I've been working with gcc 4.6 with C++ doing some templates exercises
I seem to have some unexplained behavior which might be a bug, or maybe
I'm ignorant.
First - let me give you a link for my code
http://www.nylxs.com/docs/linklist.tgz
gcc version
ruben@www2:~> g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48780
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-22
00:28:47 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Sun May 22 00:28:44 2011
New Revision: 174022
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174022
Log:
PR c++/48780
* cvt.c (type_promotes_to): Wa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48945
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-22
00:29:06 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Sun May 22 00:29:03 2011
New Revision: 174023
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174023
Log:
PR c++/48945
* decl.c (revert_static_member
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49096
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48988
--- Comment #7 from davidxl 2011-05-22 00:01:13
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Created attachment 24323 [details]
> fix
Please verify.
Davdi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48699
--- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-05-21 23:32:58 UTC ---
The patch in comment #11 fixes the runtime for the tests in comments #0 and #9.
However the other tests give a backtrace on x86_64-apple-darwin10. and valgrind
reports errors o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48988
--- Comment #6 from davidxl 2011-05-21 23:30:34
UTC ---
Created attachment 24323
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24323
fix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49105
Summary: [C++0x][SFINAE] ICE during list-initialization of
rvalue-references to const
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49103
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-05-21
23:11:01 UTC ---
Reverting revision 169083 on trunk fixes this pr (see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-01/msg01442.html for its motivation).
Further reduced test:
!--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49007
--- Comment #10 from John David Anglin 2011-05-21
22:47:34 UTC ---
This PR seems similar to PR rtl-optimization/40710.
It seems opposite_needed is incorrectly calculated after the
first delay slot iteration in fill_slots_from_thread:
mark_t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48780
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-21
22:01:32 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Sat May 21 22:01:29 2011
New Revision: 174005
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174005
Log:
PR c++/48780
* cvt.c (type_promotes_to): Do
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48945
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-21
22:01:48 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Sat May 21 22:01:45 2011
New Revision: 174007
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174007
Log:
PR c++/48945
* decl.c (grokdeclarator): Don
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48945
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-21
22:01:40 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Sat May 21 22:01:38 2011
New Revision: 174006
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174006
Log:
PR c++/48945
* decl.c (revert_static_member
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49066
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-21
21:35:53 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Sat May 21 21:35:50 2011
New Revision: 174003
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174003
Log:
PR c++/49066
* decl.c (duplicate_decls): Pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49103
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-05-21
21:21:09 UTC ---
Created attachment 24322
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24322
reduced test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49103
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49095
--- Comment #3 from Linus Torvalds 2011-05-21
20:42:26 UTC ---
Hmm. Looking at that code generation, it strikes me that even with the odd load
store situation, why do we have that "test" instruction?
c:8b 10mov(%ea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48699
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-05-21 20:09:07 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> program testmv1
>
> type bar
> end type
>
> type, extends(bar) :: bar2
> end type
>
> class(bar), allocatable :: sm
> type(bar2), a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49102
--- Comment #1 from Johannes Schaub
2011-05-21 20:04:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> The following program should be diagnosed at the call to "f" for using a
> deleted copy constructor in an lvalue to rvalue conversion
>
I'm sorry. I mean
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49097
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49097
--- Comment #3 from Joseph S. Myers 2011-05-21
19:45:31 UTC ---
Author: jsm28
Date: Sat May 21 19:45:27 2011
New Revision: 174002
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174002
Log:
PR ada/49097
* gcc-interface/Make-lang.in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48699
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[OOP] MOVE_ALLOC inside |[4.6/4.7 Regression] [OOP]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48699
--- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-05-21 19:33:32 UTC ---
r174001 fixes the test cases in comment #1 and #4.
The test case in comment #0 still fails. Reduced version:
program testmv1
type bar
end type
type, extends(bar) ::
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49097
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2011-05-21 19:23:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Created attachment 24317 [details]
> untested patch
Looking at the patch, I agree that it should fix the problem.
> Please see if this patch (unte
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48699
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-05-21 19:12:56 UTC ---
Author: janus
Date: Sat May 21 19:12:51 2011
New Revision: 174001
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174001
Log:
2011-05-21 Janus Weil
PR fortran/4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48988
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou 2011-05-21
19:05:36 UTC ---
> On x86_linux, I can not reproduce the problem:
Try to increase your ulimit settings.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49095
--- Comment #2 from Linus Torvalds 2011-05-21
18:41:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
>
> On the RTL side combine tries to do
>
> Trying 7, 8 -> 9:
> Failed to match this instruction:
> (parallel [
> (set (mem/f:DI (reg/v/f:DI 63 [ arg
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49103
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48637
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49092
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49104
Summary: bootstrap failure on AMD K6-2 with illegal instruction
(cmove) in stage2
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49103
Summary: local variables exchange values / wrong code with -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assign
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48988
davidxl changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xinliangli at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49102
Summary: Use of deleted copy constructor not diagnosed
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48955
--- Comment #8 from Thomas Koenig 2011-05-21
15:12:47 UTC ---
Created attachment 24320
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24320
Tentative patch
Paul,
what do you think of this approach? It fixes the test case, and
passes regre
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49098
--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton 2011-05-21 16:35:41
UTC ---
Author: nickc
Date: Sat May 21 16:35:38 2011
New Revision: 173999
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173999
Log:
PR target/49098
* config/rx/rx.c (rx_memory_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49093
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49007
--- Comment #9 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-05-21 14:57:02 UTC ---
> Could this have been fixed by PR 42775 which does not change reorg but rather
> free_cfg?
No. I have tried it on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 and just tried it with
darwin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41894
--- Comment #12 from Ilya Lesokhin 2011-05-21
14:47:33 UTC ---
Created attachment 24319
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24319
simple test case
i belive this is the same bug.
the problem occurs when using r28,r29 and accesing
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48529
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu 2011-05-21 13:57:01
UTC ---
Objective C failures:
FAIL: objc.dg/torture/forward-1.m -O0 -fgnu-runtime execution test
FAIL: objc.dg/torture/forward-1.m -O1 -fgnu-runtime execution test
FAIL: objc.dg/torture/forward
6(%rsp), %rdi
movl$0, %eax
movq$-1, %rcx
repnz scasb
notq%rcx
cmpl$6, %ecx
je.L2
callabort
.L2:
movl$0, %eax
addq$72, %rsp
.cfi_def_cfa_offset 8
ret
.cfi_endproc
.LFE0:
.sizemain, .-main
.ident"GCC:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49088
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24315|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49096
--- Comment #2 from engrwahidmemon at gmail dot com 2011-05-21 11:52:13 UTC ---
Thanks alot. Can you please tell me who is the author of plugin? May
be I misunderstood, the plugin that I am using is written by me.
Regards
Abdul
On Sat, May 21, 2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49100
--- Comment #1 from Joel Yliluoma 2011-05-21 11:31:46
UTC ---
It also does not happen with C's nested functions. This for instance compiles
and works just fine (to my surprise).
#include
int main()
{
int a;
#pragma omp parallel for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49097
--- Comment #1 from Joseph S. Myers 2011-05-21
11:24:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 24317
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24317
untested patch
Please see if this patch (untested) fixes the problem for you. If so I'll
commit i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49100
Summary: [OpenMP]: Compiler error when inline method defined
within OpenMP loop
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49099
Summary: sparc.c:‘sparc_solaris_elf_asm_named_section’ declared
‘static’ but never defined
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49098
Summary: unused parameters in rx.c:rx_memory_move_cost
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: targ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49097
Summary: gnatbind link fails to find version_string, potential
ranlib concurrency problem
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49096
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49095
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Statu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48988
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at ubuntu dot com
--- Comment #2 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49089
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49092
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
Summary|ice in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49093
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48988
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou 2011-05-21
09:27:39 UTC ---
To reproduce on Linux, in the build dir:
cp gcc/ada/rts/system.ads .
chmod a+w system.ads
edit system.ads and change ZCX_By_Default to False
gcc/gnat1 gcc/ada/rts/g-catiio.adb
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49085
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49096
Summary: internal compiler error: in calc_dfs_tree, at
dominance.c:394
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
Comp
58 matches
Mail list logo
