http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59031
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
I recommend always sending patches to the mailing list.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59030
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Today I can't reproduce this. Please double check.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59033
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|cannot control inherited|cannot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59035
Bug ID: 59035
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/c99-contract-1.c -O2 -flto
-fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none execution
test
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59034
--- Comment #3 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Nov 7 09:58:05 2013
New Revision: 204501
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204501root=gccview=rev
Log:
Use Pmode with stack_pointer_rtx
gcc/
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59034
--- Comment #4 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Nov 7 10:05:07 2013
New Revision: 204502
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204502root=gccview=rev
Log:
Use Pmode with stack_pointer_rtx
gcc/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59029
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59034
--- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Nov 7 10:09:49 2013
New Revision: 204503
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204503root=gccview=rev
Log:
Use Pmode with stack_pointer_rtx
Backport
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2778
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59029
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #2)
Created attachment 31177 [details]
Draft patch
Aha, looks like the ICE is caused by destination address being INTEGER_CST
instead of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59036
Bug ID: 59036
Summary: [4.9 regression] Performance degradation after r204212
on 32-bit x86 targets.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59036
--- Comment #1 from Yuri Rumyantsev ysrumyan at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 31178
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31178action=edit
test-case to reproduce
test need to be compiled with -m32 option for any x86 targets.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12277
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10619
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16386
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17314
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59036
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i?86-*-*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59035
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsm28 at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59034
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59031
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59032
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59030
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59014
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59025
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59025
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Can you please narrow it down to a file and routine? I guess I can look at it
afterwards using cross-compilers, the patch wasn't meant do any code generation
changes, only that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59027
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58994
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=59033
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59029
--- Comment #4 from ygribov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ygribov
Date: Thu Nov 7 12:04:45 2013
New Revision: 204508
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204508root=gccview=rev
Log:
Allow integer literals as addresses in instrumented builtins.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59029
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to ygribov from comment #4)
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204508root=gccview=rev
Log:
Allow integer literals as addresses in instrumented builtins.
Note, patches
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59033
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59030
--- Comment #5 from Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The offending patch got reverted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2013-11/msg00212.html
: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20131107 (experimental) (GCC)
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-v' '-save-temps' '-O3' '-mtune=generic' '-march=x86-64'
/work/gcc-trunk/gcc/install-native/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1
-E -quiet -v -imultilib . -imultiarch x86_64-linux-gnu /home/matlea01/test.c
-mtune
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59038
Bug ID: 59038
Summary: [4.9 Regression] r204398 causes 186.crafty init.c to
be miscompiled
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59038
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59037
--- Comment #1 from Matthew Leach matthew.leach at arm dot com ---
Having a quick dig around the code, I think fold-const.c:16718 looks
suspicious:
if (offset/part_widthi = TYPE_VECTOR_SUBPARTS (op00type))
Likewise in cp/semantics.c:9122 and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59037
jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59029
--- Comment #6 from Yury Gribov y.gribov at samsung dot com ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
Note, patches should still go to gcc-patches, even when you just say in
subject
[committed] and in the description that it has been
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58176
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
Bug ID: 59039
Summary: Undocumented __builtin_longjmp/__builtin_setjmp
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59027
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59038
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
extern void abort (void);
unsigned char first_ones_8bit[256];
unsigned char connected_passed[256];
int
main ()
{
int i, j;
for (i=0;i256;i++){
connected_passed[i]=0;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59040
Bug ID: 59040
Summary: [4.9 Regression] r203937 caused: FAIL:
gcc.dg/torture/memcpy-1.c -O0 (internal compiler
error)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59040
Igor Zamyatin izamyatin at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||izamyatin at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56710
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
That testcase shows this is an ice-on-valid-code bug. Reduced:
struct Dummy {
void getDummy() const { }
};
templatetypename F
void eachDummy(F closure) {
Dummy d;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59035
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com ---
If -ffp-contract=off is set for any object (whether explicitly, or
implicitly by an option such as -std=c99), the safe option for LTO would
be to set
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59040
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Igor Zamyatin from comment #1)
Dup of 58853
There is no PR58853.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59040
--- Comment #3 from Igor Zamyatin izamyatin at gmail dot com ---
Hmm... http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58853
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59040
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=58853
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59040
octoploid at yandex dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||octoploid at yandex dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59040
--- Comment #6 from octoploid at yandex dot com ---
(In reply to octoploid from comment #5)
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #2)
(In reply to Igor Zamyatin from comment #1)
Dup of 58853
There is no PR58853.
Looks like a bugzilla
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58853
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
This
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
index 53e04c4..dd8d943 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
@@ -23766,6 +23766,7 @@
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58176
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58176
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Nov 7 14:26:17 2013
New Revision: 204514
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204514root=gccview=rev
Log:
2013-11-07 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
__builtin_longjmp/setjmp are just longjmp(3) setjmp(3) with their constraints.
They should not be used directly but setjmp.h should be.
The file looks scary.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I suppose
// alloca() to force generation of frame pointer. The argument to alloca
// is contrived to prevent the compiler from optimizing it away. This
// code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59037
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
But it seems cilk depends on implementation details of setjmp/longjmp which
looks bogus anyway.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
Ah, those are the builtins used for SJLJ and they get lowered to
setjmp_setup,dispatcher and longjmp.
