--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 06:37 ---
This only fails with the C front-end, here is a testcase that also compiles
with the C++ front-end but only fails with the C front-end:
static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) void ip_finish_output2(){}
void
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 06:40 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
This only fails with the C front-end, here is a testcase that also compiles
with the C++ front-end but only fails with the C front-end:
But I think that is only because the C++ front-end
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 06:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=12335)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12335action=view)
Patch for saying SAVE_EXPRs are not lvalues
I looked into the history of lvalue_p and SAVE_EXPR has been there
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 07:08 ---
Subject: Bug 29217
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Sep 27 07:08:13 2006
New Revision: 117247
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=117247
Log:
2006-09-27 Paolo Carlini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #4 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-09-27 07:39 ---
Fixed for 4.2.0.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #20 from jan at etpmod dot phys dot tue dot nl 2006-09-27
07:51 ---
First of all, the problem is that bad that even 1*z != z when *no* optimisation
is requested. Consider:
#include iostream
#include limits
#include complex
int main()
{
std::complexdouble
--- Comment #21 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-09-27 08:07 ---
(In reply to comment #20)
First of all, the problem is that bad that even 1*z != z when *no*
optimisation is requested.
Yes :(
Secondly, could somebody clarify how patch
Look at the following source code:
#include stdio.h
typedef int __attribute__ ((aligned (16))) aint;
inline void function() {
static const aint x = 123;
unsigned long a = (unsigned long) x;
printf(Address of x: 0x%lX - %s\n, a, a 15L ? ALIGNMENT ERROR :
ok);
}
int main() {
--- Comment #1 from jespdj at hotmail dot com 2006-09-27 08:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=12336)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12336action=view)
Source code that demonstrates the bug
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29249
--- Comment #2 from jespdj at hotmail dot com 2006-09-27 08:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=12337)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12337action=view)
Precompiled source (*.ii)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29249
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 11:15 ---
This is a target/abi issue, it works for me on i686-linux.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-09-27 11:25 ---
Subject: Bug number PR c/29092
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/2006-09/msg01215.html
--
I am using g++ to compile shogun 0.1.2 from
http://www.fml.tuebingen.mpg.de/raetsch/projects/shogun.
g++ however dies as soon as I turn on optimization -O1 with the following error
(it will compile ok with -O0).
c++ -O1 -fPIC -DLINUX -g -c -I. -I/usr/include/octave-2.1.73 -o
--- Comment #1 from bugreports at nn7 dot de 2006-09-27 11:30 ---
Created an attachment (id=12338)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12338action=view)
Preprocessed source
I was kindly asked to: 'Preprocessed source stored into /tmp/ccQLsVtW.out file,
please attach this
Hi Helping hands,
Greeting from Auritas. We are in the process of installing Apache 2.0.59 on
AIX5.3 with GNU compiler machine. When we execute configure command in the
following fashion, we get configure error message saying configure:Error:
invalid option CFLAGS=-q64. We tried LDFLAGS
--- Comment #8 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-09-27 14:03 ---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/scalar-return-4_y.c fails with this ICE. Do you
know if this is the same or a different problem? This is on ARM old ABI, fails
with 4.1 and 4.2. 4.0 works.
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
--- Comment #9 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-09-27 14:04 ---
../../src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/scalar-return-4_y.c:41: error:
unrecognizable insn:
(insn 39 20 21 3 (set (reg:HI 0 r0)
(subreg:HI (mem/c:CQI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 11 fp)
(const_int -16
--- Comment #2 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-09-27 14:05 ---
And gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/20050121-1.c:
(sid)[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/build/gcc-snapshot-20060922/build/gcc$ ./xgcc -B. -o x
-c
../../src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/20050121-1.c
--- Comment #3 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-09-27 14:06 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
And gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/20050121-1.c:
(sid)[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/build/gcc-snapshot-20060922/build/gcc$ ./xgcc -B. -o
x -c
Sorry, wrong bug. This is on ARM. I meant PR28675
--- Comment #10 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-09-27 14:06 ---
And gcc.c-torture/execute/20050121-1.c
(sid)[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/build/gcc-snapshot-20060922/build/gcc$ ./xgcc -B. -o x
-c
../../src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/20050121-1.c
--- Comment #11 from pbrook at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 14:12 ---
I ICE in comment #10 looks like it may be a different problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28675
Hi there,
I am porting some code to SUSE 10, with G++ 4.1. And hit an strange
no matching function call compilation error. I am confused because
the calling function and candidate are nearly 100% same.
I wonder if this is a known G++ limitation or issue ? Because the same
program got compiled
--- Comment #7 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-09-27 15:14 ---
patch for comment #5 was approved, now it is purely a middle-end bug.
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2006-09-27 15:46 ---
You didn't show us the code that generated the problem. We can't do anything
without that. Please read
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html
for more information.
Best
W.
--
bangerth at dealii dot org changed:
--- Comment #1 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2006-09-27 15:48 ---
-q64 is not a flag that gcc recognizes. It is a flag that xlC recognizes,
however. Why would you want to pass it to gcc?
