[Bug c++/24222] The gimplifier shouldn't emit warnings or errors

--- Comment #7 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-04 05:17 --- (In reply to comment #3) > right now if we don't gimplify with -fsyntax-only, we would not be able to > diagnostic the following: > void f(void) > { > break; > } If that is true, then it should be considered a bug in

[Bug c++/24594] name lookup and partial ordering

--- Comment #2 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-04 05:14 --- The behaviour is what Standard C++ mandates. Explicit qualification in the template instructs the compiler to consider only the overload set avaliable at the definition context, not instantiation context, -- Gaby -

[Bug c++/24702] Koenig found functoid ref, but "cannot be used as a function"

--- Comment #4 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-04 05:09 --- this issue should be resolved one way of the other based on the core issue about argument dependent lookup specification, when a non-function is found. The "obvious" solution would be to do overload resolution based on

[Bug c++/25137] Warning "missing braces around initializer" causing problems with tr1::array

--- Comment #8 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-04 05:04 --- (In reply to comment #0) > The following code: > > struct S > { int x[3]; }; > > void f() > { S s = {1,2,3};} > > With -Wmissing-braces (which is implied by -Wall, among others) gives: > > warning: missing braces aro

[Bug c++/25156] [3.4/4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] wrong error message (int instead of bool)

--- Comment #6 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-04 05:00 --- Working on a patch. Fixing this issue has a deep "type" implications on the way we currently hand inputs with erronous types whereas trying to progress as much as possible. -- gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

[Bug c++/22252] [4.0 Regression] pragma interface/implementation still break synthesized methods

--- Comment #9 from halcy0n at gentoo dot org 2005-12-04 04:49 --- Created an attachment (id=10401) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10401&action=view) preprocessed output that causes ICE This patch seems to cause another ICE. I applied the patch on gcc-4.0 to fix th

[Bug rtl-optimization/25195] code fails at -O1, works at -O0

--- Comment #2 from duraid at octopus dot com dot au 2005-12-04 04:36 --- Marking this bug invalid - the code in question turned out to have a GC that did not correctly support IA64's RSE. With optimization, stuff was getting hidden from the GC in the RSE backing store and incorrectly b

[Bug middle-end/23673] fold does not fold (a^b) != 0 to a != b

--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-04 04:28 --- I am no longer going to work on this, it is too much hasle to get this fixed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug tree-optimization/15458] Combine ~ and ^.

--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-04 04:27 --- I am no longer going to fix the fold issue, it is too much hasle to get this fixed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug c++/24009] [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] C++ fails to print #include stack

--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-04 04:22 --- (In reply to comment #8) > What are the issues that get in the way of having --enable-mapped-location > always? Getting Ada fixed and getting some regressions fixed with --enable-mapped-location. -- http://gcc.

[Bug middle-end/25125] [4.1/4.2 Regression] (short) ((int)(unsigned short) + (int)) is done in the wrong type

-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |critical http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25125

[Bug libstdc++/25191] exception_defines.h #defines try/catch

--- Comment #17 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2005-12-04 02:54 --- Subject: Re: exception_defines.h #defines try/catch "hhinnant at apple dot com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] | But I won't apologize for being customer focused. Geeat! And people disagreeing with yo

[Bug middle-end/25248] 2.6.15-rc4 arch/powerpc/mm/hash_utils_64.c miscompiled

--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-04 02:19 --- As far as I can see, the tree level is fine. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25248

[Bug libstdc++/25191] exception_defines.h #defines try/catch

--- Comment #16 from hhinnant at apple dot com 2005-12-04 02:12 --- (In reply to comment #15) > Subject: Re: exception_defines.h #defines try/catch > > I don't think anybody is disputing that. It is also a simple fact > that GCC documents what happens with -fno-exceptions. I think it

[Bug middle-end/25022] failure to transform the unlocked stdio calls

--- Comment #10 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-04 01:54 --- Fixed on all active branches -- ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/25022] [3.4 regression] failure to transform the unlocked stdio calls

--- Comment #9 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-04 01:37 --- Subject: Bug 25022 Author: ghazi Date: Sun Dec 4 01:37:23 2005 New Revision: 108010 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=108010 Log: 2005-12-03 Kaveh R. Ghazi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR middl

