http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52106
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52105
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52106
Vincent Lefèvre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52102
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-03
13:21:43 UTC ---
>From the dump:
two.a._data.data = (void * restrict) __builtin_malloc (8);
__builtin_memset (two.a._data.data, 0, 8);
two.a._data.offset = -1;
{
struct t D.1891;
D.1891
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52104
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bonzini at gnu dot org
Target Milestone|-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52095
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-02-03 13:06:19 UTC ---
> --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-03
> 12:50:33 UTC ---
> Untested fix.
I've just re-built cc1 with the patch and re-run the gcc.dg/sms-7.c
test: passe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52107
Bug #: 52107
Summary: IBM 128bit long double constant loaded inefficiently
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52106
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52095
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-03
12:50:33 UTC ---
Created attachment 26562
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26562
gcc47-pr52095.patch
Untested fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52095
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52106
Bug #: 52106
Summary: missing -Wunused-but-set-variable warning with the a =
b = ... construct
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52105
Bug #: 52105
Summary: Improved dead code identifying -Wunused-function?
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49948
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52092
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52092
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-03
11:55:33 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Feb 3 11:55:29 2012
New Revision: 183869
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183869
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/52092
* loop-unswitch.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52104
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
11:08:47 UTC ---
So fixing that configure test should make the problem go away?
There's still a problem on non-TLS targets though. I have no idea how to
explicitly instantiate the std::function tem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52104
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-02-03 10:55:07 UTC ---
> --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
> 10:48:16 UTC ---
> Are you sure this is using native TLS?
Not anymore ;-( While Solaris 8 and 9 with gas supp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51522
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-03
10:50:02 UTC ---
If I try the example of comment 4 with the line break before "&" undone and
using the newest 4.7 trunk (clean build), I see in valgrind:
==14154== Invalid read of size 4
==14154==
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52104
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
10:48:16 UTC ---
Are you sure this is using native TLS?
This part of the 49204 commit:
(__future_base::_Async_state_common::_M_join): Serialize attempts to
join thread.
adds:
void _M_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48512
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48512
--- Comment #3 from Kai Tietz 2012-02-03 10:35:11
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Fri Feb 3 10:35:06 2012
New Revision: 183868
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183868
Log:
PR libjava/48512
* configure.ac (THREA
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52104
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-02-03 10:21:03 UTC ---
> --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
> 10:11:40 UTC ---
> Looks as though we need an extra explicit instantiation in src/c++11/future.cc
Seems so. T
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52103
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
10:13:55 UTC ---
You can use C++11 explicit override control:
struct B {
virtual void f(int);
};
struct D : B {
void f(long) override; // error: doesn't override anything
void f(int) over
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52095
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52104
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
10:11:40 UTC ---
Looks as though we need an extra explicit instantiation in src/c++11/future.cc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52097
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52100
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52104
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth 2012-02-03 10:05:57 UTC
---
Created attachment 26561
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26561
assembler input
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52104
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth 2012-02-03 10:05:14 UTC
---
Created attachment 26560
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26560
preprocessed input
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52103
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Version|unknown
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52104
Bug #: 52104
Summary: go1 fails to link on Solaris 8/9 x86 with native TLS
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51296
--- Comment #35 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-02-03 09:50:39 UTC ---
> --- Comment #33 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
> 08:52:17 UTC ---
> Oops, this hunk would be needed too
I know, I already had this in my failed attempt to us
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51296
--- Comment #34 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-02-03 09:48:15 UTC ---
> Since a similar problem exists for darwin11's
> PTHREAD_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INITIALIZER this solution is not OSF-specific. This
> allows config/os/*/os_defines.h to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48512
--- Comment #2 from Kai Tietz 2012-02-03 09:42:46
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Fri Feb 3 09:42:42 2012
New Revision: 183867
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183867
Log:
PR libjava/48512
* configure.ac (THREA
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34010
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49204
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.0 |4.8.0
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wake
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #42 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
09:18:36 UTC ---
That header isn't even installed, let alone included, on other targets
Jack, if you test it please change == to >= in
libstdc++-v3/config/os/bsd/darwin/os_defines.h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52103
--- Comment #1 from mlg 2012-02-03 09:14:36 UTC ---
$ g++ --version
g++ (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.5.2-8ubuntu4) 4.5.2
Copyright (C) 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc. [...]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52103
Bug #: 52103
Summary: need a finer control over -Woverloaded-virtual
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #41 from Iain Sandoe 2012-02-03 09:04:02
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #40)
> Created attachment 26558 [details]
> disable __GTHREAD_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INIT for Lion
>
> Thanks, Iain.
>
> I'm thinking of something like this, which allow
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51296
--- Comment #33 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
08:52:17 UTC ---
Oops, this hunk would be needed too
--- a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/condition_variable.cc
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/condition_variable.cc
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPAC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51296
--- Comment #32 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
08:50:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 26559
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26559
proposed patch
Since a similar problem exists for darwin11's
PTHREAD_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INITIALIZER
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #40 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-03
08:46:20 UTC ---
Created attachment 26558
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26558
disable __GTHREAD_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INIT for Lion
Thanks, Iain.
I'm thinking of something like thi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #39 from Iain Sandoe 2012-02-03 08:22:56
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #37)
> (In reply to comment #36)
> You would probably have to use Availability.h and something like...
This is not required, (and likely undesirable).
Use the "
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52102
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
Summ
101 - 145 of 145 matches
Mail list logo
