On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 02:34:27AM +, Dave Korn wrote:
On 08/12/2010 18:40, Andi Kleen wrote:
Fat LTO is just too slow. I suspect with that kind of performance
penalty most people simply would not use it at all.
How slow is too slow? How many people out of a hundred won't use it?
Hello,
I am trying your plugin to to warn about surplus includes:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-05/msg00418.html
I have some problems compiling against gcc v4.5.1.
~/local/gcc-4.5.1/bin/g++ -I`~/local/gcc-4.5.1/bin/gcc
-print-file-name=plugin`/include -fPIC -shared -O2 rm_includes.cpp -o
Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de writes:
The branch remains frozen and all checkins until after the final release
of GCC 4.5.2 require explicit RM approval.
I'd like to get the following three testsuite-only patches into the
branch if possible:
[v3] Don't create unlinkable 64-bit
On Thu, 9 Dec 2010, Rainer Orth wrote:
Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de writes:
The branch remains frozen and all checkins until after the final release
of GCC 4.5.2 require explicit RM approval.
I'd like to get the following three testsuite-only patches into the
branch if possible:
Michalis Giannakidis mgiannaki...@gmail.com writes:
I am trying your plugin to to warn about surplus includes:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-05/msg00418.html
You should probably e-mail Bernhard Reutner-Fischer, who wrote the
plugin.
I have some problems compiling against gcc v4.5.1.
Snapshot gcc-4.5-20101209 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.5-20101209/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.5 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
/configure --program-suffix=-4.6 --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.6.0 20101209 (experimental) (GCC)
Thanks,
Nate.
On 10 December 2010 00:40, Nathan Ridge wrote:
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions.
This mailing list is not the right way to report bugs, you should have
followed the instructions in the output you
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 9:36 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 5:54 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:19 AM, Andi Kleen a...@firstfloor.org wrote:
On 12/07/2010 04:20 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
The only problem left is mixing of lto and non
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 6:29 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 9:36 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 5:54 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:19 AM, Andi Kleen a...@firstfloor.org wrote:
On 12/07/2010 04:20 PM,
Hi all,
I'm porting gcc to a MIPS-based DSP, I need write some builtin
func for some insns, but I can't find a doc., any one should help me?
Show me a example please? Thanks very much.
Liu.
On 12/10/2010 02:17 PM, Liu wrote:
Hi all,
I'm porting gcc to a MIPS-based DSP, I need write some builtin
func for some insns, but I can't find a doc., any one should help me?
Show me a example please? Thanks very much.
Liu.
Maybe you should at least implement the following two
2010/12/10 WANG.Jiong wong.kwongy...@gmail.com:
On 12/10/2010 02:17 PM, Liu wrote:
Hi all,
I'm porting gcc to a MIPS-based DSP, I need write some builtin
func for some insns, but I can't find a doc., any one should help me?
Show me a example please? Thanks very much.
Liu.
Maybe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46846
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
08:05:31 UTC ---
Another post by James about REAL:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/991e2a17662a3bde
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45081
--- Comment #16 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
08:09:59 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Thu Dec 9 08:09:52 2010
New Revision: 167627
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=167627
Log:
2010-12-09 Paul Thomas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45081
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.5.2 |4.3.6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41082
--- Comment #70 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
08:33:49 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 9 08:33:45 2010
New Revision: 167629
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=167629
Log:
PR target/41082
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41082
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46853
--- Comment #2 from gcc-bugs at nospam dot pz.podzone.net 2010-12-09 08:36:46
UTC ---
The variable can be optimised away in the WHILE_LOOP test case so in effect the
variable 'foo' is never used uninitialised.
However with the FOR_LOOP test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46854
--- Comment #1 from joakim.tjernlund at transmode dot se joakim.tjernlund at
transmode dot se 2010-12-09 09:10:50 UTC ---
Somewhat related observation:
It would be nice if gcc could optimize
static inline const char *test(int i)
{
const char
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46861
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46753
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46753
--- Comment #7 from Bill Long longb at cray dot com 2010-12-09 10:29:19 UTC
---
I am out of the office until Tuesday, December 21, 2010. Send technical
questions to spsl...@cray.com.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46701
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46384
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||miles at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46701
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46348
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||miles at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46102
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-12-09 10:40:19
UTC ---
GDB gives maybe better backtrace:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
break_out_includes (filename=value optimized out) at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46862
Summary: ICE on std::decimal::decimal32 without any fields
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46861
--- Comment #2 from Jay jay.krell at cornell dot edu 2010-12-09 11:21:35 UTC
---
Right, I already reported: no problem with 4.5.1.
4.2.4 is what Debian 5.0 has though.
I'll stick with my workaround.
I can try 4.3.x, 4.4.x if there is interest
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46842
--- Comment #11 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
11:22:14 UTC ---
I fear that debugging this will be not easy - especially as to my knowledge
none of the gfortran developers has access to SPEC CPU 2006.
* * *
I tried
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46862
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
11:25:08 UTC ---
Not sure if we should error out if a TYPE_TRANSPARENT_AGGR doesn't in the end
have any fields, or simply mangle them normally if first_field returns NULL,
but
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42083
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46861
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
11:43:07 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Right, I already reported: no problem with 4.5.1.
4.2.4 is what Debian 5.0 has though.
Then it should be reported to Debian if
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46863
Summary: [4.6 Regression] Bogus memmove folding (?)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: alias, wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46856
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46720
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46823
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
13:28:32 UTC ---
I could not reproduce the ICE with the ouin.cc source but I did with
a.cc.
So far I have no clue whatsoever how IPA-SRA comes into this (but it
is true that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45081
--- Comment #18 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
13:31:02 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Thu Dec 9 13:30:59 2010
New Revision: 167637
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=167637
Log:
2010-12-09 Paul Thomas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45081
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46720
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
13:34:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
if test -f ../libquadmath/libquadmath.la; then
[...]
else
LIBQUADLIB=-lquadmath
LIBQUADLIB_DEP=
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46864
Summary: [4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE: verify_stmts failed:
statement marked for throw, but doesn't with
-fnon-call-exceptions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46842
--- Comment #12 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
13:42:57 UTC ---
The following is wrongly compiled - however, it is not a regression as it
occurs since GCC 4.1. The solution is the same as for
gfc_trans_arrayfunc_assign,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46865
Summary: Using -save-temps (or ccache, distcc) produces
different results with multiline macros containing asm
code
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46842
--- Comment #13 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
14:15:13 UTC ---
Another reason for the Tonto failure could be PR 45777.
I have now looked through the TRANSPOSEs of Tonto (cf. comment 11) - and I did
not see anything
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46864
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46866
Summary: [4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE: type mismatch in address
expression
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-checking
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46866
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.4.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46864
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
14:35:36 UTC ---
Caused by http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=146776
I think, before that EH edges were EDGE_ABNORMAL and thus
loop_suitable_for_sm disabled the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46853
--- Comment #3 from Dmitry Gorbachev d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com
2010-12-09 14:36:15 UTC ---
There are already many bug reports about missing used uninitialized warnings
(such as my PR42905). It seems that the GCC devs do not take them all to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46853
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
14:40:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
It seems that the GCC devs do not take them all to heart.
No, they just don't have the resources to fix them all. It's not an easy
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44641
--- Comment #21 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
14:43:09 UTC ---
Author: danglin
Date: Thu Dec 9 14:43:03 2010
New Revision: 167638
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=167638
Log:
PR c++/44641
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46853
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46865
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46747
Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46842
--- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2010-12-09 14:48:46
UTC ---
crystal.fppized.f90 is micompiled.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46865
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44641
--- Comment #22 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
14:51:41 UTC ---
Test case fixed on hppa*-*-*.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46864
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
14:51:59 UTC ---
Yep, that sounds sensible to me.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45646
--- Comment #7 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2010-12-09
14:56:45 UTC ---
This regression disappeared after r166079 but before r166156 on
x86_64-apple-darwin10.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44240
--- Comment #1 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2010-12-09
15:01:12 UTC ---
This regression disappeared after r166839 but before r166929.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46734
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
15:11:30 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Thu Dec 9 15:11:26 2010
New Revision: 167639
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=167639
Log:
2010-12-09 Martin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45068
--- Comment #3 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
15:15:30 UTC ---
Author: danglin
Date: Thu Dec 9 15:15:26 2010
New Revision: 167640
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=167640
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501
--- Comment #43 from Tom St Denis tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2010-12-09
15:25:25 UTC ---
Maybe it's high time someone address this shortcoming as opposed to adding
additional language front ends. If you can't even get the core ones
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46859
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2010-12-09 15:44:49
UTC ---
Shouldn't foo1/foo2 have the same alignment?
[...@gnu-6 pages-1]$ cat x.c
typedef int * ptr_t;
ptr_t
__attribute__((aligned(4096)))
foo1 ()
{
return 0;
}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46794
--- Comment #6 from Daniel Kraft domob at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09 15:55:16
UTC ---
Author: domob
Date: Thu Dec 9 15:55:13 2010
New Revision: 167644
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=167644
Log:
2010-12-09 Daniel Kraft
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501
--- Comment #44 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
16:06:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #43)
Maybe it's high time someone address this shortcoming as opposed to adding
additional language front ends. If you can't even get
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46867
Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE: in emit_note_insn_var_location,
at var-tracking.c:7325 with -O -g
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46867
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-12-09 16:26:46
UTC ---
RTL checking is needed to reproduce this:
#ifdef ENABLE_RTL_CHECKING
...
old_vl = simplify_replace_fn_rtx (old_vl, NULL_RTX,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501
--- Comment #45 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
16:34:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #44)
(In reply to comment #43)
Maybe it's high time someone address this shortcoming as opposed to adding
additional language
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45448
--- Comment #5 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2010-12-09
16:36:38 UTC ---
Fixed after r165163 but before r165193.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46868
Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV splay_tree_splay
(splay-tree.c:149) on invalid code
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46867
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46842
--- Comment #15 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
16:40:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
crystal.fppized.f90 is micompiled.
If I compare 4.6.0 20100909 with today's GCC build for Tonto 2.3.1's
crystal.F90, one sees in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45448
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2010-12-09
16:42:49 UTC ---
On powerpc-apple-darwin9 at revision 167626 with -m64, I still see:
FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/20090116 c_lto_20090116_0.o-c_lto_20090116_0.o link, -O1 -flto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42083
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46869
Summary: FAIL:
20_util/enable_shared_from_this/cons/constexpr.cc
scan-assembler-not
_ZNSt23enable_shared_from_thisIiEC2Ev
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46869
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-09 16:46:50 UTC ---
Attached .ii.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45448
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2010-12-09
16:47:29 UTC ---
See also http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-12/msg00696.html for
powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46868
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46870
Summary: [C++0x] ICE: SIGSEGV (too deep recursion) on invalid
code
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46844
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-09
17:00:32 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Dec 9 17:00:19 2010
New Revision: 167649
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=167649
Log:
2010-12-09 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46866
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46871
Summary: [C++0x] ICE: in cxx_eval_constant_expression, at
cp/semantics.c:6686 on invalid code (+rejects valid)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501
--- Comment #46 from Tom St Denis tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2010-12-09
17:03:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #44)
(In reply to comment #43)
Maybe it's high time someone address this shortcoming as opposed to adding
additional language
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46812
Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46872
Summary: 'using' in templated inheritance makes protected
member public
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46872
--- Comment #1 from Christoph Hertzberg chtz at informatik dot uni-bremen.de
2010-12-09 17:21:37 UTC ---
Created attachment 22694
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22694
code that should fail to compile
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46873
Summary: [C++0x] ICE: in build_data_member_initialization, at
cp/semantics.c:5489
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46874
Summary: internal compiler error: in
gfc_conv_descriptor_data_get, at
fortran/trans-array.c:147
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46874
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2010-12-09
17:42:21 UTC ---
Confirmed on 4.4.4, 4.5.0, and trunk r167642.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46873
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-12-09 17:44:39
UTC ---
- original.C -
#include map
#include string
void foo()
{
const std::string s;
std::mapstd::string, std::string::value_type(s, s);
}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46873
--- Comment #2 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-12-09 17:47:50
UTC ---
Now I noticed the line numbers of ICE differ, so it might be different problem.
Let me know if you need to reduce original.C.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46770
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2010-12-09 17:55:41
UTC ---
Another test:
[...@gnu-6 pr46770]$ cat foo.c
#include stdio.h
int
main ()
{
printf (main\n);
return 0;
}
[...@gnu-6 pr46770]$ cat foo1.c
#include stdio.h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38788
Sean McGovern gseanmcg at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gseanmcg at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46854
Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46872
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46875
Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed: too
many outgoing branch edges from bb 3 with -Os
-fselective-scheduling2
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46873
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2010-12-09
18:04:26 UTC ---
Yes, reducing it and filing a separate PR seems a good idea: for sure in map
and string there are no bitfields.
1 - 100 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