W.
--
bangerth at dealii dot org changed:
What|Removed
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 16:21 ---
Reducing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29250
When expanding fabs inline, GCC attempts to use a sequence without jumps. If
that sequence fails, GCC falls back to the equivalent of
if (x = 0.0)
return x;
return -x;
This sequence is incorrect for the IEEE floating point value -0.0.
This problem normally does not occur because most
I get the following ICE:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcc -c -O3 -Werror
qof-jvp_frame.c
cc1: warnings being treated as errors
qof-jvp_frame.c: In function 'kvp_frame_compare':
qof-jvp_frame.c:60: warning: passing argument 1 of 'kvp_frame_for_each_slot'
discards qualifiers from
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #7 from pbrook at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 17:10 ---
Subject: Bug 29230
Author: pbrook
Date: Wed Sep 27 17:09:40 2006
New Revision: 117253
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=117253
Log:
2006-09-27 Paul Brook [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #8 from pbrook at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 17:10 ---
Subject: Bug 29230
Author: pbrook
Date: Wed Sep 27 17:10:22 2006
New Revision: 117254
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=117254
Log:
2006-09-27 Paul Brook [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #9 from pbrook at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 17:11 ---
Fixed.
--
pbrook at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 17:52 ---
Confirmed, reduced testcase:
struct TSparseEntry
{
int feat_index;
double entry;
};
struct TSparse
{
int vec_index;
int num_feat_entries;
struct TSparseEntry* features;
};
void
get_full_feature_matrix(struct
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 18:10 ---
in the .s file you should have something like:
.align 16
.type x.1887, @object
.size x.1887, 4
x.1887:
.long 123
Notice the .align there.
Can you attach the .s file that
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
Compiler configure with --enable-e500_double
Problem reproduced with:
//temp/gnu_toolchain/install_area/gcc-trunk/gcc-trunk-20060926-e500v2/bin/powerpc-unknown-linux-gnuspe-gcc
-O3 -funroll-loops -funroll-all-loops -S stream.i -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: powerpc-unknown-linux-gnuspe
--- Comment #1 from edmar at freescale dot com 2006-09-27 18:14 ---
Created an attachment (id=12339)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12339action=view)
Source code that causes the ICE
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29255
Compiler configure with --enable-e500_double
The compiler generates inferior code then with gcc-4.1.
The source code is:
# define N 200
static double a[N],c[N];
void tuned_STREAM_Copy()
{
int j;
for (j=0; jN; j++)
c[j] = a[j];
}
Attached is stream.s-4.1
--- Comment #1 from edmar at freescale dot com 2006-09-27 18:30 ---
Created an attachment (id=12340)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12340action=view)
Result of 4.1 compilation
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29256
--- Comment #2 from edmar at freescale dot com 2006-09-27 18:30 ---
Created an attachment (id=12341)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12341action=view)
Result of 4.2 compilation
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29256
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 18:34 ---
Here is a reduced testcase:
typedef struct _GList GList;
typedef struct _KvpFrame KvpFrame;
typedef struct _KvpValue KvpValue;
struct _KvpValue
{
int type;
GList *list;
};
kvp_glist_compare (GList * list1,GList
Hello come to www.ixi.vhost.lt/welcome
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 20:15 ---
Subject: Bug 27021
Author: kargl
Date: Wed Sep 27 20:15:22 2006
New Revision: 117257
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=117257
Log:
* configure.in: Check for GMP 4.1 or newer. Check for
--- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 20:15 ---
Subject: Bug 28276
Author: kargl
Date: Wed Sep 27 20:15:22 2006
New Revision: 117257
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=117257
Log:
* configure.in: Check for GMP 4.1 or newer. Check for
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 20:37 ---
Fixed on trunk. Won't be fixed on 4.1.
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 20:38 ---
Fixed on trunk. Won't be fixed on 4.1.
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jespdj at hotmail dot com 2006-09-27 21:11 ---
Created an attachment (id=12342)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12342action=view)
output of g++ tst.cpp -S
Here is the assembler source produced with g++ tst.cpp -S
At the bottom of the file is
--- Comment #6 from jespdj at hotmail dot com 2006-09-27 21:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=12343)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12343action=view)
assembly source without inline
This is the assembly file I get when I compile without inline, so the source
looks
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 21:19 ---
So GCC is emitting the correct alignment (the .align) so this is either a
binutils issue or just a windows one in general.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #25 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 21:24 ---
Subject: Bug 26792
Author: tromey
Date: Wed Sep 27 21:24:23 2006
New Revision: 117259
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=117259
Log:
2006-09-26 Jack Howarth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #2 from lopezibanez at gmail dot com 2006-09-27 21:31 ---
Is this testcase better?
list_compare (int * list1)
{
if (list1)
value_compare ();
}
func1 (int * f){}
value_compare (int * a)
{
if (a)
list_compare (a);
}
func2 (const
--- Comment #26 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 21:43 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #8 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 23:51 ---
Isn't this handled by -ftrapv?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19351
--- Comment #8 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 23:51
---
Isn't this handled by -ftrapv?
