[Bug middle-end/26717] [4.2 Regression] gfortran: ICE at tree-complex.c:133 with -O -ffast-math in LAPACK,

2006-03-17 Thread anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gmx dot de 2006-03-17 08:06 --- (In reply to comment #4) I will, however, suggest that you reconsider using --fast-math with gfortran. One of my codes works correctly without --fast-math, but it will generate NaN's with it. I have not tracked down the

[Bug bootstrap/26718] Bootstrap 4.1.0 fails on Apple Power G5

2006-03-17 Thread aszodi at imp dot univie dot ac dot at
--- Comment #4 from aszodi at imp dot univie dot ac dot at 2006-03-17 08:53 --- Andrew: I could build gcc 4.0.2 on my private iBook (OS X 10.4.4 = Darwin V8.4.0), but not gcc 4.1.0 -- so the problem is most probably not G5-specific. Fang: I used the nm that came with the system

[Bug libfortran/26712] gfortran on mac intel runtime floating point exception when printing

2006-03-17 Thread ccb at dl dot ac dot uk
--- Comment #5 from ccb at dl dot ac dot uk 2006-03-17 10:13 --- How do I put this. The apple fenv.h supplied functions work by only setting bits in mxcsr (not cw), and then only setting bits 1-6. Problem is that the actual working bits are in 7-12 (as in fpu-387.h). So my little

[Bug target/26721] [4.2 Regression]: Gcc generates unaligned access

2006-03-17 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #19 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 10:33 --- *sigh*, seems like I opened a can of worms. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug rtl-optimization/26725] New: ICE in check_reg_live, at haifa-sched.c:4645 with -O2 at IPF

2006-03-17 Thread grigory_zagorodnev at linux dot intel dot com
GCC 4.2 revision 112135 failed to compile SPEC cpu2000/197.parser. Here is the minimal reproducer: struct Exp_struct { char type; unsigned char cost; }; extern void foo(); void print_expression(struct Exp_struct * n) { int i; if (n-type == 2) { for (i=0; in-cost; i++) foo();

[Bug tree-optimization/26726] New: -fivopts producing out of bounds array refs

2006-03-17 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
=== Cut === struct QValueList { QValueList() { sh = new int; } QValueList operator+= ( QValueList); int* sh; }; void queryIconsByContext() { QValueList iconlist[8]; QValueList iconlistResult; for (int i=0; i8; i++) iconlistResult+=iconlist[i]; }

[Bug target/26721] [4.2 Regression]: Gcc generates unaligned access

2006-03-17 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #20 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 11:03 --- For the testcase in comment #6 we fall into the #ifdef CONSTANT_ALIGNMENT else if (CONSTANT_CLASS_P (exp)) align = CONSTANT_ALIGNMENT (exp, align); #endif path and conclude the alignment is

[Bug bootstrap/26715] bootstrap comparison failure

2006-03-17 Thread chris dot pitchford at newsint dot co dot uk
--- Comment #2 from chris dot pitchford at newsint dot co dot uk 2006-03-17 11:18 --- Currently the only C compiler on the box is GCC 3.4.2 which was downloaded from Sunfreeware.com Is this the bootstrap compiler? To be honest this project is the first time I've tried to compile GCC,

[Bug libfortran/26712] gfortran on mac intel runtime floating point exception when printing

2006-03-17 Thread ccb at dl dot ac dot uk
--- Comment #6 from ccb at dl dot ac dot uk 2006-03-17 11:30 --- Created an attachment (id=11062) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11062action=view) fpu-387.h based fpe control for mactel The changes are to the SSE elements. It sets a mask as for the local floating

[Bug bootstrap/26715] bootstrap comparison failure

2006-03-17 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 11:33 --- Currently the only C compiler on the box is GCC 3.4.2 which was downloaded from Sunfreeware.com Is this the bootstrap compiler? The bootstrap compiler is the compiler that compiles GCC during stage #1 of the

