https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34528
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #0)
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/
> 80093a381db184c6/
>
> This interface is needed if one wants pass an array descriptor to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91195
--- Comment #3 from Jiangning Liu ---
The gcc compilation difference between FOR_UP_LIMIT is 3 and 4 is that,
cunrolli can do loop unrolling when FOR_UP_LIMIT is 3, for which the control
flow can be significantly simplified, so the conditional
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
C. Heide changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cameron.heide at betasystems
dot c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91194
Feng Xue changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80545
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
As best I can tell the problem is that the option_enabled() function doesn't
consider the front-end's lang_mask and returns true even for options that are
not supported in the current language. I'm working
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91220
Bug ID: 91220
Summary: -Q --help=common displays options limited to subsets
of languages
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87256
--- Comment #11 from John David Anglin ---
I tend to think there may be an issue with costs. There is no pattern
for muldi3 on 32-bit hppa, so we use the generic code from libgcc. How
do we know the cost for this routine?
If synth_mult is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67853
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54366
Bug 54366 depends on bug 67853, which changed state.
Bug 67853 Summary: decltype of parenthesized xvalue does not correctly yield
rvalue-reference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67853
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67853
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Sun Jul 21 21:20:27 2019
New Revision: 273652
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273652=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/67853
* g++.dg/cpp0x/decltype72.C: New test.
Added:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67853
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90362
Stafford Horne changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90363
Stafford Horne changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90362
--- Comment #3 from Stafford Horne ---
Author: shorne
Date: Sun Jul 21 20:59:50 2019
New Revision: 273648
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273648=gcc=rev
Log:
or1k: Fix issues with msoft-div
Fixes bad assembly logic with software divide as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90363
--- Comment #3 from Stafford Horne ---
Author: shorne
Date: Sun Jul 21 20:58:54 2019
New Revision: 273647
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273647=gcc=rev
Log:
or1k: Fix code quality for volatile memory loads
Volatile memory does not match
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #72 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2019-07-21 2:56 p.m., cameron.heide at betasystems dot com wrote:
> I did a bit of bisecting and the EOF conftest crash started occurring at
> revision r214747
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #71 from C. Heide ---
Created attachment 46616
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46616=edit
Different output for revs r214744 and r214747
I did a bit of bisecting and the EOF conftest crash started occurring at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91030
--- Comment #40 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Jul 21 15:55:49 2019
New Revision: 273643
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273643=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-07-21 Thomas König
PR libfortran/91030
* gfortran.texi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88227
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The following test giveS ALSO an ICE with -m32
% cat boz_10.f90
print *, real(b'1010101001101',10)
end
% gfortran -m32 boz_10.f90
f951: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault: 11
libbacktrace
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78209
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48839
--- Comment #10 from Paolo Carlini ---
Hi Eric
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #9)
> (In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #8)
> > Hi. As you can see, the patch itself seems simple, but a while ago I noticed
> > that quite a few
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53633
--- Comment #7 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Sun Jul 21 09:42:41 2019
New Revision: 273642
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273642=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix -Wreturn-type for static naked functions in C
This patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91217
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40073
--- Comment #17 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Yup, those testcases work fine for powerpc, too; and the signed versions of
those
do as well. (I couldn't find vector-types.h; I did "#define VECTOR_SIZE 16").
24 matches
Mail list logo
