[Bug fortran/31205] aliased operator assignment produces wrong result

2007-03-17 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 07:26 --- The aliasing of the arguments to subroutine set results in the initialization of the intent(out) also being applied to the intent(in) argument. I feel a temporary coming on. Paul -- pault at gcc dot gnu dot org

[Bug ada/31174] [4.2 regression] ACATS C380004 fails

2007-03-17 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 07:30 --- Probably uncovered by disabling VRP... -- ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug ada/31174] [4.2 regression] ACATS C380004 fails

2007-03-17 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org

[Bug ada/31108] [4.2 regression] ACATS C35507M fails

2007-03-17 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 07:33 --- I have to rerun the ACATS tests with more disk space available. After the C3 tests all other failures were due to disk full. OK, please report the results of a complete run. --

[Bug fortran/31205] aliased operator assignment produces wrong result

2007-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 07:38 --- This is related to PR 14771, most likely the parentheses are being ignored. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31205

[Bug fortran/31237] New: [meta-bug] TRANSFER intrinsic

2007-03-17 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
Just a meta-bug to keep track of problems with TRANSFER. Most of these should go away once we write (and call) gfc_simplify_transfer. -- Summary: [meta-bug] TRANSFER intrinsic Product: gcc Version: 4.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug target/31161] __builtin_cexpi is broken on Darwin

2007-03-17 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #17 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-03-17 09:45 --- (In reply to comment #16) As far as I can tell the problem is fixed, at least for Mac OSX 10.3. Thanks Richard for your patience. I have just noticed the following oddity with the code: [karma] bug/cexp_pb% g++-4

[Bug c/31238] New: Too many instructions in C loop

2007-03-17 Thread sigra at home dot se
Build the following code with gcc -std=c99 -Wall -Wextra -Werror -Os -S: void q(const unsigned int); void f() {for (unsigned int x = 0; x != 10; ++x) q(77);} The loop becomes: .L2: subl$12, %esp incl%ebx pushl $77 callq addl$16, %esp

[Bug fortran/31209] too much indirection for actual pointer procedure

2007-03-17 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 10:18 --- This fixes it and regtests OK - will submit later on Index: gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c === *** gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c(revision 122943) ---

[Bug fortran/31237] [meta-bug] TRANSFER intrinsic

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1

[Bug fortran/31234] Thread-safety of random_number should be documented.

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last

[Bug fortran/29975] [meta-bugs] ICEs with CP2K

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #90 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 11:24 --- Closing as fixed. -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/31229] kind parameter in function declaration fails to find use-associated parameters

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 GCC host

[Bug fortran/31184] gfortran option description wrong.

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 11:30 --- Subject: Bug 31184 Author: fxcoudert Date: Sat Mar 17 11:30:20 2007 New Revision: 123018 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=123018 Log: PR fortran/31184 * invoke.texi: Fix typo.

[Bug c/31239] New: bootstrap fails on 32-bit x86 solaris2.11

2007-03-17 Thread johnsonnenschein at gmail dot com
building gcc on opensolaris fails. the build attempts to build a 64 bit compiler on a 32 bit system.. gmake GCC_FOR_TARGET=/export/home/error404/Code/gcc-4.1.1/host-i386-pc-solaris2.11/gcc/xgcc -B/export/home/error404/Code/gcc-4.1.1/host-i386-pc-solaris2.11/gcc/

[Bug fortran/31184] gfortran option description wrong.

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 11:32 --- Subject: Bug 31184 Author: fxcoudert Date: Sat Mar 17 11:31:52 2007 New Revision: 123019 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=123019 Log: PR fortran/31184 * invoke.texi: Fix typo.

[Bug fortran/31184] gfortran option description wrong.

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 11:33 --- Subject: Bug 31184 Author: fxcoudert Date: Sat Mar 17 11:32:56 2007 New Revision: 123020 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=123020 Log: PR fortran/31184 * invoke.texi: Fix typo.

