[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

2016-03-31 Thread nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 --- Comment #11 from Nathan Sidwell --- Applied to gcc-5 branch r234653.

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

2016-03-31 Thread nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 --- Comment #10 from Nathan Sidwell --- Author: nathan Date: Thu Mar 31 20:51:20 2016 New Revision: 234653 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234653=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/70393 * varasm.c (output_constructor_regular_field):

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

2016-03-31 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely --- Should it be fixed on gcc-5-branch too?

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

2016-03-31 Thread nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

2016-03-31 Thread nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 --- Comment #7 from Nathan Sidwell --- Author: nathan Date: Thu Mar 31 15:30:33 2016 New Revision: 234636 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234636=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/70393 * varasm.c (output_constructor_regular_field): Flush

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

2016-03-29 Thread nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

2016-03-24 Thread nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 --- Comment #6 from Nathan Sidwell --- Indeed, manually editing the assembly to such an initializer results in a working program. The CONSTRUCTOR created for ab's DECL_INITIAL has the correct things in it, but in declaration order. I.e. it

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

2016-03-24 Thread nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

2016-03-24 Thread ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

2016-03-24 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Yeah, that was with -std=c++0x. With -std=c++1y it started one revision earlier (r217663).

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

2016-03-24 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

2016-03-24 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code