[Bug c/25248] 2.6.15-rc4 arch/powerpc/mm/hash_utils_64.c miscompiled

--- Comment #1 from olh at suse dot de 2005-12-04 01:36 --- Created an attachment (id=10400) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10400&action=view) PR25248.tar.bz2 buildscripts and preprocessed files. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25248

[Bug c/25248] New: 2.6.15-rc4 arch/powerpc/mm/hash_utils_64.c miscompiled

current kernels do not boot, they hang after 'returning from prom_init' gcc4.1 and mainline miscompile arch/powerpc/mm/hash_utils_64.c. Taking the object file from a gcc4.0 compiled tree fixes booting. gcc-mainline r108000 binutils-mainline -> fails gcc-4_0-branch r107977 binutils-mainline -> work

[Bug libstdc++/25025] Failure to build, :1:2: error: missing '(' after predicate

--- Comment #7 from pda at freeshell dot org 2005-12-04 00:06 --- Subject: Re: Failure to build, :1:2: error: missing '(' after predicate On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 10:00:39PM -, dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote: > > --- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc

[Bug c/25240] [OPENMP] _Pragma parsing problem on the gomp branch

-- rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org

[Bug testsuite/25247] syntax error in target selector for gcc.dg/torture/fp-int-convert-float128-timode.c

--- Comment #3 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 23:42 --- Janis is testing a patch: . -- jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug testsuite/25247] syntax error in target selector for gcc.dg/torture/fp-int-convert-float128-timode.c

--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 23:35 --- Confirmed. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25247

[Bug testsuite/25247] syntax error in target selector for gcc.dg/torture/fp-int-convert-float128-timode.c

--- Comment #1 from billingd at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 23:35 --- Seen on multiple platforms by different testers. -- billingd at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug testsuite/25247] New: syntax error in target selector for gcc.dg/torture/fp-int-convert-float128-timode.c

Test gcc.dg/torture/fp-int-convert-float128-timode.c fails with ERROR: gcc.dg/torture/fp-int-convert-float128-timode.c: syntax error in target selector "target ia64-*-* && lp64" for " dg-xfail-if 5 "" { "ia64-*-* && lp64" } { "*" } { "" } " This happens several platforms, including: i686-pc-cygw

[Bug middle-end/25022] [3.4 regression] failure to transform the unlocked stdio calls

--- Comment #8 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 23:32 --- 3.4 patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-12/msg00284.html -- ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug c++/22464] [3.4 Regression] ICE on classes in template functions which attempt closure

--- Comment #12 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 23:20 --- Taking care of the backport. -- reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/23307] [3.4 Regression] ICE in cp_parser_template_id, at cp/parser.c:8564 with Boost remote_call_manager

--- Comment #11 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 23:18 --- Taking care of the backport. -- reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug web/25198] svn.html

-- gerald at pfeifer dot com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |gerald at pfeifer dot com |dot org |

asm outport

Hi, i want send word (16 bit) to I/O in borland C V3.0 i write for send 0xf to port address ox56 #include int main(void) { asm { mov dx,0x56 mov ax,0xf out dx,ax } return 0; } OR #include int main(void) { outport(0x56,0xf); return 0; } but when write this code in one file

help outport

Hi, i want send word (16 bit) to I/O in borland C V3.0 i write for send 0xf to port address ox56 #include int main(void) { asm { mov dx,0x56 mov ax,0xf out dx,ax } return 0; } OR #include int main(void) { outport(0x56,0xf); return 0; } but when write this code in one file

[Bug target/25203] [4.0] enable checking failure in g++.dg/opt/mmx2.C

--- Comment #1 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 20:06 --- Here's a reduced testcase, configure 4.0.x with --enable-checking=yes,rtl --target=i686-pc-linux-gnu and compile with: cc1plus -fpreprocessed mmx2.ii -quiet -dumpbase mmx2.C -mmmx -mtune=pentiumpro -auxbase mmx2 -O2 -

[Bug target/25242] [3.4] testsuite failure in i386-sse-2.c on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

