--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-24 07:17 ---
4000 is still too much. The usual stack size limit on Linux is 8MB, on cygwin
it is I think even just 2MB. So it would need to be 500 instead of 1.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42135
--- Comment #8 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-24 06:59 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> + if (gfc_pure (NULL) && gfc_state_stack->state != COMP_DERIVED)
Looks OK.
> None of the examples have any save attributes set, implied or otherwise.
Probably not in decl.c - but
--- Comment #1 from sebpop at gmail dot com 2009-11-24 06:51 ---
Subject: Re: New: FAIL: libgomp.graphite/force-parallel-2.c
execution test
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 14:57, dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
wrote:
> Since revision 150792, the test libgomp.graphite/force-parallel-2.
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 14:57, dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
wrote:
> Since revision 150792, the test libgomp.graphite/force-parallel-2.c
> (introduced
> in revision 150755) fails on *-apple-darwin9. AFAICT the array x[1][1]
> is allocated in stack and is too big for the 64Mb hard limit o
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-24 04:32
---
This seems to do the trick:
Index: decl.c
===
--- decl.c (revision 154430)
+++ decl.c (working copy)
@@ -1865,7 +1865,7 @@ variable_decl (
--- Comment #3 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-24 03:10 ---
test, please ignore.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42160
--- Comment #2 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-24 02:57 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Happens on x86-linux also:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-11/msg02287.html
Oh "good", thanks! Then I retract my implied offer to reduce the case and
attach assembly diff. (I tho
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-24 02:47 ---
Happens on x86-linux also:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-11/msg02287.html
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
With revision 154431 this test passed.
>From revision 154433 and on, this test has failed as follows:
Running
/tmp/hpautotest-gcc1/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/execute.exp ...
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-22.c execution, -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-22.c execution, -O2
--- Comment #2 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-11-24
01:49 ---
On x86_64-apple-darwin10, these show up as failures like...
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc45-4.4.999-20091123/darwin_objdir/gcc/testsuite/obj-c++/../../g++
-B/sw/src/fink.build/gcc45-4.4.999-20091123
--- Comment #2 from vlad at demoninsight dot com 2009-11-24 01:37 ---
I also have 32 bit gcc 4.4.1 on a MacBook Pro (Snow Leopard 10.6.2 as well)
obtained outside of darwinports:
>gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-apple-darwin9.7.0
Configured with: ./configure --enable-languages
--- Comment #1 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-11-24
01:25 ---
This bug doesn't appear to be present in current gcc trunk on
x86_64-apple-darwin10.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42159
--- Comment #11 from ltuikov at yahoo dot com 2009-11-24 01:05 ---
Update Summary to give visibility in searches.
--
ltuikov at yahoo dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
A 64 bit build of gcc 4.4.2 installed via darwinports on a Mac Pro server
running Snow Leopard 10.6.2 causes a crash in the following program:
>cat src/test.cpp
#include
struct X
{
~X () // crash disappears if there is no destructor
{
}
};
void
dummy ()
{
X x;
--- Comment #2 from info at hex-rays dot com 2009-11-24 00:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=19107)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19107&action=view)
sample files to reproduce the bug -- sorry for the previous attachment
compile with
g++ gcc_align_bug.cpp myadd.cpp
--- Comment #1 from info at hex-rays dot com 2009-11-24 00:11 ---
Created an attachment (id=19106)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19106&action=view)
sample files to reproduce the bug
compile it with
g++ gcc_align_bug.cpp myadd.cpp
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
if the base class and the derived class have different alignments, g++
sometimes uses the alignment of the base class for the derived class.
it happens if the source code has definition of a base class instance before
the declaration of the derived class, then the base alignment is used, which is
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-23 23:19
---
Created an attachment (id=19105)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19105&action=view)
Draft patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42038
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-23 23:18
---
Jason, as far as I know, we never compiled this, the ICE is new. If we only
want to avoid the ICE, I'm attaching a patchlet to except.c which works fine,
otherwise, please let me know...
--
paolo dot carlin
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #18 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 22:57 ---
Mine now.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|gdr at gc
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 22:56 ---
Subject: Bug 42086
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Nov 23 22:55:54 2009
New Revision: 154478
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154478
Log:
2009-11-23 H.J. Lu
PR testsuite/42086
* gcc.targe
--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-11-23 22:55 ---
Works for me on linux.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITI
--- Comment #1 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-11-23 22:36 ---
Apparently fixed:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-11/msg00799.html
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from mexas at bristol dot ac dot uk 2009-11-23 22:35 ---
sorry, I no longer have alpha, I moved to ia64 FreeBSD.
many thanks for your efforts anyway!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40329
--- Comment #1 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-11-23 22:31 ---
Can you check if latest SVN still fails?
