http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47659
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Henlich thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net
2011-08-08 06:07:33 UTC ---
It is not safe to omit the warning for integers: the constant could have been
truncated to an integer, as in:
real(8) :: r8
r8 =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50021
Summary: -Wsuggest-attribute=pure makes obviously-incorrect
suggestion
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50011
--- Comment #2 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz 2011-08-08 07:53:54
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
That may be true on your platform, but I don't think it is guaranteed to be
true in general. I don't know if that explains the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49963
--- Comment #6 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
08:28:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Created attachment 24909 [details]
Draft patch
I'm attaching a patch which tries to implement what Joseph suggests (thanks!).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50020
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47762
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-apple-darwin9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50005
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-08-08
09:29:05 UTC ---
Patch posted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-08/msg00749.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49996
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=49997
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=49991
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49998
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50004
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50007
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50008
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50009
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=50005
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50005
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
09:59:05 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Aug 8 09:59:02 2011
New Revision: 177557
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177557
Log:
2011-08-08 Mikael
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50014
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=50018
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49242
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49246
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50011
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=50012
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49987
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50011
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse marc.glisse at normalesup dot org 2011-08-08
10:12:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Yes, I should have mentioned the target is x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Generally, the code added in r177215:
+ if
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50021
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50022
Summary: [4.7 regression] incorrect condition in IT block
when building mozilla code base for ARM
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49993
--- Comment #1 from Arnaud Desitter arnaud02 at users dot sourceforge.net
2011-08-08 10:28:27 UTC ---
The equivalent C program results in the expected segmentation fault.
void a1(int *ia) {
*ia = 1;
}
void a2(void) {
static const int ia[] =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50022
--- Comment #1 from Mike Hommey mh+gcc at glandium dot org 2011-08-08
10:44:27 UTC ---
Created attachment 24949
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24949
nsCookieService.i.xz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50011
--- Comment #5 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz 2011-08-08 11:03:29
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
+ if ((TYPE_PRECISION (type) TYPE_PRECISION (ftype)
+ || TYPE_UNSIGNED (type) != TYPE_UNSIGNED (ftype))
looks wrong. I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50011
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse marc.glisse at normalesup dot org 2011-08-08
11:14:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
It gives a warning probably because of a mistake in the gcc sources.
Or not. In your example, remove short and replace int
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48648
kiloalphaindia kilo at stierand dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kilo at stierand
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49946
--- Comment #2 from Igor Zamyatin izamyatin at gmail dot com 2011-08-08
11:35:32 UTC ---
cunrolli does not handle the loop in the testcase because of the condition ul
== UL_NO_GROWTH unr_insns ninsns in try_unroll_loop_completely. Meanwhile
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50016
Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jb at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50016
--- Comment #7 from PcX xunxun1982 at gmail dot com 2011-08-08 12:05:47 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #6)
Maybe this is MingW specific?
I haven't tested this, but here goes my guess:
Since in the write loop we're jumping back and forth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50014
Ira Rosen irar at il dot ibm.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50016
--- Comment #8 from PcX xunxun1982 at gmail dot com 2011-08-08 12:35:12 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #7)
(In reply to comment #6)
Maybe this is MingW specific?
I haven't tested this, but here goes my guess:
Since in the write loop
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50016
--- Comment #9 from PcX xunxun1982 at gmail dot com 2011-08-08 12:38:11 UTC
---
CC list add Kai.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
13:01:14 UTC ---
(gdb) ignor 1 79
Will ignore next 79 crossings of breakpoint 1.
(gdb) r
Starting program: /home/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/gnat1 -gnatwa -quiet -dumpbase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50016
PcX xunxun1982 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.7.0
--- Comment #10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50023
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/graphite/id-pr46845.c (test for excess
errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
--- Comment #2 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
13:25:41 UTC ---
(gdb) p debug_tree (fndecl)
function_decl 7a543700 system__os_lib__create_temp_file_internal.isra.0
type function_type 7a33a9c0
type
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48007
--- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
13:26:10 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Aug 8 13:26:06 2011
New Revision: 177563
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177563
Log:
Fix Dwarf unwind
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48007
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #33 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-08 13:34:47
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #32)
(In reply to comment #31)
(In reply to comment #29)
Created attachment 24938 [details]
WIP patch that exploits addr32.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49948
Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gjl at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50015
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48370
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50011
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
14:36:27 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Aug 8 14:36:22 2011
New Revision: 177565
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177565
Log:
PR c++/50011
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47659
--- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2011-08-08 14:50:33 UTC ---
On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 06:07:36AM +, thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net
wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47659
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50020
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #34 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08 14:59:22 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Aug 8 14:59:19 2011
New Revision: 177566
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177566
Log:
PR target/49781
* config/i386/i386.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49993
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50020
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
15:32:27 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Aug 8 15:32:21 2011
New Revision: 177567
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177567
Log:
PR c++/50020
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47727
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48529
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
--- Comment #2 from Ryan Hill dirtyepic at gentoo dot org 2011-08-08 15:58:33
UTC ---
ie. no backports for graphite work?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #35 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-08 16:28:58
UTC ---
It works much better now. But gcc.dg/torture/pr47744-2.c compiled with
-mx32 -O3 -std=gnu99 -ftree-vectorize -funroll-loops
still generates those leal:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #36 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
16:33:10 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Aug 8 16:33:06 2011
New Revision: 177569
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177569
Log:
Add a testcase for PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50018
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-08-08
16:57:17 UTC ---
Created attachment 24950
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24950
reduced test case
The test case is simply that a function takes the address
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #37 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-08-08 17:16:44
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #35)
It works much better now. But gcc.dg/torture/pr47744-2.c compiled with
-mx32 -O3 -std=gnu99 -ftree-vectorize -funroll-loops
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #5 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2011-08-08
17:45:03 UTC ---
We seem to have...