Don't use __builtin_setjmp as I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Ah, those are the builtins used for SJLJ and they get lowered to
setjmp_setup,dispatcher and longjmp.
Right, they are the efficient version of setjmp/longjmp.
I suppose these
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #7)
Ah, those are the builtins used for SJLJ and they get lowered to
setjmp_setup,dispatcher and longjmp.
Right, they are the efficient
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59036
--- Comment #2 from Vladimir Makarov vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Yuri Rumyantsev from comment #0)
After patch to improve register preferencing in IRA and to *remove regmove*
pass we noticed performance degradation on several
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
What restrictions do they have? Can they be used within the
same function? Can they be used within functions with parameters?
The only restriction I know of is that they cannot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59025
--- Comment #4 from Peter Bergner bergner at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Pat was working on that. He reported to me that he had gone through compiling
each file with the bad options and did not hit the error, so it seems it is
an interaction between
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #9)
What restrictions do they have? Can they be used within the
same function? Can they be used within functions with parameters?
The only
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #11 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org ---
In the latter testcase foo doesn't call a function so there is never a need to
save anything.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59041
Bug ID: 59041
Summary: [4.8/4.9 Regression] Unnecessary vzeroupper generated
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59041
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
This one is not unnecessary, it is emitted on purpose from generic
mode-switching code:
-- gcc/mode-switching.c --
/* Pretend the mode is clobbered across abnormal edges. */
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59019
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
OK, making a conditional no-return call into an unconditional no-return call
would have the same problem. Ugh.
The problem I see where is we're going to have to run some kind of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
%rdi holds the function parameter 'i'. But when __builtin_longjmp is
called, %rdi can have some random value. GCC doesn't save %rdi first.
No, __builtin_longjmp doesn't touch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59019
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The problem I see where is we're going to have to run some kind of cleanup
pass after each RTL pass that might make these transformations (cse, gcse,
cprop, combine and I'm sure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59027
Marc Mutz marc.mutz at kdab dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59041
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=59027
--- Comment #4 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com ---
(In reply to Marc Mutz from comment #3)
See code posted in http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=17834
is_unsignedMouseButton fails, !is_signed succeeds. MouseButton is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #12)
No, __builtin_longjmp doesn't touch %rdi at all. Don't worry too much, the
SJLJ mechanism of the C++ and Ada compilers has been piggybacked
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59027
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59042
Bug ID: 59042
Summary: Declaration of back_insert_iterator::value_type is
incorrect
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59042
--- Comment #1 from Chris Dodd cdodd at acm dot org ---
The other type traits of back_insert_iterator should probably not be void, as
well.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59027
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Marc Mutz from comment #0)
According to N3797 Table 49, both is_signed and is_unsigned should evaluate
to true_type only if the argument is_arithmetic, too. is_unsigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59042
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
And in [back.insert.iterator] the standard explicitly requires this:
template class Container
class back_insert_iterator :
public iteratoroutput_iterator_tag,void,void,void,void{
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56764
Cong Hou congh at google dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||congh at google dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59042
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Your code is not valid, you should be using typename
iterator_traitsOutputIterator::value_type
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59042
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56764
--- Comment #3 from congh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: congh
Date: Thu Nov 7 19:29:45 2013
New Revision: 204538
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204538root=gccview=rev
Log:
2013-11-07 Cong Hou co...@google.com
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59037
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Matthew Leach from comment #1)
Having a quick dig around the code, I think fold-const.c:16718 looks
suspicious:
if (offset/part_widthi = TYPE_VECTOR_SUBPARTS
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58984
Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58994
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
Note that the tests pass on x86_64-apple-darwin10 for both -m32 and -m64.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59043
Bug ID: 59043
Summary: [4.9 Regression] FAIL: (gcc|++).dg/pubtypes*
scan-assembler long.*Length of Public Type Names Info
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58471
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58471
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Thu Nov 7 22:39:15 2013
New Revision: 204547
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204547root=gccview=rev
Log:
2013-11-07 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran/58471
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This is good to hear. What is each field? I assume that
the first 3 fields are frame address, resume address and
stack address. Are the same for all targets? What are
the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #15 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #14)
This is good to hear. What is each field? I assume that
the first 3 fields are frame address, resume address and
stack address. Are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59044
Bug ID: 59044
Summary: Internal compiler error triggers when accessing a
typedef in a specialized member class
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56764
--- Comment #4 from congh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: congh
Date: Fri Nov 8 02:08:05 2013
New Revision: 204557
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204557root=gccview=rev
Log:
2013-11-07 Cong Hou co...@google.com
Backport from mainline
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18969
--- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It works in clang:
test.cc:3:16: error: void function 'foo' should not return a value
[-Wreturn-type]
void foo() { return 0; }
^ ~
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18969
--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Breakpoint 5, check_return_expr (retval=integer_cst 0x77408720,
no_warning=0x7fffdf2f) at /home/manuel/test1/src/gcc/cp/typeck.c:8311
B =if (processing_template_decl)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48110
Mingjie Xing mingjie.xing at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mingjie.xing
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
