[Bug fortran/32646] INQUIRE (by UNIT) for (un)formatted always returns YES...

2007-07-07 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 06:22 --- We have addressed this in previous bug reports. Any unit can be accessed as formatted or unformatted if one chooses to do so, this is why we answer yes. In other words, it is allowed This should not be

[Bug c++/32232] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] ICE in resolve_overloaded_unification

2007-07-07 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 07:32 --- Subject: Bug 32232 Author: mmitchel Date: Sat Jul 7 07:31:54 2007 New Revision: 126435 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=126435 Log: PR c++/32232 * pt.c

[Bug c++/32232] [4.1/4.2 Regression] ICE in resolve_overloaded_unification

2007-07-07 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 07:36 --- Fixed in 4.3.0. -- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/32664] New: [sh] ICE in create_pre_exit, at mode-switching.c:373

2007-07-07 Thread mstein at phenix dot rootshell dot be
Hello, there seems to be a problem compiling the attached source file with sh-elf-gcc: /home/mstein/sim/sh-elf/build/./gcc/xgcc -B/home/mstein/sim/sh-elf/build/./gcc/ -nostdinc -B/home/mstein/sim/sh-elf/build/sh-elf/newlib/ -isystem /home/mstein/sim/sh-elf/build/sh-elf/newlib/targ-include

[Bug target/32664] [sh] ICE in create_pre_exit, at mode-switching.c:373

2007-07-07 Thread mstein at phenix dot rootshell dot be
--- Comment #1 from mstein at phenix dot rootshell dot be 2007-07-07 07:46 --- Created an attachment (id=13862) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13862action=view) preprocessed source file from gcc -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32664

[Bug middle-end/32662] Significant extra code generation for 64x64=128-bit multiply

2007-07-07 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-07-07 08:22 --- This is fixed in gcc-4.3: _Z3fooPyPKyy: movq%rdx, %rax mulq(%rsi) movq%rdx, (%rdi) ret _Z3fooPyPKyyy: andq(%rsi), %rcx movq%rcx, %rax mulq

[Bug target/32660] ICE using __builtin_ia32_vec_ext_v2di()

2007-07-07 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-07-07 08:23 --- Compiles OK in 4.3.0. -- ubizjak at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work|

[Bug target/32660] ICE using __builtin_ia32_vec_ext_v2di()

2007-07-07 Thread uros at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 09:23 --- Subject: Bug 32660 Author: uros Date: Sat Jul 7 09:23:04 2007 New Revision: 126438 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=126438 Log: PR target/32660 Backport from mainline. *

[Bug target/32660] [4.2 Regression] ICE using __builtin_ia32_vec_ext_v2di()

2007-07-07 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-07-07 09:24 --- Confirmed, still regression on 4.2 branch. -- ubizjak at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/32661] __builtin_ia32_vec_ext suboptimal for pointer/ref args

2007-07-07 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-07-07 09:25 --- Confirmed, not a regression. -- ubizjak at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/32665] New: allocatable array on lhs deleted while still in use on rhs

2007-07-07 Thread dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org
While experimenting with testcases from PR31320, I hit this: $ cat alloc.f90 TYPE :: x INTEGER, ALLOCATABLE :: a(:) END TYPE TYPE(x) :: a a = x((/ 1, 2, 3 /)) a = x((/ a%a, 4 /)) end $ gfortran-svn -g -Wall -fdump-tree-original allocatable.f90 ./a.out Segmentation fault $ valgrind

[Bug target/32664] [sh] ICE in create_pre_exit, at mode-switching.c:373

2007-07-07 Thread kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 10:42 --- This is same on sh4-unknown-linux-gnu. A reduced testcase long long foo (long long u) { return u; } fails on sh4 with -fnon-call-exceptions. It looks that it started to fail after the patch r126403 | uros |

[Bug c++/31338] [4.1 regression] Cannot apply ! to complex constants

2007-07-07 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 10:43 --- This fix ported PR 31780 back to the 4.2 branch. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31338

[Bug c++/31780] [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with incompatible types for ?: with complex type conversion

2007-07-07 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 10:47 --- The ICE is now also present on the 4.2 branch. Most likely caused by the patch for PR 31338. -- reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/31743] [4.1/4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with invalid use of new

2007-07-07 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 10:59 --- Mark, is there any reason, you added the exectuable flag? If not, would you mind removing it? Propchange: trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/init/new20.C ('svn:executable' added) -- reichelt at gcc dot

[Bug tree-optimization/19910] [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with -ftree-loop-linear