[Bug tree-optimization/26726] -fivopts producing out of bounds array refs

2006-03-17 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 11:39 --- Reduced testcase: struct QValueList { QValueList() { sh = new int; } void foo(); int* sh; }; void queryIconsByContext() { QValueList iconlist[8]; iconlist[7].foo(); } ivopts generates bb 2:

[Bug tree-optimization/26726] -fivopts producing out of bounds array refs

2006-03-17 Thread mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 12:40 --- one possible workaround would be to lower the ARRAY_REF's to indirect mem refs, which I don't track -- mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/26726] -fivopts producing out of bounds array refs

2006-03-17 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 12:55 --- For your warning patch another option is to simply only warn in either the first or the second VRP pass, not in the third which is the only one run after loop optimizations. Also you could ignore ADDR_EXPR

[Bug tree-optimization/26726] -fivopts producing out of bounds array refs

2006-03-17 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 13:00 --- Now I noticed IVOPTs generates a TMR with base == iconlist[1] + ivtmp, offset -iconlist[0] and offset -4B (ivtmp being iconlist[0] initially). Which boils down to using simply *ivtmp instead of a TMR. Funny. --

[Bug tree-optimization/26726] -fivopts producing out of bounds array refs

2006-03-17 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 13:17 --- Simpler testcase: struct Foo { Foo() : s(1) {} int s; }; void foo(Foo); void bar(void) { Foo x[4]; foo(x[0]); } bb 0: ivtmp.34 = x[1]; L0:; D.1822 = (int *) x[0]; D.1825 = -x; MEM[base: D.1822 +

Re: [Bug tree-optimization/26726] -fivopts producing out of bounds array refs

2006-03-17 Thread Daniel Berlin
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 12:40 +, mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: --- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 12:40 --- one possible workaround would be to lower the ARRAY_REF's to indirect mem refs, which I don't track Uh, no. We are in fact, trying

[Bug tree-optimization/26726] -fivopts producing out of bounds array refs

2006-03-17 Thread dberlin at dberlin dot org
--- Comment #6 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 13:31 --- Subject: Re: -fivopts producing out of bounds array refs On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 12:40 +, mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: --- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 12:40

[Bug middle-end/21898] Segmentation fault on testsuite case gcc.dg/20020425-1.c

2006-03-17 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 14:29 --- I see the same on ia64 for trunk. Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x402ed101 in gimplify_cond_expr (expr_p=0x2070aca8, pre_p=0x607ffe8dc798, fallback=fb_none) at

[Bug middle-end/21898] Segmentation fault on testsuite case gcc.dg/20020425-1.c

2006-03-17 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 14:32 --- Forgot to mention - the ia64 build I was seeing this with was built with -g -fno-inline and checking enabled. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21898

[Bug rtl-optimization/26725] [4.2 Regression] ICE in check_reg_live, at haifa-sched.c:4645 with -O2 on ia64

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added GCC target triplet||ia64-unknown-linux-gnu Keywords|

[Bug rtl-optimization/26727] New: [4.2 Regression] gcc.target/powerpc/doloop-1.c fails

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
I was looking through my testsuite results and noticed this fails. We deinitely don't get a do loop at all: L7: addic. r0,r0,-1 add r4,r4,r2 addi r2,r2,1 bne- cr0,L7 L5: .. blr L6: add r5,r5,r2 addi r2,r2,1 bdz L5 add

[Bug rtl-optimization/26727] [4.2 Regression] gcc.target/powerpc/doloop-1.c fails

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26727

[Bug middle-end/26724] __builtin_constant_p fails to recognise function with constant return

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 15:20 --- Confirmed, the problem is: /* If this expression has side effects, show we don't know it to be a constant. Likewise if it's a pointer or aggregate type since in those case we only want literals, since

Error with stl

2006-03-17 Thread Michael Tomuschat
Hello, I've got a problem compiling the following source [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/tmp/xxx g++ -Wall -O2 b.cpp b.cpp: In member function ‘void bClsT::DumpItems()’: b.cpp:15: error: expected `;' before ‘aIter’ When I compile this code with borland's bcc it compiles without complaining. So I think it