If the build still fails, please attach preprocessed source to the report (see
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/ for instructions).
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What
--- Comment #3 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 22:30 ---
Fixed.
--
hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #2 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 22:27 ---
Subject: Bug 42151
Author: hubicka
Date: Mon Nov 23 22:27:15 2009
New Revision: 154475
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154475
Log:
PR middle-end/42151
* ipa-inline.c (inline_tr
--- Comment #2 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 22:19 ---
Proposed patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg01311.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42154
--- Comment #5 from hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 22:10
---
Subject: Bug 36470
Author: hutchinsonandy
Date: Mon Nov 23 22:10:18 2009
New Revision: 154471
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154471
Log:
PR testsuite/36470
* gcc.dg/utf-cvt.c: Skip in
While building current mainline (rev 154216) again after half a year, the
bootstrap
aborted while building the stage 1 libgcc:
/vol/gcc/src/gcc-dist/libgcc/../gcc/libgcc2.c: In function '__muldi3':
/vol/gcc/src/gcc-dist/libgcc/../gcc/libgcc2.c:562:1: internal compiler error:
Segmentation fault
Ple
--- Comment #4 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 22:04 ---
Fixed.
--
hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #2 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 22:01 ---
Closing as fixed, as no complaints about the committed patch have surfaced.
--
jb at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-11-23 21:58 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> OK, that fixed the problem. But shouldn't configuration have caught it?
So, fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #11 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 21:48
---
Created an attachment (id=19104)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19104&action=view)
another proposed patch
Here's another proposed patch, but there is a problem with it.
If we calculate (m2 -
--- Comment #15 from mexas at bristol dot ac dot uk 2009-11-23 21:47
---
> Hi Marcel, sorry to bother you with this again.
> Are you happy to be on my Cc list for this "bug"?
Sure. sje@ doesn't quite know what he's talking about
because he doesn't know FreeBSD.
See also below.
>
--- Comment #44 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-11-23
21:41 ---
(In reply to comment #43)
> From the technical POV we should try to help isolating the issue.
>
> My 2 cents.
>
Actually, if the Alexandre's patch...
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg01292
--- Comment #13 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-11-23 21:30 ---
Fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #12 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 21:27 ---
Subject: Bug 42113
Author: uros
Date: Mon Nov 23 21:27:30 2009
New Revision: 154465
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154465
Log:
PR target/42113
* config/alpha/alpha.md (*cmp_sadd
--- Comment #11 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 21:14 ---
Subject: Bug 42113
Author: uros
Date: Mon Nov 23 21:14:32 2009
New Revision: 154464
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154464
Log:
PR target/42113
* config/alpha/alpha.md (*cmp_sadd
--- Comment #10 from ltuikov at yahoo dot com 2009-11-23 20:56 ---
Can anyone comment on this?
I'd really like to use gcc 4.4.2 to cross compile ARC.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42116
--- Comment #43 from andreast at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 20:55
---
I understood Jack this way that he asked/is looking for a temporary solution to
prove that this is the only issue we face with dsymutil. It is not the idea,
from my understanding, that we, gcc, 'fix'/tweak gcc to
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 20:52 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 19:35 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Without the patch it is rejected, with the patch it is not. I will look into
> this further.
Would something like "if (...->attr.saved) { gfc_error }" work, combined with
the patch from c
--- Comment #1 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 18:15 ---
Sorry the second results for 154391 link is:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-11/msg02040.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42156
Sometime between mainline revision 154353:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-11/msg01929.html
and 154391:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-11/msg01929.html
I'm getting massive numbers of objc++ testsuite regressions.
--
Summary: Hundreds of objc++ testsuite regres
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 17:09
---
Presumably, thanks Laurent.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 16:42 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 38644 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 16:42 ---
*** Bug 42155 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #42 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-11-23
16:35 ---
(In reply to comment #41)
> So it's the responsibility of the darwin community to come up with
> either a fixed dsymutil or a proper re-implementation of it.
>
> Richard.
>
Unfortunately, dsymutil isn't
--- Comment #41 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-11-23 16:29 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] dsymutil "Assertion failed
..."
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009, howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu wrote:
> --- Comment #39 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-11-23
> 15:43
--- Comment #14 from mexas at bristol dot ac dot uk 2009-11-23 16:12
---
can I add a FBSD ia64 developer email to the CC list (xcl...@mac.com)?
I tried to do this before, but was refused.
I'm just reporting the bug. I've neigher skill not time
to deal with this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 16:10 ---
Subject: Bug 42095
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Nov 23 16:10:19 2009
New Revision: 154449
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154449
Log:
PR middle-end/42095
* tree.c: Include cgraph.h.
