--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Last reconfirmed|2009-12-08 11:19:20 |2009-12-08
--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-08 11:21
---
Let's CC Jason, maybe it's just matter of robustifying a tad the initializer
list code.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-08 13:11
---
Likely a duplicate of PR34491.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-08 13:12
---
Then show here exactly what you are trying to compile. Note: this is *not*
gcc-help.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42330
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42332
--- Comment #10 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-08 14:15
---
Since you have specializations for A, you also need, in general, the
corresponding definitions:
const int A0::i;
const int A1::i;
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42330
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-07 14:30
---
Fixed.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-07 16:41
---
In any case, please provide a small self-contained snippet demonstrating the
issue. Thanks.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-07 23:35
---
Likewise SunStudio and Icc reject it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42328
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-06 19:35
---
Let's CC Dodji...
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-05 09:45
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 42272 ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-05 09:45
---
*** Bug 42296 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42272
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-05 19:32
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 42272 ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-05 19:32
---
*** Bug 42296 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42272
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-04 08:50
---
Thanks Jason, it looks like the larger testcases we have also build fine now!
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-04 09:21
---
Fixed for 4.4.3 too, arguably this is a regression.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42261
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-04 09:31
---
Benjamin, can you check this?
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-04 10:49
---
Let's add DaveK in CC
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-04 16:20
---
I'm recategorizing as other, because actually the demangler doesn't belong to
the library.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-04 17:44
---
.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-03 12:42
---
Funny, after so many years... Let me look into it.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-03 13:04
---
Note, however, that this happens only with checking enabled...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42260
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-03 14:22
---
Fixed.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
org
ReportedBy: paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42266
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-03 18:19
---
Second try here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-12/msg00184.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34272
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-02 15:54
---
Fixed for 4.5.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-02 15:55
---
Fixed for 4.5.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-01 09:22
---
Done, thank you.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-02 00:01
---
*** Bug 42242 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-02 00:01
---
This is essentially PR32618, see the last audit trail entries, in particular.
As far as I know my last remark is still an issue (I told privately Howard but
then I dropped it): without Concepts, it's quite
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 08:53
---
Jason, can we close this one as duplicate of PR38712 ?
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 10:27
---
Today (r154772), I can't reproduce the issue anymore. Volker, can you double
check?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42057
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 14:02
---
The ICE part is fixed by my patch for PR34272.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42062
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 14:07
---
The second part seems to me essentially a duplicate of PR28300.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42062
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 15:29
---
Ian, can you have a look to this issue? Thanks in advance.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 18:41
---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg01729.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40371
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 22:41
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 38600 ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 22:41
---
*** Bug 38712 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jason at gcc dot gnu dot org|
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-30 22:46
---
Fixed.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-29 08:34
---
Stefan is right. The issue, in full generality, isn't trivial at all, there is
now a new discussion on the library reflector. I'm under the impression that
for C++0x we are not going to standardize
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-29 23:50
---
Is this related to PR38600?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38600
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-29 23:52
---
Oops, I meant PR38712
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38600
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-28 19:05
---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg01568.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34272
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-27 10:24
---
Definitely intentional, yes.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-27 10:46
---
Fixed for 4.5.0. Not planning a backport.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-27 10:50
---
It is zero, in mainline. I'm not planning to backport anything here.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42191
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-27 12:49
---
Fixed by my patch for PR35112 in r154698.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-27 16:37
---
Fixed for 4.5.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-27 16:48
---
4.1.x is very old and not maintained anymore. Try something more recent, eg,
4.4.x, and, before reporting anything make sure you are not violating aliasing
rules (double check if the result changes with -fno
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-27 16:52
---
Reopening to...
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-27 16:53
---
... close as duplicate.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21920 ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #150 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-27 16:53
---
*** Bug 42197 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-27 23:08
---
The issue is pretty simple, actually: std::unique_future (which, by the way,
will be renamed just std::future), is missing move assignment operator. Note,
in N2914 it does *not* exist, has been added only
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-26 11:35
---
Hey, this is pointless, the issue is well known and Gaby is the reference
person in this area.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-26 12:15
---
What I meant, exactly, is that if any issue is well known to the concerned
people, there is no need for a Bugzilla, in particular an invalid one ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42182
--- Comment #9 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-26 12:57
---
The point is that the code is not conforming. In any case, conforming or not,
in the future please do not open Bugzilla for issues already known to the
maintainers, thanks in advance.
--
http
--- Comment #11 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-26 18:00
---
Yes, but remember our policy in the future, thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42182
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-24 08:37
---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg01304.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42057
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-24 10:49
---
Of course, this is completely unsupported.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-23 12:40
---
Richard, can you have a look to this one? First blush, I don't see anything
wrong with the code...
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-23 23:18
---
Jason, as far as I know, we never compiled this, the ICE is new. If we only
want to avoid the ICE, I'm attaching a patchlet to except.c which works fine,
otherwise, please let me know...
--
paolo dot
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-23 23:19
---
Created an attachment (id=19105)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19105action=view)
Draft patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42038
--- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-22 17:02
---
To work around this, can't you move the decltype as default of an additional
template parameter and use result_of for the result type?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42132
--- Comment #10 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-22 17:34
---
Yes, it works nice for me ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42132
--- Comment #30 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-22 19:13
---
Nope, let's keep it open as a reminder that we are still missing
__is_convertible_to and the newer ones, needed to implement N2984 (I'm
implementing three as we are speaking)
--
paolo dot carlini
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2009-11-22 19:13:48 |2009
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-21 19:16
---
This works with 4.4.x and current mainline.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-21 21:11
---
No excuses, just use --permissive! ;) Seriously, it would be nice if Jason
could confirm this is glitch in the extended SFINAE implementation, which, in
case, could be relatively easy to fix, I suspect
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-21 23:05
---
Thanks for the analysis, Jason.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42132
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-20 10:07
---
Fixed for 4.5.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-20 16:05
---
Fixed for 4.5.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-20 21:36
---
Note: linux is an operating system; borland is a software company.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42097
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-19 09:38
---
It is basic, yes, a point worth making with people insisting that we do have a
serious bug, thus reopening the PR at will, without trusting the competence of
the maintainers and wasting some of our time
--- Comment #9 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-19 17:03
---
Fixed for 4.5.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-18 11:11
---
Fixed for 4.5.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-18 11:37
---
Fixed for 4.5.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-19 02:16
---
It doesn't have any definition, it does have a *declaration*. This is pretty
basic C++, by the way. Just add out of class:
const size_t X::DEPENDENT_LENGTH_MASK;
...
...
and everything will be fine
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-17 11:01
---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg00783.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42058
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-17 11:09
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 39390 ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-17 11:09
---
*** Bug 42077 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-17 15:15
---
Yes.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39390
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-17 20:05
---
Fixed in mainline, I'm not planning work on a backport.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-16 08:33
---
Fixed for 4.5.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-16 13:16
---
I don't have the time to analyze this, but I note that a binary built with ICC
behaves exactly the same way.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42063
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-16 13:59
---
The confusion stems from the way, slightly confusing, in which the example in
the standard is written, which, if considered an actually runnable snippet,
invokes undefined behavior, because destroys the base
--- Comment #17 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-16 14:06
---
Gaby, I'm sorry, are you actively working on this issue?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11764
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-16 14:59
---
Fixed.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #16 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-16 22:02
---
*** Bug 42071 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
1201 - 1300 of 2536 matches
Mail list logo