[Bug java/26720] Can't find method 'access$1(I)'

2006-03-17 Thread rmathew at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- rmathew at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last

Re: Error with stl

2006-03-17 Thread Andrew Pinski
On Mar 17, 2006, at 10:33 AM, Michael Tomuschat wrote: vectorclass aCls T ::iterator aIter; // tut nicht You forgot the typename keyword. It should be: typename vectorclass aCls T ::iterator aIter; -- Pinski

[Bug fortran/26728] New: On AMD Athlon 64 not possible to call C routine with variable no. of arguments from Fortran

2006-03-17 Thread kbanse at eso dot org
Since gcc release 4 it is not possible anymore to call from Fortran a C routine defined for a variable no. of arguments using the ellips notation. It used to work on all previous gcc 3 releases, and it still works on 32-bit machines, like e.g. Intel Pentium with SUSE Linux 10.0 (gcc 4.0.2)

[Bug fortran/26728] On AMD Athlon 64 not possible to call C routine with variable no. of arguments from Fortran

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 15:41 --- This is not valid code at all. The fortran code assumes it is passing to a non varargs function which is correct. You should develop a different solution to this issue. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org

[Bug tree-optimization/26629] tree load PRE does not work on array references

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 16:11 --- Patch posted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg01110.html -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/26729] New: bogus 'comparison is always 0' message

2006-03-17 Thread apl at alum dot mit dot edu
trivial function using POD constructors says comparison is always 0. If I remove any of the UInt16 constructors, the warning goes away. This doesn't seem to happen in gcc-4.1.0 typedef unsigned short UInt16; UInt16 pipe; UInt16 cmp () { UInt16 answer; answer = UInt16((pipe

[Bug c++/26729] bogus 'comparison is always 0' message

2006-03-17 Thread apl at alum dot mit dot edu
--- Comment #1 from apl at alum dot mit dot edu 2006-03-17 16:48 --- Created an attachment (id=11063) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11063action=view) g++ -Wall -Werror -Wextra -O2 ... (almost) trivial test case... --

[Bug c/26730] New: Pointer assignment used together with ++ leads to an update of the wrong structure

2006-03-17 Thread SimonX200 at hotmail dot com
This is not the same as bug 11751 as the variable used with ++ is not reused. Here the simple code: sadd.i: # 1 sadd.c # 1 built-in # 1 command line # 1 sadd.c typedef struct A A; struct A { int no; A *sub; }; void main() { A sub={0, ((void*)0)}; A root={0, sub};

RE: too few template-parameter-lists with nested template

2006-03-17 Thread Michael Gourlay
I have worked around the problem. The HashTable methods now have __GCC__ code that detects when the object has not had its constructor called, and Performs the same initialization on-demand. From the lack of responses indicating otherwise, I suppose I will assume this is a bug in G++. Should

[Bug c/26730] Pointer assignment used together with ++ leads to an update of the wrong structure

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 16:59 --- pos=pos-sub[pos-no++]; This is undefined. You assign pos and use it without a sequence point. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 11751 *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

[Bug c/11751] wrong evaluation order of an expression

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #64 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 16:59 --- *** Bug 26730 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/26729] [3.3/3.4 Regression] bogus 'comparison is always 0' message

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 17:00 --- Fixed in 4.0.0, 3.4.6 was the last release of 3.4.x. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/26729] [3.3/3.4 Regression] bogus 'comparison is always 0' message

2006-03-17 Thread apl at alum dot mit dot edu
--- Comment #3 from apl at alum dot mit dot edu 2006-03-17 17:04 --- Any clue as to the specific patch? We build with -Wall -Wextra -Werror, and won't be able to upgrade to gcc-4.x for at least another couple of months. -- apl at alum dot mit dot edu changed: What