--- Comment #40 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 15:49 ---
Given:
2.6.1.1.4 Empty Location Descriptions
An empty location description consists of a DWARF expression containing no
operations. It represents a piece or all of an object that is present in the
source but not in
--- Comment #13 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2009-11-23 15:43 ---
I think you will need to create a fde-freebsd.c file in gcc/config/ia64 to
define Unwind_FindTableEntry. See fde-glibc.c and fde-vms.c for examples.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40959
--- Comment #39 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-11-23
15:43 ---
Normally this wouldn't be a big deal, but powerpc support stops at Leopard so
we are effectively cutting off powerpc-apple-darwin* from every properly
generating dSYMs in gcc 4.5.
--
http://gcc.gnu.or
--- Comment #20 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 15:40 ---
If you don't think it's worth fixing on the older branches, the right thing to
do is set the Target Milestone to the release where it will be fixed, and then
close the bug as fixed.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #38 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-11-23 15:28 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] dsymutil "Assertion failed
..."
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009, howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu wrote:
> --- Comment #37 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-11-23
> 15:26
--- Comment #37 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-11-23
15:26 ---
(In reply to comment #36)
> If it's valid dwarf then it is also dwarf-strict. Please get apple
> fix its tools and issue a maintainance update. (I'm inclined to close
> this bug as invalid)
>
> Richard.
Hello.
I've found bug in GCC 4.4.1 for ARM7TDMI in THUMB mode.
Test code:
void foo(char *bar);
char test()
{
char tmp;
foo(&tmp);
return tmp;
}
Compiled with: arm-elf-gcc -S -mcpu=arm7tdmi -O2 -mthumb test.c
Then using -O2 or -O3 optimization, assembler code looks like:
1:test:
2:
--- Comment #36 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-11-23 15:07 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] dsymutil "Assertion failed
..."
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009, howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu wrote:
> --- Comment #35 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-11-23
> 15:03
--- Comment #35 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-11-23
15:03 ---
If it is in fact valid dwarf, the question remains of what to do about the
breakage that this causes with dsymutil on darwin. Inhibiting the emission of
this in dwarf-strict might be a reasonable compromis
--- Comment #4 from guerby at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 14:57 ---
Subject: Bug 42153
Author: guerby
Date: Mon Nov 23 14:56:58 2009
New Revision: 154446
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154446
Log:
2009-11-23 Eric Botcazou
Laurent GUERBY
--- Comment #34 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 14:53
---
I suppose empty DW_AT_location lists may now denote places where the value
dies and is no longer available. We now properly track this with VTA.
Alex?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41473
--- Comment #7 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 14:53 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
>
> OK, can't argue with not breaking existing headers I suppose. But this is to
> me clearly a bogus usage. What are the semantics of using internal zero sized
> arrays in a struct? They ha
--- Comment #33 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-11-23
14:41 ---
I should reiterate the dsymutil's maintainers comments on this issue...
The variable should be checked to make sure it really doesn't have a
location,
and if it doesn't just don't emit the DW_AT_lo
--- Comment #32 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-11-23
14:38 ---
I got this response over on the gdb mailing list regarding
the validity of emitting dwarf debug info containing an
AT_location with any block form having a zero length...
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/20
--- Comment #4 from thiago at kde dot org 2009-11-23 14:32 ---
My experience:
gcc 4.4 + binutils 2.18.50.20070820 + no -march: ok
gcc 4.4 + binutils 2.18.50.20070820 + -march=armv7-a: error
gcc 4.4 + binutils 2.19.51.0.2.20090204: ok in both cases
The instruction I had problems with was
--- Comment #31 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-11-23 14:26 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] dsymutil "Assertion failed
..."
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009, howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu wrote:
> --- Comment #30 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-11-23
> 14:22
--- Comment #30 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-11-23
14:22 ---
Perhaps something like...
Index: dwarf2out.c
===
--- dwarf2out.c (revision 154443)
+++ dwarf2out.c (working copy)
@@ -10447,8 +10447,11 @@
--- Comment #6 from david dot resnick at comverse dot com 2009-11-23 14:15
---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Subject: Re: g++ should warn or error on internal 0 size
> array in struct
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, david dot resnick at comverse dot com wrote:
> > (In reply to comment #3)
> > > (
--- Comment #1 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 14:01 ---
I'm looking into this. This example shows why using access->expr to create new
expressions is a dangerous thing to do, at least in some contexts (which I did
not really realize until now). I'd better look at them al
--
dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org|unassigned at gcc dot gnu
|
--- Comment #19 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 13:44 ---
This should be fixed in 4.5. Adjusting the Regression tag.
Not planning to fix in 4.3/44.
