--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 06:11
---
Subject: Bug 35863
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Aug 16 03:38:31 2008
New Revision: 139147
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=139147
Log:
2008-08-15 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 06:11
---
Subject: Bug 35863
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Aug 16 03:42:54 2008
New Revision: 139148
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=139148
Log:
2008-08-15 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 06:11
---
Subject: Bug 35863
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Aug 16 03:42:54 2008
New Revision: 139148
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=139148
Log:
2008-08-15 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #1 from joao dot eiras at gmail dot com 2008-08-16 16:42
---
Sorry, full error is
gpp_bug_2.cpp: In constructor `BX::B()':
gpp_bug_2.cpp:15: error: `o_t' is not a class or namesp
gpp_bug_2.cpp:15: error: `type_t' does not name a type
--
joao dot eiras at gmail dot com
The following code sample does not compile, and it should.
I get the error:
gpp_bug_1.cpp: In constructor `BX::B()':
gpp_bug_1.cpp:10: error: expected `;' before x
G++ version: g++ (GCC) 4.4.0 20080729 (experimental)
templateclass X class A{
public:
typedef X type_t;
};
templateclass X
--- Comment #2 from raeburn at raeburn dot org 2008-08-16 18:18 ---
Just noting for future reference: I looked at the VRP results and that does
seem to be where the optimization opportunity is missed; x%y with constant y is
VARYING if x is, though it seems to me the result should be
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 20:03
---
*** Bug 37141 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 20:03 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 14258 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:07
---
*** Bug 37092 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:07 ---
This is a binutils bug which was fixed for 2.18.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 15267 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:08 ---
symbol unknown: offset 0x78a186d9 is non-aligned
That was a binutils bug which was fixed in binutils 2.18.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 15267 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:08
---
*** Bug 37050 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37097
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|---
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:14 ---
Can you provide the preprocessed source which you can get via the -save-temps
option. Also does using -fno-strict-aliasing fix the issue?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37096
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:20 ---
Note I agree with Richard here. All my builds for cross compilers (except for
testing the trunk for spu-elf which I am going to change soon anyways), I
bootstrap first the compiler I am going to compile and then
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:36 ---
What happens if you just use --with-build-sysroot= ? without saying the
--with-sysroot?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:37 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 37094 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:37 ---
*** Bug 37136 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:39 ---
2008-08-09 Richard Sandiford [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* mt-mips16-compat: New file, taken from mt-mips-elfoabi.
* mt-mips-elfoabi: Include mt-mips16-compat.
* mt-mips-gnu: New file.
Hmm, what
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:42 ---
This source does not compile at all so how can we get a link error?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37089
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:43 ---
Might be related to PR 37101.
Does -O2 -ftree-vectorize fail too?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:47 ---
This seems like a bug in Sun's compiler. As far as I can tell a ? const struct
A : struct A should be valid in C and C++. I think you should both post the
patches to gcc-patches@ and make sure you file a bug with
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:47 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:48
---
I agree there is legacy g77 behavior involved here. I did a test here, and a
very simple patch will enable this feature. At least for the test case I get
the exact same results as g77. I just disable this
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:54 ---
__insertion_sort (entry.node_id[0], entry.node_id[16]);
The length is only 4.
One issue is that we don't reduce:
D.8167 = entry.node_id[0] + (unsigned int) num_side_vert * 4;
if (entry.node_id[0] != D.8167)
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 22:55 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2008-08-16 22:55
---
The below does compile (with -std=c++0x of course) and indeed the triple
ampersand is there.
#include utility
template class T
void f(T a, bool);
templateclass T
void f(T a){
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37123
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Summary|Optimizer generates faulty |[4.2
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 23:05 ---
Can you try 4.2.4?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36953
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 23:06 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|---
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Summary|Build fails with|[4.4
--- Comment #9 from gnu_andrew at member dot fsf dot org 2008-08-16 23:14
---
Fix for 0.98; check gjdoc version in configure.
--
gnu_andrew at member dot fsf dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 23:17 ---
Note, SRA needs to be disabled for the testcase to show the issue.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 23:20
---
This bug should never have been in the waiting state, waiting state is for
waiting on information from the reporter and not another developer.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 23:21
---
Also this seems like this should be a P4 or lower as it is an error recovery
issue.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #30 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 23:31
---
This was fixed for PPC between:
-LAST_UPDATED: Mon Jun 23 19:12:32 UTC 2008 (revision 137049)
+LAST_UPDATED: Tue Jul 8 16:22:03 UTC 2008 (revision 137638)
I don't have any closer date though. So this is no
--- Comment #1 from tristan at wibberley dot org 2008-08-16 23:34 ---
fail.cc: In instantiation of pairspairint, int, pairint, int :
fail.cc:14: instantiated from here
fail.cc:10: error: mismatched argument pack lengths while expanding pairAS,
BS
fail.cc: In instantiation of
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 23:36 ---
I don't see why this is a P1, -ftree-loop-distribution is not enabled default
at all.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #27 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-16 23:41
---
Fixed for spu between:
-LAST_UPDATED: Thu May 8 15:05:11 UTC 2008 (revision 135088)
+LAST_UPDATED: Sun Jun 29 21:32:49 UTC 2008 (revision 137266)
And for PPC (with the cost change);
-LAST_UPDATED: Mon Jun 23
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-17 00:04 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36931
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36932
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36933
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36935
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-17 00:07 ---
This is fixed for 4.3.0.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36944
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36907
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36926
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-17 00:16 ---
I think the issue is we don't disquish between an empty overloaded set and one
that needs to be looked up later.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36883
--- Comment #2 from michael dot a dot richmond at nasa dot gov 2008-08-17
00:21 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Hmm, what version of GCC are you starting with?
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: mips-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v
g++ version information:
works on
g++-4.1 (GCC) 4.1.3 20080308 (prerelease) (Ubuntu 4.1.2-21ubuntu1)
Comeau 4.3.10.1
icc 10.1
fails to work on
g++ (GCC) 4.2.3 (Ubuntu 4.2.3-2ubuntu7)
g++ (Ubuntu 20080404-0ubuntu1) 4.3.1 20080404 (prerelease) [gcc-4_3-branch
revision 133917]
g++
--- Comment #1 from annan dot h at gmail dot com 2008-08-17 03:37 ---
Created an attachment (id=16078)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16078action=view)
The preprocessor output
This is the complete output from the 4.3.2 2008-08-14 snapshot compiler:
[EMAIL
59 matches
Mail list logo