[Bug c++/26729] [3.3/3.4 Regression] bogus 'comparison is always 0' message

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 17:07 --- Who knows, 3.4.x is dead, I would not doubt it was the merge of the tree-ssa branch into the mainline which fixed this. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/26731] New: Jump threading gets in the way of loops

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
Jump threading causes bad interactions with loops: int f(int t, int a, int x) { int n, g; if (t) n = a; else n = 4; for (g=0; gn; g++) x++; return x; } This should be optimized to: int f(int t, int a, int x) { int n, g; if (t) n = a; else n = 4; x+=n; return x;

[Bug tree-optimization/26731] Jump threading gets in the way of loops

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 17:32 --- I almost think this is also the cause for PR 26727. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/26721] [4.2 Regression]: Gcc generates unaligned access

2006-03-17 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #21 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 17:38 --- Subject: Bug 26721 Author: rguenth Date: Fri Mar 17 17:38:51 2006 New Revision: 112177 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112177 Log: 2006-03-17 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR

[Bug target/26721] [4.2 Regression]: Gcc generates unaligned access

2006-03-17 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #22 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 17:39 --- This should be fixed now. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug rtl-optimization/26727] [4.2 Regression] gcc.target/powerpc/doloop-1.c fails

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 17:52 --- It also fails on AIX. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-03/msg01132.html This worked in rev 112118 but failed in 112135. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug java/26720] Can't find method 'access$1(I)'

2006-03-17 Thread tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 18:01 --- The bug here is that the code that handles assignments requiring an accessor method does not understand that a constant might be subject to a narrowing constant conversion. Hence it does not (e.g.) convert '0' to

[Bug fortran/26716] [4.1,4.2 regression] gfortran: incorrect choice of overloaded function

2006-03-17 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 18:02 --- I have a patch that fixes this and regtests OK; I will get it ready for submission tomorrow. Index: gcc/fortran/interface.c === ***

[Bug java/26720] Can't find method 'access$1(I)'

2006-03-17 Thread tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 18:06 --- One potential fix is to call try_builtin_assignconv in nested_field_access_fix or the like. I haven't tried this. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26720

[Bug libstdc++/26513] make_exports.pl hardcoded to build nm

2006-03-17 Thread bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 18:29 --- Solution is to make make_exports.pl.in with NM_FOR_TARGET substition for current uses of 'nm' This is done with other scripts. This is low-priority, but this is enough of a hint so that you should be able to try

[Bug libstdc++/26497] libstdc++-v3: configure: test: -lt: unary operator expected

2006-03-17 Thread bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 18:31 --- linking tests are native only, because finding all the support objects needed for all the various platforms (crt.o, etc.) is hard. At least, this is the traditional objection. fixing glibcxx_gnu_ld_version still

[Bug libstdc++/25608] g++ miscompiles gcjx

2006-03-17 Thread bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #18 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 18:33 --- is this still an active issue, or was it indicative of some temporary or transient thing in the gcc sources? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25608

[Bug c/26732] New: Rejects valid code at different optimization levels.

2006-03-17 Thread ramana dot radhakrishnan at codito dot com
#include stdlib.h int bar(baz) struct { int foo; } baz; { return baz.foo; } int main (void) { struct { int foo; } baz; baz.foo = 0xdeadbeef; if (bar(baz) != 0xdeadbeef) abort(); } Compiling at O2 results in no error. compiling at O3 results in the

[Bug c/26732] Accepts invalid code at different optimization levels.

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 18:43 --- This is invalid code, well undefined at best. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26732

[Bug c/26732] Accepts invalid code at different optimization levels.

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 18:45 --- Related to PR 22249. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26732

[Bug c/26732] Accepts invalid code at different optimization levels.