--
dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 13:44
---
Without the patch it is rejected, with the patch it is not. I will look into
this further.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42008
--- Comment #18 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 13:30 ---
Subject: Bug 14777
Author: dodji
Date: Mon Nov 23 13:29:50 2009
New Revision: 154443
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154443
Log:
Fix PR c++/14777
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c++/14777
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 13:29 ---
int __attribute__((noinline,noclone))
sort(int L)
{
int end[2] = { 10, 10, }, i=0, R;
while (i<2)
{
R = end[i];
if (Lhttp://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42142
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Summary|GCC 4.5 doesn't compile a |[4.5 Regre
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 13:10 ---
==29953== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
==29953==at 0x400671: sort (qsort.c:16)
==29953==by 0x40079F: main (qsort.c:45)
qsort.c.034t.cddce1 deletes the store to end[i+1].
I will
--- Comment #3 from grosser at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 13:02 ---
Subject: Bug 42130
Author: grosser
Date: Mon Nov 23 13:02:08 2009
New Revision: 154440
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154440
Log:
Protect loops that might be executed zero times.
2009-11-23
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-23 12:40
---
Richard, can you have a look to this one? First blush, I don't see anything
wrong with the code...
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 12:38 ---
Does your patch still reject
pure function test()
integer, pointer :: p => null() ! INVALID per C1272
integer :: test
test = p
end function test
That is currently rejected as "Error: Initialization of pointer
--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 11:41 ---
Another example (with generics):
module foo_module
implicit none
private
public :: foo,rescale
type ,abstract :: foo
contains
procedure(times_interface) ,deferred :: times
procedure(assign_interface) ,defe
--- Comment #22 from gcc at coreland dot ath dot cx 2009-11-23 11:13
---
Any way I can remove the above attachments?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42150
--- Comment #21 from gcc at coreland dot ath dot cx 2009-11-23 11:12
---
Created an attachment (id=19103)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19103&action=view)
version suitable for gnatchop
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42150
--- Comment #20 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 11:02
---
> Really fail to see how this is more convenient or useful for anyone involved
> but oh well, what do I know?
Attaching a lot of files is indeed inconvenient, that's why
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs
section "Detail
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42154
struct A { char x[1]; };
extern void abort (void);
void __attribute__((noinline,noclone))
foo (struct A a)
{
if (a.x[0] != 'a')
abort ();
}
int main ()
{
struct A a;
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 1; ++i)
a.x[i] = 'a';
foo (a);
return 0;
}
fails at -O1 because (early) SRA converts
:
--- Comment #19 from gcc at coreland dot ath dot cx 2009-11-23 10:22
---
Really fail to see how this is more convenient or useful for anyone involved
but oh well, what do I know?
gcc-4.4.0:
gcc -c pfseudo.ads pfseudo-path.adb pfseudo-archiver.ads
pfseudo-archiver-directory.adb test.ad
--- Comment #18 from gcc at coreland dot ath dot cx 2009-11-23 10:20
---
Created an attachment (id=19102)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19102&action=view)
dependency for arc_dir_003.adb
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42150
--- Comment #17 from gcc at coreland dot ath dot cx 2009-11-23 10:19
---
Created an attachment (id=19101)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19101&action=view)
dependency for arc_dir_003.adb
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42150
--- Comment #16 from gcc at coreland dot ath dot cx 2009-11-23 10:19
---
Created an attachment (id=19100)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19100&action=view)
dependency for arc_dir_003.adb
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42150
--- Comment #15 from gcc at coreland dot ath dot cx 2009-11-23 10:19
---
Created an attachment (id=19099)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19099&action=view)
dependency for arc_dir_003.adb
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42150
--- Comment #14 from gcc at coreland dot ath dot cx 2009-11-23 10:19
---
Created an attachment (id=19098)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19098&action=view)
dependency for arc_dir_003.adb
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42150
--- Comment #13 from gcc at coreland dot ath dot cx 2009-11-23 10:18
---
Created an attachment (id=19097)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19097&action=view)
dependency for arc_dir_003.adb
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42150
--- Comment #12 from gcc at coreland dot ath dot cx 2009-11-23 10:18
---
Created an attachment (id=19096)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19096&action=view)
dependency for arc_dir_003.adb
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42150
--- Comment #11 from gcc at coreland dot ath dot cx 2009-11-23 10:18
---
Created an attachment (id=19095)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19095&action=view)
dependency for arc_dir_003.adb
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42150
--- Comment #10 from gcc at coreland dot ath dot cx 2009-11-23 10:17
---
Created an attachment (id=19094)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19094&action=view)
dependency for arc_dir_003.adb
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42150
--- Comment #9 from gcc at coreland dot ath dot cx 2009-11-23 10:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=19093)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19093&action=view)
dependency for arc_dir_003.adb
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42150
--- Comment #8 from gcc at coreland dot ath dot cx 2009-11-23 10:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=19092)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19092&action=view)
dependency for arc_dir_003.adb
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42150
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