[Bug fortran/31184] gfortran option description wrong

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 11:34 --- Fixed on all active branches. Thanks for the report, documentation bug-reports are an important feedback to us! -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug fortran/31189] Support backtracing for non-library errors

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 11:36 --- Confirmed. We have to be careful how that interacts with user-installed signal handlers, but it's otherwise a good idea. -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug fortran/30955] intrinsic: FGET

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1

[Bug fortran/31190] minimum field width list-directed output

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 11:39 --- Confirmed as an possible enhancement, though I agree there a both pros and cons. (My personal opinion is that I prefer the fixed-width version.) -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What

[Bug fortran/31129] No warning on unused parameters

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1

[Bug target/31161] __builtin_cexpi is broken on Darwin

2007-03-17 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #18 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-03-17 12:29 --- Subject: Re: __builtin_cexpi is broken on Darwin This is PR middle-end/30666. Patch for this problem is waiting for review. Thanks for the answer. I did not worried about the warn, but was only in the mode I

[Bug fortran/31201] Too large unit number generates wrong code

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 13:01 --- (In reply to comment #3) The front end is converting the integer8 to integer4 and not checking the range of the number first. Every time a unit number is used, there should be a check to be sure it's in the

[Bug testsuite/31240] New: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pointer_intent_1.f90 failure on OSX

2007-03-17 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
Without option and when compiled with the 20070316 snapshot on OSX 10.3.9 gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pointer_intent_1.f90 yields an executable which segfault, see: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2007-03/msg00345.html but ignore the crash log I have posted. The right one is: ** Host Name:

[Bug testsuite/31240] gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pointer_intent_1.f90 failure on OSX

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 GCC target

[Bug tree-optimization/31169] Bootstrap comparison error at revision 122821

2007-03-17 Thread dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
--- Comment #20 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-03-17 13:44 --- Subject: Re: Bootstrap comparison error at revision 122821 int foo (unsigned int i) { int j = 12048173; if (i 32) { j = j i; if (j 0) return 0; } return 1;

[Bug middle-end/31241] New: Post Increment opportunity missed

2007-03-17 Thread pranav dot bhandarkar at gmail dot com
A simple code that adds a 'value' too all the elements of an array should generate post increments while loading/storing values from/into the array. The code looks something like this for (i = 0; i 10; i++) { *(intArray++) |= value; } However a post increment is not generated at O3 ( that

[Bug tree-optimization/31169] Bootstrap comparison error at revision 122821

2007-03-17 Thread ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #21 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 14:12 --- I get similar make compare errors on sparc-sun-solaris2.10. Reverting the bit from comment#15 fixes it. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31169

[Bug middle-end/31241] Post Increment opportunity missed

2007-03-17 Thread pranav dot bhandarkar at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from pranav dot bhandarkar at gmail dot com 2007-03-17 14:13 --- Created an attachment (id=13218) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13218action=view) Source that exposes the mentioned deficiency in the compiler --

[Bug target/31242] New: Problem while compiling gcc for bfin-elf

2007-03-17 Thread mstein at phenix dot rootshell dot be
Hello, there seems to be a gcc problem with the target 'bfin-elf': /home/mstein/sim/bfin-elf/build/./gcc/xgcc -B/home/mstein/sim/bfin-elf/build/./gcc/ -nostdinc -B/home/mstein/sim/bfin-elf/build/bfin-elf/newlib/ -isystem /home/mstein/sim/bfin-elf/build/bfin-elf/newlib/targ-include -isystem

[Bug target/31242] Problem while compiling gcc for bfin-elf

2007-03-17 Thread mstein at phenix dot rootshell dot be
--- Comment #1 from mstein at phenix dot rootshell dot be 2007-03-17 14:20 --- Created an attachment (id=13219) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13219action=view) from SVN revision: 123001 Commandline used to create fp-bit.i:

[Bug tree-optimization/31041] [4.3 Regression] verify_stmts failed: invalid operand to binary operator with -O2 -ftree-vectorize

2007-03-17 Thread dorit at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from dorit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 14:43 --- Subject: Bug 31041 Author: dorit Date: Sat Mar 17 14:43:30 2007 New Revision: 123023 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=123023 Log: PR tree-optimization/31041 * tree-vect-transform.c

[Bug fortran/31243] New: truncating strings longer than 2**32 characters

2007-03-17 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
The string lengths are truncated to 32-bit values here, which shouldn't happen. $ cat substr.f90 program main character (len=2_8**32_8+4_8) :: ch ch = ' ' print *,ch(1:2_8**32_8+3_8) end program main $ gfortran -fdump-tree-original substr.f90 $ cat substr.f90.003t.original MAIN__ () {