--- Comment #2 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 19:41 --- Here's a reduced testcase, compile it with cc1 targetted to x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: cc1 -fpreprocessed i386-sse-2.i -quiet -dumpbase i386-sse-2.c -msse -mtune=k8 -auxbase-strip i386-sse-2.s -O0 -version -o i386-sse-

[Bug target/25242] [3.4] testsuite failure in i386-sse-2.c on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

--- Comment #1 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 19:39 --- I configured with --enable-checking=yes,rtl however I don't think that's necessary to trigger the error. I see another report without checking here that fails the test. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-12/m

[Bug c/25246] New: [gomp] #pragma pack() inside of structure

#pragma pack(1) struct S { char h; int i; #pragma pack() int j; }; struct S s; void *i = &s.i, *j = &s.j; (distilled from Linux kernel) used to compile in 4.0.x, though the whole struct wasn't really packed at all (i at offset 4, j at offset 8). gomp #pragma handling rejects this. Another t

[Bug c++/25236] FAIL: g++.dg/warn/huge-val1.C (test for excess errors)

--- Comment #5 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 19:16 --- The problem went away when I removed the old headers, so closing as invalid. -- danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/25243] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Jump threading opportunity missed in tree-ssa but caught in jump1

--- Comment #6 from law at redhat dot com 2005-12-03 18:27 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] Jump threading opportunity missed in tree-ssa but caught in jump1 On Sat, 2005-12-03 at 17:46 +, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > > --- Comment #5 from steven at gcc

[Bug ada/25245] Discriminant is left uninitialized.

--- Comment #2 from listor1 dot rombobeorn at comhem dot se 2005-12-03 17:55 --- Created an attachment (id=10398) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10398&action=view) demonstrates strange error message -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25245

[Bug ada/25245] Discriminant is left uninitialized.

--- Comment #1 from listor1 dot rombobeorn at comhem dot se 2005-12-03 17:54 --- Created an attachment (id=10397) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10397&action=view) demonstrates uninitialized discriminant -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25245

[Bug ada/25245] New: Discriminant is left uninitialized.

The attached file uninitialized_field.adb demonstrates a case where a discriminant of a record isn't initialized. I compile and run it like this: $ gnatmake uninitialized_field.adb gcc -c uninitialized_field.adb gnatbind -x uninitialized_field.ali gnatlink uninitialized_field.ali $ ./uninitialize

[Bug tree-optimization/25243] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Jump threading opportunity missed in tree-ssa but caught in jump1

--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 17:46 --- Actually, it's more related to Bug 21488. What happens is that we record a value for the left hand side of a single-argument PHI node (i.e. for "rhs=PHI(lhs)" we record an equivalence rhs==lhs), but the left hand sid

[Bug java/25239] gij failed to execute JREProperties.java

--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 17:04 --- It might be, it works correctly on i686-linux-gnu. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25239

[Bug tree-optimization/25243] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Jump threading opportunity missed in tree-ssa but caught in jump1

--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 17:01 --- This looks very much related to PR 21829. Hmm, in 4.0.0 we got Before DOM (likewise for 4.1.0 and above): :; i_2 = i_10 + 1; if (i_2 != 4) goto ; else goto ; # i_7 = PHI ; :; if (i_7 == 4) goto ; else goto

[Bug fortran/25244] ICE when building libgfortran

--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 16:44 --- You have a broken GMP installed, for some reason there have been a couple reports about this. Maybe gfortran is the stress tester of GMP which nothing else was before. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

[Bug testsuite/25241] DejaGNU does not distinguish between errors and warnings

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 16:39 --- Confirmed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCON

[Bug c/25240] [OPENMP] _Pragma parsing problem on the gomp branch

-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |blocker Component|preprocessor|c

[Bug fortran/25244] ICE when building libgfortran

--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 16:30 --- Backtrace: (gdb) where #0 0x4d4f690:0 in __gmpn_copyi+0xa0 () #1 0x4d38180:0 in __gmpz_set () at set.c:53 #2 0x425cd80:0 in gfc_arith_init_1 () at gmp.h:1629 #3 0x42d1750:0 in gfc_init_1 () at /tmp/debug/gcc/