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 18:47 --- This is all: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-10/msg00772.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26732

[Bug libstdc++/25409] STL mt_allocator crash in global construcutor

2006-03-17 Thread bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 19:04 --- Created an attachment (id=11064) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11064action=view) example of how to do testcase Explicitly use __mt_alloc. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25409

[Bug libstdc++/25409] STL mt_allocator crash in global construcutor

2006-03-17 Thread bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 19:10 --- I'm closing this. I cannot reproduce it. In addition, the submitted testcase is not sufficient: it has a complicated directory structure, makefiles, etc etc. Also, does not demonstrate the so-called bug... Please

[Bug libstdc++/26733] New: move semantics vs. debug mode

2006-03-17 Thread bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- Summary: move semantics vs. debug mode Product: gcc Version: 4.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: bkoz

[Bug libstdc++/26733] move semantics vs. debug mode

2006-03-17 Thread bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 19:15 --- On libstdcxx_so_7-branch, there is preliminary support for move semantics. These patches have some issues: 1) _GLIBCXX_STD_MOVE not listed in any ChangeLog entry... 2) new fails in debug mode. First pointed out

[Bug libstdc++/26733] move semantics vs. debug mode

2006-03-17 Thread bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 19:16 --- Created an attachment (id=11065) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11065action=view) patch to test debug mode This runs the testsuite with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG. --

[Bug libstdc++/26733] move semantics vs. debug mode

2006-03-17 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-03-17 19:48 --- (In reply to comment #1) On libstdcxx_so_7-branch, there is preliminary support for move semantics. These patches have some issues: 1) _GLIBCXX_STD_MOVE not listed in any ChangeLog entry... 2) new fails in debug

[Bug c/26732] Accepts invalid code at different optimization levels.

2006-03-17 Thread joseph at codesourcery dot com
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2006-03-17 19:48 --- Subject: Re: Accepts invalid code at different optimization levels. Bug 16876 is a related case. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26732

[Bug tree-optimization/26731] Jump threading gets in the way of loops

2006-03-17 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 20:02 --- Confirmed. Though SCEV should be taught to handle this. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/26734] New: GCC cannot bootstrap on IA64 HP-UX

2006-03-17 Thread sje at cup dot hp dot com
The compiler builds but when it tries to build libgcc I get a bunch of ICEs. Here is a small test case that will not compile with -O2 on ia64-hp-hpux11.23 with the ToT compiler: extern int c; long long __negti2 () { return (-c); } I believe the problem is due to the IA64 speculation changes that

[Bug target/26734] [4.2 Regression] GCC cannot bootstrap on IA64 HP-UX

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot |

[Bug libfortran/26735] New: -fconvert=swap and implied open

2006-03-17 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
$ cat conv-implied-open.f90 program main implicit none integer (kind=8) :: i1, i2, i3 write (10) 1_8 close (10) open (10,status=old, form=unformatted, access=direct, recl=8) read (10,rec=1) i1 read (10,rec=2) i2 read (10,rec=3) i3 print '(3Z16,1X)',i1,i2,i3 end program main $

[Bug fortran/20618] Variable format expressions not supported

2006-03-17 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 21:12 --- Following the discussion on comp.lang.fortran on this subject, I'm tempted to mark this WONTFIX. This feature can cause a lot of headaches to implement and is of questionable semantics. Any objections? --

[Bug target/26734] [4.2 Regression] GCC cannot bootstrap on IA64 HP-UX

2006-03-17 Thread mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 21:16 --- (In reply to comment #0) The compiler builds but when it tries to build libgcc I get a bunch of ICEs. Here is a small test case that will not compile with -O2 on ia64-hp-hpux11.23 with the ToT compiler:

Re: [Bug target/26734] [4.2 Regression] GCC cannot bootstrap on IA64 HP-UX

2006-03-17 Thread Andrew Pinski
On Mar 17, 2006, at 4:16 PM, mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: Unfortunately, I don't have access to HP-UX and the bug doesn't appear on ia64-linux, so can you please provide some more information for the failure like backtrace. A cross compile will most likely reproduce it. --

[Bug target/26734] [4.2 Regression] GCC cannot bootstrap on IA64 HP-UX

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 21:19 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] GCC cannot bootstrap on IA64 HP-UX On Mar 17, 2006, at 4:16 PM, mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: Unfortunately, I don't have access to HP-UX and the bug doesn't appear on