2007-07-07 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #13 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 11:07 --- The testcase indeed doesn't crash on mainline (i686-pc-linux-gnu) anymore. It still crashes on the 4.2 branch, though. Given that the testcase disappeared and reappeared on mainline the problem might still be

[Bug target/32337] [4.3 Regression] Error: Register number out of range 0..1

2007-07-07 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org

[Bug tree-optimization/32650] Convert p+strlen(p) to strchr(p, '\0') if profitable

2007-07-07 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 13:27 --- Confirmed. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/32661] __builtin_ia32_vec_ext suboptimal for pointer/ref args

2007-07-07 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot |

[Bug middle-end/32662] Significant extra code generation for 64x64=128-bit multiply

2007-07-07 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 13:32 --- Fixed. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|minor

[Bug target/28904] operand out of range on Linux/PowerPC

2007-07-07 Thread srm at schokokeks dot org
--- Comment #8 from srm at schokokeks dot org 2007-07-07 13:37 --- crystalspace also has a bug report for this (http://www.crystalspace3d.org/trac/CS/ticket/210) as mentioned there, one could try this http://www.crystalspace3d.org/trac/CS/ticket/258 which is using a special branch for

[Bug tree-optimization/32663] [4.3 regression]: revision 126369 went into an infinite loop

2007-07-07 Thread hjl at lucon dot org
--- Comment #1 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-07-07 14:31 --- Revision 126198 is good and revision 126338 is bad. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32663

[Bug tree-optimization/32663] [4.3 regression]: revision 126369 went into an infinite loop

2007-07-07 Thread hjl at lucon dot org
--- Comment #2 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-07-07 14:47 --- Revision 126286 is good. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32663

[Bug middle-end/32662] Significant extra code generation for 64x64=128-bit multiply

2007-07-07 Thread scovich at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from scovich at gmail dot com 2007-07-07 14:55 --- While it's nice that the new optimization framework can eliminate the redundant IMUL instruction(s), why were they being generated in the first place? Compiling the simpler foo() without optimizations gives:

[Bug fortran/31832] FAIL: gfortran.dg/integer_exponentiation_2.f90 at -O1 and above

2007-07-07 Thread danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 15:09 --- I don't know. I haven't been able to bootstrap hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 since the dataflow merge. The following two tests are failing on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 (revision 126397): FAIL:

[Bug tree-optimization/32663] [4.3 regression]: revision 126369 went into an infinite loop

2007-07-07 Thread hjl at lucon dot org
--- Comment #3 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-07-07 15:14 --- Revision 126328 is good. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32663

[Bug pch/32636] [4.3 regression] 25_algorithms/search_n/iterator.cc: pch-related verify_ssa failure

2007-07-07 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 15:17 --- In reply to comment #4: confirmed. I've now confirmed that it is commit 126198 that exposed this bug, so I'll remove all other people from CC. You're very welcome to add yourself back, of course. :) Richi, if you can

[Bug pch/32636] [4.3 regression] 25_algorithms/search_n/iterator.cc: pch-related verify_ssa failure

2007-07-07 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-07-07 15:24 --- Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] 25_algorithms/search_n/iterator.cc: pch-related verify_ssa failure On Sat, 7 Jul 2007, hp at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: --- Comment #4 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07

[Bug tree-optimization/32663] [4.3 regression]: revision 126369 went into an infinite loop

2007-07-07 Thread hjl at lucon dot org
--- Comment #4 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-07-07 15:35 --- I verified that this patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-07/msg00323.html causes this regression. It only happens for 32bit target. -- hjl at lucon dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug pch/32636] [4.3 regression] 25_algorithms/search_n/iterator.cc: pch-related verify_ssa failure

2007-07-07 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 15:44 --- Failing pass: #4 0x00738bbf in execute_one_pass (pass=0xca6280) at /home/hp/regress126198/gcc/gcc/passes.c:1147 (gdb) p *pass $1 = {name = 0xafff81 store_copyprop, gate = 0x848c70 gate_store_copy_prop, execute

[Bug libstdc++/32666] New: FAIL: abi_check

2007-07-07 Thread danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
abi_check is failing on hppa-unknown-linux-gnu with Debian lenny (libc6 2.5-9): === libstdc++-v3 check-abi Summary === # of added symbols: 74 # of missing symbols:22 # of incompatible symbols: 23 using: baseline_symbols.txt FAIL: abi_check I've

[Bug libstdc++/32666] FAIL: abi_check

2007-07-07 Thread dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-07 15:55 --- Subject: Re: New: FAIL: abi_check I've seen this with 4.2.1 and 4.3.0. Attached is the output log (probably somewhat out of order). Dave --- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot

[Bug pch/32636] [4.3 regression] 25_algorithms/search_n/iterator.cc: pch-related verify_ssa failure

2007-07-07 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 15:56 --- Created an attachment (id=13864) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13864action=view) one of the dumps generated with -fdump-tree-store_copyprop-vops-blocks -fdump-tree-store_ccp-vops-blocks --

[Bug pch/32636] [4.3 regression] 25_algorithms/search_n/iterator.cc: pch-related verify_ssa failure

2007-07-07 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 15:57 --- Created an attachment (id=13865) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13865action=view) the other dump -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32636

[Bug pch/32636] [4.3 regression] 25_algorithms/search_n/iterator.cc: pch-related verify_ssa failure

2007-07-07 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 16:00 --- Using the patch in comment #5 applied on 126197 causes the same failure. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32636

[Bug middle-end/32662] Significant extra code generation for 64x64=128-bit multiply

2007-07-07 Thread rask at sygehus dot dk
--- Comment #4 from rask at sygehus dot dk 2007-07-07 16:08 --- In reply to comment #1: If you're splitting a multiword subreg (such as %rbx:%rcx) after reload, then the prologue/epilogue code has no way of knowing that all use of %rbx is later optimized away. I don't know if this is

[Bug pch/32636] [4.3 regression] 25_algorithms/search_n/iterator.cc: pch-related verify_ssa failure

2007-07-07 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 16:13 --- So the bogus replacement happens in store_copyprop (function _ZSt10__search_nIN10__gnu_test24forward_iterator_wrapperIiEEiiET_S3_S3_T0_RKT1_St20forward_iterator_tag) for a (yet) mysterious reason it replaces in

[Bug pch/32636] [4.3 regression] 25_algorithms/search_n/iterator.cc: pch-related verify_ssa failure

2007-07-07 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #11 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 16:15 --- Created an attachment (id=13866) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13866action=view) dump with -fdump-tree-store_copyprop-vops-blocks-details -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32636

[Bug fortran/32644] CHARACTER*1, c produces Unclassifiable statement

2007-07-07 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 16:35 --- I will have a look -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c/32570] Compiling GCC 4.3.0 with CIL instead of using GCC 4.2 or 4.3 finds many warnings that GCC does not report

2007-07-07 Thread rob1weld at aol dot com
--- Comment #3 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2007-07-07 16:41 --- A bug report has been filed with 'hal'. What had happened was that CIL had optimized away, in some cases, and created incorrect code in other cases; based on what it read of the GCC 4.3 sources. It then fed the C2C back

[Bug fortran/32644] [4.3 Regression] CHARACTER*1, c produces Unclassifiable statement

2007-07-07 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 16:48 --- This is a regression against 4.2. It looks like its not making it through the parser. Hmm. -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/32663] [4.3 regression]: revision 126369 went into an infinite loop

2007-07-07 Thread hjl at lucon dot org
--- Comment #5 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-07-07 16:54 --- Before the change, PRE generates: # prephitmp.165_1394 = PHI storetmp.156_472(127), storetmp.156_452(130) # prephitmp.165_1395 = PHI storetmp.156_1216(127), storetmp.156_466(130) # nlast_26 = PHI 0(127), nlast_442(130)

[Bug tree-optimization/32607] [4.3 Regression] internal compiler error: in set_lattice_value, at tree-ssa-ccp.c:487

2007-07-07 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 17:02 --- Related to (or a dup of) PR 31926. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug pch/32636] [4.3 regression] 25_algorithms/search_n/iterator.cc: pch-related verify_ssa failure

2007-07-07 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 pch/32636] [4.3 regression] 25_algorithms/search_n/iterator.cc: pch-related verify_ssa failure

2007-07-07 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 17:04 --- So the problem is that we detect PHI node __i$D47460$SharedInfo_92 copy-of chain: __i$D47460$SharedInfo_92 - __i$D47460$SharedInfo_40 - SR.1030_31 - SR.1030_31 [COPY] but later replace with

[Bug pch/32636] [4.3 regression] 25_algorithms/search_n/iterator.cc: pch-related verify_ssa failure

2007-07-07 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #13 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 17:23 --- The following creates a similar copy chain, but still chooses the right one to copy from. struct Foo { int x; }; void use(int); void foo(struct Foo *p, int q) { int a = p-x; int b, c; p-x = a; if

[Bug middle-end/32662] Significant extra code generation for 64x64=128-bit multiply

2007-07-07 Thread rask at sygehus dot dk
--- Comment #5 from rask at sygehus dot dk 2007-07-07 17:26 --- s/multiword subreg/multiword hard reg/g and s/comment #2/comment #3/g in comment #4. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32662