[Bug fortran/31244] New: data initialization with more than 2**32 elements

2007-03-17 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
$ cat data.f90 program main integer(kind=1), dimension(4294967296_8) :: i data i /4294967296_8 * 1_1/ print *,i(1) end program main $ gfortran data.f90 data.f90:3.24: data i /4294967296_8 * 1_1/ 1 Error: Integer value too large in expression at (1) This is probably

[Bug fortran/31206] wrong code generated with gfortran

2007-03-17 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 15:27 --- I can reproduce the problem, but this is a duplicate of PR 29397. Closing (but thanks anyway!) *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 29397 *** -- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

[Bug fortran/29397] Constant logical expression with parameter array

2007-03-17 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 15:27 --- *** Bug 31206 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/31207] advance=no and tabs

2007-03-17 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 15:36 --- Confirmed. Reduced test case: $ cat rewind-2.f90 program main write (*,'(A,T1,A)',advance=no) 'XX','ABC' end program main $ gfortran rewind-2.f90 $ ./a.out ABC$ Jerry, I'm putting you on the CC list for

[Bug fortran/31218] ICE on valid code with gfortran

2007-03-17 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 15:42 --- Confirmed. -- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|

[Bug c/31245] New: SSE2 generation bug with 4.1.2 and -O3

2007-03-17 Thread prakash at punnoor dot de
This is my simple test proggie. test1 is always ok, but test2 fails with -O3 (produces output 1 0 0 0 for test2), but -O2 makes it behave. I  am on x86_64. -m32 has interesting effects: -O3 -Wall -m32 -msse2 -march=i486 is ok (output 1 0 3 0, as expected) -O3 -Wall -m32 -msse2 -march=i586 is

[Bug fortran/31200] wrong code: procedure call with pointer-returning-function as argument

2007-03-17 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 15:52 --- This fixes the bug (and PR31209) and regtests OK. Will package it up as a submission tomorrow morning. Index: gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c === ***

[Bug c/31245] SSE2 generation bug with 4.1.2 and -O3

2007-03-17 Thread prakash at punnoor dot de
--- Comment #1 from prakash at punnoor dot de 2007-03-17 15:52 --- Created an attachment (id=13220) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13220action=view) test2 triggers bug -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31245

[Bug fortran/31207] advance=no and tabs

2007-03-17 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 15:59 --- I have started looking at this. I believe its a duplicate of 31199. In using advance=no we are failing to retain or use the information about the maximum position reached during preceding writes. *** This bug

[Bug fortran/31199] write with t1 format gives wrong output

2007-03-17 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 15:59 --- *** Bug 31207 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31199

[Bug target/31239] bootstrap fails on 32-bit x86 solaris2.11

2007-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 16:34 --- What options are passing to configure? Do you have CFLAGS set? Second i386-solaris is a multilibed target which means it will build the 64bit libraries even on a 32bit machine. If you don't want that, then use

[Bug libstdc++/31246] New: Strange -Wunreachable-code warning with _GLIBCXX_DEBUG

2007-03-17 Thread sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr
Compiling the following with -Wunreachable-code -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG -- #include vector int main() { std::vectorint::iterator a; } -- produces the warning : --

[Bug target/31245] SSE2 generation bug with 4.1.2 and -O3

2007-03-17 Thread prakash at punnoor dot de
--- Comment #2 from prakash at punnoor dot de 2007-03-17 16:49 --- Created an attachment (id=13221) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13221action=view) test2 triggers bug -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31245

[Bug target/31245] SSE2 generation bug with 4.1.2 and -O3

2007-03-17 Thread prakash at punnoor dot de
--- Comment #3 from prakash at punnoor dot de 2007-03-17 16:51 --- Sorry, I uploaded the wrong test case. In fact changing the unaligned load to aligned load triggers the bug, which the new file represents in a shorter notation, I guess. --

[Bug libstdc++/31247] New: std::vector::iterator::value_type is accessible

2007-03-17 Thread sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr
This is an accepts invalid code report. The following code happens to compile with g++ (all versions), whereas the standard does not guarantee it should (I think). #include vector typedef std::vectorint::iterator Iterator; Iterator::value_type v; Iterator::pointer

[Bug libstdc++/31246] Strange -Wunreachable-code warning with _GLIBCXX_DEBUG

2007-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 16:58 --- Lets look at the IR: ;; Function __gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator_Iterator, _Sequence::_Safe_iterator() [with _Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iteratorint*, __gnu_norm::vectorint, std::allocatorint , _Sequence =

[Bug libstdc++/31247] std::vector::iterator::value_type is accessible

2007-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 17:00 --- IIRC iterator is an implemention defined type so this is valid. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31247