[Bug target/26734] [4.2 Regression] GCC cannot bootstrap on IA64 HP-UX

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 21:20 --- hmm, I get: options.c:3863: error: `MASK_ILP32' undeclared here (not in a function) or was there a fix for this? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26734

[Bug target/26734] [4.2 Regression] GCC cannot bootstrap on IA64 HP-UX

2006-03-17 Thread sje at cup dot hp dot com
--- Comment #4 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2006-03-17 21:25 --- I already fixed the problem in comment 3 with an 'obvious' checkin to config/ia64/ia64.opts. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26734

[Bug target/26734] [4.2 Regression] GCC cannot bootstrap on IA64 HP-UX

2006-03-17 Thread sje at cup dot hp dot com
--- Comment #5 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2006-03-17 21:47 --- The debugger shows: (gdb) p debug_rtx(*unused_listp) (deps_list 34 (nil) 0 [0x0]) (gdb) p debug_rtx(prev_link) (UnKnown Unknown) When I print unused_insn_list I get a long RTL that I couldn't capture. Here is a

[Bug target/26734] [4.2 Regression] GCC cannot bootstrap on IA64 HP-UX

2006-03-17 Thread sje at cup dot hp dot com
--- Comment #6 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2006-03-17 22:34 --- I applied the patch that Maxim created for PR 26725 but it did not seem to help this problem. I verified the problem happened on ia64-hp-hpux11.23 in LP64 mode as well as ILP32 mode so that makes it more surprising that

Re: [Bug libstdc++/25608] g++ miscompiles gcjx

2006-03-17 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | is this still an active issue, or was it indicative of some temporary or | transient thing in the gcc sources? Now, I get a segmentation fault -- instead of dead lock. gcjx is compiled with mainline GCC/g++. I was trying to compile

[Bug libstdc++/25608] g++ miscompiles gcjx

2006-03-17 Thread gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
--- Comment #19 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2006-03-17 23:37 --- Subject: Re: g++ miscompiles gcjx bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | is this still an active issue, or was it indicative of some temporary or | transient thing in the gcc sources?

[Bug target/26734] [4.2 Regression] GCC cannot bootstrap on IA64 HP-UX

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 23:39 --- t.c: In function '__negti2': t.c:4: internal compiler error: in add_forw_dep, at sched-deps.c:1644 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for

[Bug target/26734] [4.2 Regression] GCC cannot bootstrap on IA64 HP-UX

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-17 23:57 --- Confirmed, with a cross compiler. here is the backtrace: #1 0x0083e49c in add_forw_dep (to=0x1d1a230, link=0x1db9100) at ../../gcc/sched-deps.c:1644 #2 0x0083e8f4 in compute_forward_dependences (head=0x1d1a640,

[Bug fortran/26509] incorrect behaviour of error-handler for direct access write

2006-03-17 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #19 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 01:56 --- Subject: Bug 26509 Author: jvdelisle Date: Sat Mar 18 01:56:07 2006 New Revision: 112198 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112198 Log: 2006-03-17 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR

[Bug fortran/26509] incorrect behaviour of error-handler for direct access write

2006-03-17 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #20 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 01:59 --- Subject: Bug 26509 Author: jvdelisle Date: Sat Mar 18 01:59:50 2006 New Revision: 112199 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112199 Log: 2006-03-17 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR

[Bug c++/26739] New: [4.2 regression] ICE in g++.old-deja/g++.pt/friend36.C

2006-03-17 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
The testcase g++.old-deja/g++.pt/friend36.C ICEs on mainline: friend36.C: In instantiation of 'Sint': friend36.C:12: instantiated from here friend36.C:9: error: redefinition of 'templateclass T void f(T)' friend36.C:4: error: 'templateclass T void f(T)' previously declared here friend36.C:9:

[Bug c++/26740] New: [4.2 regression] ICE taking the address of a bound member function

2006-03-17 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
The following testcases cause ICEs on mainline: g++.old-deja/g++.bugs/900213_03.C g++.old-deja/g++.other/pmf2.C g++.old-deja/g++.other/pmf7.C They all crash at the same position: pmf2.C: In function 'void f()': pmf2.C:17: error: ISO C++ forbids taking the address of a bound member function to

[Bug c++/26739] [4.2 regression] ICE in g++.old-deja/g++.pt/friend36.C

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot |

[Bug c++/26740] [4.2 regression] ICE taking the address of a bound member function

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot |

[Bug c++/26740] [4.2 regression] ICE taking the address of a bound member function

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 03:08 --- Grrr. Well confirmed. The reason why this does show up in the testresults is because of the follow: fmp = ptr-function_member; // { dg-error } pmf = pf-f; // { dg-error } not a valid pmf expression

[Bug c++/26740] [4.2 regression] ICE taking the address of a bound member function

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 03:09 --- So who ever fixes this bug, please also fix the testsuite so the testsuite will show the ICE. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26740

[Bug c++/26739] [4.2 regression] ICE in g++.old-deja/g++.pt/friend36.C

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 03:11 --- Confirmed. friend void f(T) {} // { dg-error } redeclaration Grrr oh well. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/26741] New: Elemental functions not permitted in initialization expressions

2006-03-17 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
In testing gfortran's capacity to deal with iso_varying_string, it was found that the error Specification function 'len_' at (1) must be PURE was produced - see testcase below. This is obviously incorrect because elemental functions are pure. The patch and the testcase appear below. Paul Thomas

[Bug other/21866] profiledbootstrap on gcc4 - release fails

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 06:05 --- Since this worked for me and this is only report of this failure, something must be up with the source you used. Closing as works for me. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug other/25178] installation of gfortran failed after deveral trys

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 06:07 --- We do not support the binaries. Please use the fortran mailing list for these binaries. [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the place you should be reporting problems. Note these binaries work for a lot of people. --

[Bug bootstrap/21698] creating first stage compiler

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 06:20 --- crosstools and the crossgcc list is the best place to ask questions like this really. Second sysroot can be changed at runtime now. So this is not a bug and closing as such. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org

[Bug target/21737] long double incorrect result

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 06:22 --- As I mentioned 4.0.0 works for me so closing as fixed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug gcov/profile/21388] gcov-io.h compilation warning

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 06:25 --- Since this does not show up in 4.0.0 closing as won't fix as 3.4.6 was the last release. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libgomp/26308] [4.2 Regression] libgomp bootstrap failure on Tru64 UNIX V4.0F

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 06:30 --- Was this fixed? -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug other/25178] installation of gfortran failed after deveral trys

2006-03-17 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 06:31 --- I know for sure the binaries do not work on Win98. This was reported before. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25178

[Bug libgomp/26308] [4.2 Regression] libgomp bootstrap failure on Tru64 UNIX V4.0F

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 06:33 --- PR 26161 might had fixed this. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug rtl-optimization/17228] ICE when compiling the CGAL branch of fgsd ( i486 Linux g++ 3.3.4 debian )

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 06:34 --- (In reply to comment #4) I can reproduce it with 3.3.4 (Debian 1:3.3.4-9) on alpha-linux. Seems to be some kind of memory corruption, trying to reduce the test case fails. Any news on that reduction? --

[Bug fortran/26741] Elemental functions not permitted in initialization expressions

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 06:36 --- Confirmed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug rtl-optimization/26727] [4.2 Regression] gcc.target/powerpc/doloop-1.c fails

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-18 06:38 --- Confirm based on http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-03/msg01186.html If PR 26731 gets fixed, this testcase needs to be changed (or removed) as it will cause the testcase to always fail. -- pinskia at

[Bug fortran/26716] [4.1/4.2 regression] gfortran: incorrect choice of overloaded function

2006-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot |