http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50471
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50471
--- Comment #4 from Zoltan Glozik zoltan at epochcapital dot com.au
2011-09-21 06:43:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
NS::f(t);
Binds at the point at definition because it is qualified.
f(t);
Does not bind and then does argument
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50394
--- Comment #18 from Markus Trippelsdorf markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2011-09-21 07:13:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
I haven't found out exactly what libs are affected yet, because I've copied
them in large chunks.
Hmm, this is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835
--- Comment #31 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-09-21
07:34:33 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #29)
(In reply to comment #28)
Created attachment 24791 [details]
working patch for gcc-4.7-20110709
gcc-4.7-20110709
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50472
Bug #: 50472
Summary: Volatile qualification in data is not enough to avoid
optimization over pointer to data
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50449
--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
08:22:08 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Wed Sep 21 08:21:57 2011
New Revision: 179037
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179037
Log:
PR target/50449
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50465
--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
08:22:10 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Wed Sep 21 08:21:57 2011
New Revision: 179037
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179037
Log:
PR target/50449
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50472
--- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-09-21
08:29:07 UTC ---
Duplicate of PR50078?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50394
--- Comment #19 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2011-09-21 09:38:57
UTC ---
# silent miscompiles; LO/OOo adds -O2/1/0 where appropriate
filter-flags -O*
And because the effect of LTO is to fully optimize the important
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45099
--- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
09:40:17 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Wed Sep 21 09:40:13 2011
New Revision: 179040
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179040
Log:
PR target/45099
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50454
--- Comment #8 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-09-21 09:56:49 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Sep 21 09:56:45 2011
New Revision: 179042
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179042
Log:
/cp
2011-09-21
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50454
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50470
Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50471
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
10:19:21 UTC ---
The name lookup is delayed until instantiation, however [temp.dep.candidate]
says that the qualified lookup in g1 only finds declarations visible at the
point
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50471
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
10:22:48 UTC ---
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#448
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49561
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50394
Michael Meeks michael.meeks at suse dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50451
Ira Rosen irar at il dot ibm.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |irar at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #25320|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50326
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
12:18:46 UTC ---
The different alias set (4 instead of 10) is then just carried along
in the RTL dumps not causing any different behavior until
tree-ssa-ccp.c.192r.postreload
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374
--- Comment #15 from Ira Rosen irar at il dot ibm.com 2011-09-21 12:20:47 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #14)
Another thing is that this really ought to work even with -ftree-pre, having a
vectorization that requires users to disable PRE would
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50350
Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18610
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50473
Bug #: 50473
Summary: [C++0x] ICE in type_has_nontrivial_copy_init, at
cp/tree.c:2574
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50394
--- Comment #21 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2011-09-21 13:08:43
UTC ---
is altogether more hairy - we create at run-time C++ vtables packed with
trampolines so we can intercept / model native C++ objects and interact with
them via
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18610
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
13:09:55 UTC ---
But I think it can be considered fixed for 4.7 by Nathan's excellent work in
giving reasons why candidate functions are not viable:
t.cc: In function 'int
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50433
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
13:10:37 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Sep 21 13:10:31 2011
New Revision: 179046
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179046
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18610
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
13:11:47 UTC ---
N.B. that's even better than clang, as it tells you *why* substitution failed:
the specialization Qint is incomplete
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49152
Christopher Yeleighton giecrilj at stegny dot 2a.pl changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50433
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50449
Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35860
Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gjl at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18610
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18724
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10618
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18610
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
14:48:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
(In reply to comment #6)
N.B. that's even better than clang, as it tells you *why* substitution
failed:
the specialization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10143
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10618
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
14:56:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
(In reply to comment #5)
The second part (the non-template case) of the bug is already fixed in
3.5.0:
pr10618.cc:15: error:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50344
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50470
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com 2011-09-21 15:03:18 UTC ---
On Wed, 21 Sep 2011, bugdal at aerifal dot cx wrote:
The sysroot features may be nice but they're not a substitute for being able
to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13050
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13050
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2011-09-21
15:08:38 UTC ---
about the ~2000 unconfirmed bugs.
2622 last time (i.e. today) I looked at the number vs. 3670 new;-(
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10618
--- Comment #9 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
15:30:26 UTC ---
test.cc:12:1: error: need ‘typename’ before ‘AT::k’ because ‘AT’ is a
dependent scope
test.cc:14:6: error: expected constructor, destructor, or
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49705
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10618
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
15:38:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
The second diagnostic from G++ does not make sense. Clang gives the correct
diagnostics in that case.
Ah, that's because you're
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10618
--- Comment #11 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
15:46:59 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
(In reply to comment #9)
The second diagnostic from G++ does not make sense. Clang gives the correct
diagnostics in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10618
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50474
Bug #: 50474
Summary: GCC (cc1plus) hangs forever compiling with -O2
(-fcse-follow-jumps)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #25331|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
16:57:08 UTC ---
Seems my reduction patterns just give some extreme's index, but not necessarily
the first or last extreme's index. It was just narrowing down the index
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50464
--- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21 17:37:06 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed Sep 21 17:37:00 2011
New Revision: 179053
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179053
Log:
PR target/50464
* config/i386/sse.md
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50380
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49152
--- Comment #2 from Christopher Yeleighton giecrilj at stegny dot 2a.pl
2011-09-21 20:06:42 UTC ---
== Code ==
struct X { int x; };
void trigger (X x []) { x [01] = 0; }
== Result (v4.6) ==
doit.cpp:2:34: error: no match for ‘operator=’ in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49152
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
20:16:24 UTC ---
Wow, that one is worthy of its own bug report, it's not just an unclear
diagnostic, it's completely bogus.
x[01] is *(x+1) or *((char*)x + 4) but what G++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49152
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
21:03:37 UTC ---
The common thing in my original example and comment 2 is that when printing no
match for a binary operator, the diagnostic machinery tries to reconstruct
the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49152
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49152
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
23:30:34 UTC ---
Thanks, Manu. Most of the PRs mentioned on that page are FIXED, and I don't
see specific mention of outputting the types involved in the operation, just
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50380
--- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-09-21
23:30:32 UTC ---
The test case got unbroken on trunk by r176563:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2011-07/msg00830.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49152
--- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-21
23:56:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Thanks, Manu. Most of the PRs mentioned on that page are FIXED, and I don't
PR 35441 is still broken. In any case, most of the
-bootstrap --enable-shared --disable-sjlj-exceptions
--enable-gomp --enable-cloog-backend=isl --enable-languages=c,c++,lto
--no-create --no-recursion
Thread model: win32
gcc version 4.7.0 20110921 (experimental) (GCC)
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-L/tmp/winsup/i686-pc-cygwin/winsup'
'-L/tmp/winsup/i686-pc-cygwin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50476
Bug #: 50476
Summary: Warn of pointer set to object whose lifetime is
limited
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50348
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-09-22
00:29:43 UTC ---
Jason, could you please help me triaging this PR? Should the library do
something else here? Thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48974
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-22
01:25:13 UTC ---
For an example of working around (2), see
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/rapp.git/tree/compute/backend/rc_vec_vis.h.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50477
Bug #: 50477
Summary: -Wunused-parameter should not warn about virtual
method declarations with bodies
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50461
--- Comment #1 from Denis Excoffier g...@denis-excoffier.org 2011-09-22
05:22:47 UTC ---
Also with mpfr-3.1.0-rc2.
66 matches
Mail list logo