[Bug libstdc++/31247] std::vector::iterator::value_type is accessible

2007-03-17 Thread chris at bubblescope dot net
--- Comment #2 from chris at bubblescope dot net 2007-03-17 17:19 --- Depending on how you read it, 24.3.1 looks to me like it might require that. It says that iterator_traits is defined to include: typedef typename Iterator::value_type value_type; and that it is specialised for

[Bug libstdc++/31246] Strange -Wunreachable-code warning with _GLIBCXX_DEBUG

2007-03-17 Thread sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr
--- Comment #2 from sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr 2007-03-17 17:26 --- Trying further, I noticed that simply default constructing an std::vectorint, even without the debug mode _GLIBCXX_DEBUG, generates also a bunch (14 !) of these warnings. Andrew, I did not follow all

[Bug c/31236] incorrect output on external symbol address cast as integer used in conditional statement

2007-03-17 Thread sh-list at ssc-studios dot com
--- Comment #4 from sh-list at ssc-studios dot com 2007-03-17 17:31 --- so in other words you're saying the solution to this is if you want it to work with GCC, make your code non-portable afaik __attribute__ (( weak )) is not part of the standard, its not a portable solution. the

[Bug libstdc++/31247] std::vector::iterator::value_type is accessible

2007-03-17 Thread sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr
--- Comment #3 from sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr 2007-03-17 17:35 --- I'm not sure about the standard requirements. My user question is that I want to develop with GCC as my main compiler, and I want it to catch non-portability bugs as much as possible. @Chris: note

[Bug libstdc++/31246] Strange -Wunreachable-code warning with _GLIBCXX_DEBUG

2007-03-17 Thread chris at bubblescope dot net
--- Comment #3 from chris at bubblescope dot net 2007-03-17 17:46 --- This is a general problem I've come across with templates. You commonly want to try/catch around some operation, but when you have templated on a simple type, like int, then it's easy to find out that no throwing can

[Bug c/31236] incorrect output on external symbol address cast as integer used in conditional statement

2007-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 17:47 --- Well linker scripts are already non portable and not mentioned in the standard and you are violating the C/C++ standards if the address of a variable is NULL (0) :). Also -O2 with -DUSETEMP gives the same results

[Bug libstdc++/31247] std::vector::iterator::value_type is accessible

2007-03-17 Thread chris at bubblescope dot net
--- Comment #4 from chris at bubblescope dot net 2007-03-17 17:52 --- The main problem I can see with changing this is that you would have to decide if you were going to remove the same options from the iterators of all other standard containers. To not do so would seem to be

[Bug c/31166] Integer hex constant does not follow promoting rules

2007-03-17 Thread roberto dot gordo at gmail dot com
--- Comment #9 from roberto dot gordo at gmail dot com 2007-03-17 17:58 --- I would like to apologize for my faults in gcc bug report 31166, specially to the people who responded, and fully acknowledge my error. I've misunderstood your responses. Now, while reading them again, they

[Bug tree-optimization/31169] Bootstrap comparison error at revision 122821

2007-03-17 Thread dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
--- Comment #22 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-03-17 18:03 --- Subject: Re: Bootstrap comparison error at revision 122821 I'll recheck with the third hunk. j_5: [0, 12048173] EQUIVALENCES: { } (0 elements) There isn't any difference in the code generated with and

[Bug libstdc++/31246] Strange -Wunreachable-code warning with _GLIBCXX_DEBUG

2007-03-17 Thread chris at bubblescope dot net
--- Comment #4 from chris at bubblescope dot net 2007-03-17 18:07 --- Here is a minimal code example: #include new int* get_ptr(void* ptr) { return new(ptr) int(); } Which gives (on my computer) /usr/include/c++/4.0.0/new: In function 'int* get_ptr(void*)':

[Bug fortran/30834] ICE with kind=8 exponentiaton

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 18:45 --- Created an attachment (id=13222) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13222action=view) Proposed patch I think the attached patch would fix this bug. It's a significant rewrite of the arith.c code

[Bug tree-optimization/31248] New: Too much casting for char operands on tree level

2007-03-17 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
Following testcase produces unnecessary moves in short loop: --cut here-- char table[256]; int test(void) { char val = 0; int i; for (i = 0; i 10; i++) val += table[i]; return val; } --cut here-- gcc -O2: test: .LFB2: movzbl table(%rip), %ecx movl$1, %edx

[Bug fortran/31120] ICE with integer_exponentiation_1.f90 and -ffast-math

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 19:58 --- Subject: Bug 31120 Author: fxcoudert Date: Sat Mar 17 19:58:37 2007 New Revision: 123028 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=123028 Log: PR fortran/31120 * trans-expr.c

[Bug fortran/31243] truncating strings longer than 2**32 characters

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last

[Bug target/31239] bootstrap fails on 32-bit x86 solaris2.11

2007-03-17 Thread johnsonnenschein at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from johnsonnenschein at gmail dot com 2007-03-17 20:31 --- yes, you are correct, it was multilib. I tried again with that Perhaps a check of isainfo(1) should be placed in the configure script to ensure the target supports amd64 binaries ? Solaris runs on x86 32-bit or

[Bug libstdc++/31246] Strange -Wunreachable-code warning with _GLIBCXX_DEBUG

2007-03-17 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
--- Comment #5 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-03-17 20:40 --- Note, however, that, as far as I can see, such try/catch are *not* in the library code proper, but *all* synthesized by the C++ front-end. Is it so weird to imagine for the C++ front-end to automatically suppress warning

[Bug c++/31246] Strange -Wunreachable-code warning with _GLIBCXX_DEBUG

2007-03-17 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
--- Comment #6 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-03-17 20:48 --- And I'm recategorizing as C++: either (as I strongly believe) a very general diagnostic issue, or maybe a duplicate of C++/30500: certainly there is nothing we can do on the library side to fix the implementation of

[Bug fortran/31203] Character length should never be negative

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 20:58 --- A two-lines fix for this bug: Index: gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c === --- gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c(revision 123028) +++ gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c

[Bug middle-end/31249] New: pseudo-optimzation with sincos/cexpi

2007-03-17 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
With gfortran and g++ the computation of cos(x) and sin(x) is optimized by taking the real and imaginary parts of cexpi(x) (at least it is what I understand). This is working if and only if the computation of cexpi(x) is faster than the sum of the separate computations of cos(x) and sin(x). Now

[Bug fortran/31250] New: Initialization expr as constant character length rejected

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
$ cat a4.f90 character(len=min(-4,5)) :: s print *, len(s) end $ ./bin/gfortran -static a4.f90 a4.f90:1.31: character(len=min(-4,5)) :: s 1 Error: 's' at (1) must have constant character length in this context I tried with a few intrinsics, like MIN,

[Bug fortran/31250] Initialization expr as constant character length rejected

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Known

[Bug fortran/31251] New: Non-integer character length leads to segfault

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
$ cat foo.f90 character(len=2.3) :: s print *, len(s) end $ gfortran foo.f90 foo.f90:1.16: character(len=2.3) :: s 1 Error: Expression at (1) must be of INTEGER type foo.f90:1.16: character(len=2.3) :: s 1 Error: Expression at (1) must be of INTEGER type

[Bug fortran/31251] Non-integer character length leads to segfault

2007-03-17 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Known

[Bug fortran/31252] New: ICE dans gfc_conv_constant, � fortran/trans-const.c:348

2007-03-17 Thread mikael dot morin at tele2 dot fr
-- Summary: ICE dans gfc_conv_constant, à fortran/trans-const.c:348 Product: gcc Version: 4.1.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org

[Bug fortran/31253] New: ICE in gfc_conv_constant, at fortran/trans-const.c:348

2007-03-17 Thread mikael dot morin at tele2 dot fr
the fortran compiler crashes when trying to compile the following test program : subroutine probleme(p) real(kind=8), dimension(:) :: p integer :: nx = size(p, 1) integer :: nix nix = nx end subroutine The error reported by the compiler is : test.f:

[Bug fortran/31253] ICE in gfc_conv_constant, at fortran/trans-const.c:348

2007-03-17 Thread mikael dot morin at tele2 dot fr
--- Comment #1 from mikael dot morin at tele2 dot fr 2007-03-17 21:58 --- Created an attachment (id=13223) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13223action=view) the test program that fails -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31253

[Bug fortran/31253] ICE in gfc_conv_constant, at fortran/trans-const.c:348

2007-03-17 Thread mikael dot morin at tele2 dot fr
--- Comment #2 from mikael dot morin at tele2 dot fr 2007-03-17 22:03 --- the attached program (test.f) fails to compile: the compilation command is : gfortran -c test.f the error is : test.f: In function ‘probleme’: test.f:2: erreur interne du compilateur: dans gfc_conv_constant, à

[Bug fortran/30834] ICE with kind=8 exponentiaton

2007-03-17 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 22:06 --- Hi FX, I'll look at this. Looking at your patch, I have identified one compile-time hog in complex_pow_ui: $ time gfortran complex.f90 real3m35.506s user3m35.329s sys 0m0.156s $ cat complex.f90

[Bug fortran/31253] ICE in gfc_conv_constant, at fortran/trans-const.c:348

2007-03-17 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 22:08 --- Confirmed with 4.3.0. -- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/31252] ICE dans gfc_conv_constant, � fortran/trans-const.c:348

2007-03-17 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 22:10 --- Empty bug report, closing. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 31253 *** -- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/31253] ICE in gfc_conv_constant, at fortran/trans-const.c:348

2007-03-17 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 22:10 --- *** Bug 31252 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31253

[Bug tree-optimization/29922] [4.3 Regression] [Linux] ICE in insert_into_preds_of_block

2007-03-17 Thread dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #24 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 23:07 --- Subject: Bug 29922 Author: dberlin Date: Sat Mar 17 23:07:34 2007 New Revision: 123029 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=123029 Log: 2007-03-16 Daniel Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fix PR

[Bug tree-optimization/29922] [4.3 Regression] [Linux] ICE in insert_into_preds_of_block

2007-03-17 Thread tbm at cyrius dot com
--- Comment #25 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-03-17 23:16 --- Thanks, Danny! -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29922

[Bug tree-optimization/29922] [4.3 Regression] [Linux] ICE in insert_into_preds_of_block

2007-03-17 Thread dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #26 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 23:18 --- Sorry for the delay. Fixed now. -- dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/31246] Strange -Wunreachable-code warning with _GLIBCXX_DEBUG

2007-03-17 Thread gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu
--- Comment #7 from gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu 2007-03-17 23:35 --- Subject: Re: Strange -Wunreachable-code warning with _GLIBCXX_DEBUG pcarlini at suse dot de [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | Note, however, that, as far as I can see, such try/catch are *not* in the | library code proper,

[Bug fortran/30875] Equivalence of derived types with (same) default initializer

2007-03-17 Thread brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 23:39 --- At the end of 14.6.3.3, Default initialization may be specified for a storage unit that is storage associated provided the objects or subobjects supplying the default initialization are of the same type and type

[Bug c++/17000] parse error calling member template function of non-lvalue from within template class member

2007-03-17 Thread matt at galloway dot me dot uk
--- Comment #7 from matt at galloway dot me dot uk 2007-03-18 01:06 --- Same problem for me with gcc-4.0.1. Is this going to get fixed or is it correct behaviour and the code needs some sort of codeword to tell the compiler that func2 is a template? -- matt at galloway dot me dot uk

[Bug tree-optimization/31169] Bootstrap comparison error at revision 122821

2007-03-17 Thread daney at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #23 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-18 01:55 --- Reverting the hunk mentioned in comment #15 also allows mipsel-linux to bootstrap. I bootstrapped R122924 which failed in the stage2 stage3 compare. I then reverted said hunk, and re-bootstrapped successfully. --

[Bug fortran/31201] Too large unit number generates wrong code

2007-03-17 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-18 02:22 --- Heres the real problem: Try compiling this with and without -fno-range-check. integer*8 :: k= 68719476746 integer*8 :: k2 = 2_8**36 + 10 print *, k=,k, k2, int(k2, kind=8), int(k2, kind=4)

[Bug tree-optimization/31248] Too much casting for char operands on tree level

2007-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-18 05:29 --- You are wrong. The casts are correct as char + char in C is actually defined as (int)(char) + (int) (char) aka promoted to int while doing the addition so what the optimizers do when it sees (char)((int)(char) +

[Bug c++/31246] Strange -Wunreachable-code warning with _GLIBCXX_DEBUG

2007-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-18 05:38 --- I agree with you Paolo. The front-end should make sure that its artefacts don't adversily affect diagnostics we emit. I agree to some extend. The reason why the try/catch is there is because of what the C++

[Bug c++/17000] parse error calling member template function of non-lvalue from within template class member

2007-03-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-18 06:12 --- The work around is doing: get_a().template func2 int(); Which tells the compiler for sure func2 is a template. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17000