDouble.cc:27:
--- Comment #5 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-23 05:58 ---
Patch posted here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01457.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31616
67 matches
Mail list logo