/* Given a partial pathname as input, return another pathname that
shares no directory elements with the pathname of __FILE__.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49923
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
17:53:57 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Aug 8 17:53:55 2011
New Revision: 177572
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177572
Log:
2011-08-08 Martin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08 17:57:06
UTC ---
Created attachment 24951
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24951
make errors.c match core-diagnostic.c in the shared interfaces
OK. So Darwin's
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50020
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50011
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2011-08-08
18:12:34 UTC ---
Apparently the key is --enable-checking=something.
It is even more subtle (x86_64-apple-darwin10):
../work/configure --prefix=/opt/gcc/gcc4.7w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49990
--- Comment #3 from Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08 18:19:20
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Mon Aug 8 18:19:17 2011
New Revision: 177573
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177573
Log:
2011-08-08 Richard Henderson
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49990
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #8 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08 18:22:38
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Apparently the key is --enable-checking=something.
It is even more subtle (x86_64-apple-darwin10):
../work/configure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2011-08-08
18:31:02 UTC ---
It doesn't seem to me to have much to do with lto - it seems a build issue.
I.E. one should not be including two different implementations of the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #10 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2011-08-08
19:27:58 UTC ---
This is radar://6320843 duplicate symbols from static libraries not properly
ignored revisiting us...
26-Oct-2008 10:43 AM Jack Howarth:
Xcode 3.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5
David Fang fang at csl dot cornell.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fang at csl dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50024
Summary: gcc crashes when using braced initialization in member
function of template
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50021
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
20:48:51 UTC ---
Yep, we need to mark partial clones and supress warnings there. Do we have way
to work out from DECL if it is a clone? (from callgraph it is bit tricky in
this
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50025
Summary: C++0x initialization syntax doesn't work for class
members of reference type
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50018
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49994
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
--- Comment #4 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-08-08 22:13:29 UTC ---
Attached bug box sources. These are from hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00.
Dave
--
John David Anglindave.ang...@bell.net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50025
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
22:29:08 UTC ---
G++ is actually correct according to wording in the C++11 FDIS (see 8.5.4
paragraphs 5 and 6), but we've reported it as an issue that needs to be fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #11 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08 22:39:31
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
It doesn't seem to me to have much to do with lto - it seems a build issue.
I.E. one should not be including two different
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #12 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08 22:41:32
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
This is radar://6320843 duplicate symbols from static libraries not properly
ignored revisiting us...
hm I doubt it.
Check the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50025
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
22:46:31 UTC ---
It's not just class members, it applies to list-initialization of any reference
type:
int i;
int ir{ i };
The FDIS requires a temporary to be created,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #13 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2011-08-08
22:59:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
(In reply to comment #10)
This is radar://6320843 duplicate symbols from static libraries not
properly
ignored
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
--- Comment #5 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-08-08 23:06:08 UTC ---
On 8-Aug-11, at 6:37 PM, danglin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Let's try this again.
--
John David Anglindave.ang...@bell.net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49990
--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Makarov vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
23:18:25 UTC ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Mon Aug 8 23:18:23 2011
New Revision: 177575
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177575
Log:
2011-08-08
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50025
--- Comment #3 from Andrzej Krzemienski akrzemi1 at gmail dot com 2011-08-08
23:31:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
G++ is actually correct according to wording in the C++11 FDIS (see 8.5.4
paragraphs 5 and 6), but we've reported it as an
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49937
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #14 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2011-08-09
00:09:08 UTC ---
Iain,
I would also add that when I was trying avoid having to resort to
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-08/msg01583.html, I found that the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49246
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Gray jsg at openbsd dot org 2011-08-09 00:16:20
UTC ---
I was still seeing it about a week or so ago. At the moment I can't even get
past stage1 however. Something seems to go into an infinite loop around
stage 1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49500
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50024
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49935
--- Comment #2 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net 2011-08-09
01:47:15 UTC ---
Created attachment 24954
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24954
GCC 4.0.2 patch, v1
Here is the patch which must be applied to the core
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49935
--- Comment #3 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net 2011-08-09
01:48:45 UTC ---
Created attachment 24955
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24955
GCC extension for 4.0.2, v1
And here is the GCC extension updated to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49935
Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24954|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38644
--- Comment #41 from Jiangning Liu jiangning.liu at arm dot com 2011-08-09
02:04:52 UTC ---
Yes, this is from the libstdc++ sources (4.6.1 20110627,
libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/new_opnt.cc). You need a non-EABI ARM variant of GCC
since this bug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45170
Damian Rouson damian at rouson dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||damian at rouson
1 - 100 of 106 matches
Mail list logo