[Bug web/25198] svn.html

-- steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gerald at pfeifer dot com Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/25244] New: ICE when building libgfortran

Trying to build mainline on ia64-hpux, I get an error when building libgfortran, which is due to the following ICE: $ cat tmp28181.f90 integer (kind=1) :: i end $ /tmp/debug/ibin//gcc/f951 tmp28181.f90 :0: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault -- Summa

[Bug tree-optimization/25243] Jump threading opportunity missed in tree-ssa but caught in jump1

--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 15:46 --- With a minor hack, we optimize the test case in dom3: Index: tree-ssa-dom.c === --- tree-ssa-dom.c (revision 107822) +++ tree-ssa-dom.c (worki

[Bug fortran/25106] [4.0/4.1] statement label is zero

--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 15:33 --- Patch commited to mainline, waiting some time before commiting to 4.1. -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug fortran/25106] statement label is zero

--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 15:32 --- Subject: Bug 25106 Author: fxcoudert Date: Sat Dec 3 15:32:04 2005 New Revision: 107999 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=107999 Log: PR fortran/25106 * parse.c (next_free):

[Bug tree-optimization/25243] Jump threading opportunity missed in tree-ssa but caught in jump1

--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 14:37 --- Actually VRP doesn't catch it. Do: -if (e[i] == 16) +if (e[i] == 16) so that store-CCP doesn't load e[0] anymore to find that it is 16. With that, the .vrp dump at -O2 looks like this: baz (r) { long unsi

[Bug tree-optimization/25243] Jump threading opportunity missed in tree-ssa but caught in jump1

--- Comment #1 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 14:22 --- I should have said, this is at "-O1 -fthread-jumps". I guess VRP catches this at -O2 and better. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25243

[Bug tree-optimization/25243] New: Jump threading opportunity missed in tree-ssa but caught in jump1

static const int e[4] = { 16, 16, 20, 20 }; extern void foo (unsigned long *); void baz (unsigned long *r) { unsigned long i; for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) if (e[i] == 16) break; if (i == 4) { foo (r); } } We have the following in the .vars tree dump: ;; Function baz (

[Bug target/25242] New: [3.4] testsuite failure in i386-sse-2.c on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

When running the 3.4 testsuite on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, I'm getting the following error: FAIL: gcc.dg/i386-sse-2.c (test for excess errors) as shown here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-12/msg00083.html The logfile says: In file included from gcc/include/xmmintrin.h:1216,

[Bug other/25028] TImode-to-floating conversions broken

--- Comment #2 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 13:36 --- Patch posted which fixes the problems except for on ia64-hpux, and includes a discussion of the problems on ia64-hpux and how they might be fixed. -- jsm28

[Bug testsuite/25241] New: DejaGNU does not distinguish between errors and warnings

Our testsuite should be distinguishing between errors and warnings based on GCC diagnostic markers "error: ", "warning: ", etc. -- Summary: DejaGNU does not distinguish between errors and warnings Product: gcc Version: 4.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug preprocessor/25240] _Pragma parsing problem on the gomp branch

--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 10:06 --- This prevents glibc build. -- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug preprocessor/25240] New: _Pragma parsing problem on the gomp branch

#define weak_extern(symbol) _weak_extern (weak symbol) #define _weak_extern(expr) _Pragma (#expr) extern void foo (void); weak_extern (foo) void bar (void) { if (foo) foo (); } gives: ./xgcc -B ./ -O2 a.c -S a.c:4: warning: malformed #pragma weak, ignored a.c: In function ar': a.c:8: warnin

[Bug fortran/19669] [gfortran] ICE (segfault) on legal code

--- Comment #9 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-03 09:49 --- (In reply to comment #8) > The bug seems to have disappeared from current mainline and is not present > on gomp branch either. Should it be closed? It is fixed on both mainline and 4.1 (probably by one of Paul T'

[Bug java/25239] gij failed to execute JREProperties.java

--- Comment #3 from pluto at agmk dot net 2005-12-03 09:35 --- I think this is a dup of PR25121 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25239