No because sizeof is unsigned and -ftrapv only deals with signed types.
-- Pinski
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2006-09-27 23:56
---
Subject: Re: operator new[] can return heap blocks which are too small
--- Comment #8 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-27 23:51
---
Isn't this handled by -ftrapv?
No because
gcc-4.0 -v -c gcc_bug.cpp
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v
--enable-languages=c,c++,java,f95,objc,ada,treelang --prefix=/usr
--enable-shared --with-system-zlib --libexecdir=/usr/lib
--without-included-gettext --enable-threads=posix --enable-nls
--- Comment #1 from cfurman at lbl dot gov 2006-09-28 00:37 ---
Created an attachment (id=12344)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12344action=view)
Source code to produce error
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29257
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-28 01:18 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 29175 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-28 01:18 ---
*** Bug 29257 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-28 01:31 ---
Andrew, stop closing this bug.
If necessary I will ask the SC for a statement preventing you from closing bugs
as invalid when the submitter disagrees, since you haven't shown a willingness
to listen to what they are
--- Comment #5 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-28 01:32 ---
While I firmly agree with Wolfgang, my same comment about the meaning of
RESOLVED/INVALID applies here also.
--
drow at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from yuanfei8077 at gmail dot com 2006-09-28 01:50 ---
Hi,
For your convinence, the following is the reproduction code.
Many Thanks,
-Kelvin
Compilation error
=
no matching function for call to tdat_hash_mapMemAllocatorint
::func(MemAllocatorint)
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-28 01:50
---
However, some more
general mechanism for setting the default ABI of a header might be useful.
I'm
thinking something like #pragma GCC visibility here.
Which is PR 15892 by the way.
--
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29252
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-28 01:56 ---
The error message is broken but this is invalid code as you cannot bind a
temporary to a reference argument.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29252
--- Comment #4 from cummings at cacr dot caltech dot edu 2006-09-28 02:00
---
Created an attachment (id=12345)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12345action=view)
sample code for signal intrinsic function with optional third argument
OK, here is a sample code showing
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-28 02:02 ---
Note I would rather you post stuff like this to the C standards committee
instead of posting bugs. Maybe even to gcc@gcc.gnu.org before filing a bug for
something which most people disagree on. It is one thing for
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-28 02:32 ---
Reducing
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
The error occured when i tried building crosscompiler for x86_64.
Steps i followed:
1. binutils-2.17
2. Installing glibc headers
3. Installing gcc (bootstrap)
4. Installing glibc [ error occured in this step ]
The exact error message is
./strtod_l.c: In function `strtold_l_internal':
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-28 02:53 ---
Reduced testcase:
static double a[200 +0],avgtime[4] = {0},maxtime[4] = {0};
main()
{
int j, k;
for (j=0; j4; j++)
{
avgtime[j] = avgtime[j]/(double)(10 -1);
g(avgtime[j],maxtime[j] );
}
}
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
Component|c |target
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-28 02:59 ---
This is a generic regression, x86 has the same problem with the code. Even
doing -Ddouble=int, we have the same problem.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
After writing to or reading from an unformatted file an attempt to read from
standard input causes a crash with Fortran runtime error: End of file.
I have gcc version 4.1.1 20060525 (Red Hat 4.1.1-1) on Fedora Core 5. My system
is x86_64 but I have seen the same problem on i686.
Sample Code
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-28 04:06 ---
Please see section 9.3.1, 9.3.3, and 9.3.4 of the Fortran 95 Standard.
You're first open statement closes the preconnected standard input unit,
so your second and third read *, n is fucked up.
Hint use inquire to
When compiling code where there's call to a member function of a const object
the compiler fails with segmentation fault. The code that demonstrates the ill
behaviour:
--- main.d begins ---
class Y
{
private: int i;
public:
void f() { i = 90; }
};
void main()
{
const Y y;
for _Unwind_GetIPInfo
configure:31130:
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc4-4.1.-20060927/darwin_objdir/./gcc/xgcc
-shared-libgcc -B/sw/src/fink.build/gcc4-4.1.99
99-20060927/darwin_objdir/./gcc -nostdinc++
-L/sw/src/fink.build/gcc4-4.1.-20060927/darwin_objdir/powerpc-apple-darwin8/libstdc+
+-v3/src
-L/sw/src/fink.build
Hi there,
I found that the compiling the following code will fail with g++ 4.1
while cmopile succeed with VC8. I suspect this is a g++ error.
env info
=
g++ (GCC) 4.1.0 (SLES10)
No compile option is added
Compilation error
=
main.cpp: In copy constructor
--- Comment #2 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2006-09-28 05:59 ---
Confirmed. This actually worked in gcc2.95 to my surprise:
g/x /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-2.95.3/bin/c++ -c x.cc
x.cc: In function `void foo()':
x.cc:1: variable-sized object of type `const char *[((c - 1) + 1)]' may not
79 matches
Mail list logo
