------- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-29 14:20 ------- The only expected fails left should now be
FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34989-1.c (internal compiler error) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34989-1.c (internal compiler error) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34989-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34989-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/struct/wo_prof_double_malloc.c (internal compiler error) FAIL: gcc.dg/struct/wo_prof_double_malloc.c (internal compiler error) FAIL: gcc.dg/struct/wo_prof_double_malloc.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/struct/wo_prof_double_malloc.c (test for excess errors) all --combine ones, and FAIL: libgomp.c++/task-4.C -O (internal compiler error) FAIL: libgomp.c++/task-4.C -O (internal compiler error) FAIL: libgomp.c++/task-4.C -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: libgomp.c++/task-4.C -O (test for excess errors) a bug wrt missing gimplification of VLA array type bounds. This bug is now very confusing (as are all "revision blabla caused many regression" bugs). I will open two new bugs for the above and close this one. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39932