[Bug tree-optimization/32636] [4.3 regression] 25_algorithms/search_n/iterator.cc: pch-related verify_ssa failure

2007-07-07 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Component|pch |tree-optimization Target Milestone|---

[Bug fortran/29876] ICE on bad operator in ONLY clause of USE statement

2007-07-07 Thread dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot |

[Bug c++/32667] New: builtin operator= generates memcpy with overlapping memory regions

2007-07-07 Thread Raimund dot Merkert at baesystems dot com
This code generates a warning when run with valgrind: #include vector using namespace ::std; struct X { double values[10]; }; int main() { vectorX x; x.push_back(X()); for (vectorX::iterator i=x.begin();i!=x.end();++i) { *i = *(x.end()-1); } return 0; } g++ test.cpp -o foo

[Bug c++/16696] Strange message when operator++ not found

2007-07-07 Thread rob1weld at aol dot com
--- Comment #10 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2007-07-07 18:05 --- I compiled the program I was working on using GCC 4.2 that was configured using the option --enable-concept-checks and one file would not compile; giving this error: /usr/include/c++/4.2/bits/boost_concept_check.h: In

[Bug c++/32667] builtin operator= generates memcpy with overlapping memory regions

2007-07-07 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-07-07 18:19 --- Interesting: mainline is not affected by the problem. I would guess thanks to fixing libstdc++/29286 ??? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32667

[Bug fortran/32644] [4.3 Regression] CHARACTER*1, c produces Unclassifiable statement

2007-07-07 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 18:19 --- I have confirmed that this problem occurred after the iso_c_binding merge and is not part of the initial merge itself. That narrows it down quite a bit. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32644

[Bug fortran/29876] ICE on bad operator in ONLY clause of USE statement

2007-07-07 Thread patchapp at dberlin dot org
--- Comment #1 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-07-07 18:25 --- Subject: Bug number PR29876 A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker. The mailing list url for the patch is http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-07/msg00645.html --

[Bug c++/16696] Strange message when operator++ not found

2007-07-07 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
--- Comment #11 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-07-07 18:27 --- One comment, to avoid wasting time (I don't have the time to understand why the old library-simulation of concept checks is discussed in a C++ PR): for sure we are not going to enable by default the simulated concept

[Bug fortran/29804] segfault with -fbounds-check on allocatable derived type components

2007-07-07 Thread dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 19:07 --- Salvatore, could you please recheck this one? I can not observe any problems, neither on dt_bnd.f90 nor on the reduced testcase. $ gfortran-svn -g -fbounds-check dt_bnd.f90 ./a.out [snipped output] $ valgrind

[Bug c++/32232] [4.1/4.2 Regression] ICE in resolve_overloaded_unification

2007-07-07 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 19:16 --- Subject: Bug 32232 Author: mmitchel Date: Sat Jul 7 19:16:09 2007 New Revision: 126443 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=126443 Log: PR c++/32232 * pt.c

[Bug c++/32232] [4.1 Regression] ICE in resolve_overloaded_unification

2007-07-07 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 19:16 --- Fixed in 4.2.1. -- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/31743] [4.1/4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with invalid use of new

2007-07-07 Thread mark at codesourcery dot com
--- Comment #11 from mark at codesourcery dot com 2007-07-07 19:18 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with invalid use of new reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: --- Comment #10 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 10:59 --- Mark, is there any

[Bug middle-end/32668] The type-generic builtins apply default promotions

2007-07-07 Thread ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 19:26 --- Here's a testcase: int foo1 (float fp) { return __builtin_isnan (fp); } int foo2 (float fp) { return __builtin_isnan ((double)fp); } int foo3 (double fp) { return __builtin_isnan (fp); } int foo4 (long

[Bug c++/31780] [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with incompatible types for ?: with complex type conversion

2007-07-07 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 19:26 --- The ICE is occurring in the gimplifier; it appears not to handle expressions with type error_mark_node. Either we should not gimplify anything after an error occurs, or it must be made more robust. I'm thinking

[Bug middle-end/32668] New: The type-generic builtins apply default promotions

2007-07-07 Thread ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org
The type-generic builtins apply the default variadic promotions to their arguments before handing them off to the middle-end for processing. This is bad because e.g. __builtin_isnan(f), where f is a float, gets turned into __builtin_isnan((double)f). In most cases, the cast to double merely

[Bug target/31331] [avr] ICE on function attribute syntax for main()

2007-07-07 Thread aesok at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from aesok at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 19:30 --- Subject: Bug 31331 Author: aesok Date: Sat Jul 7 19:30:37 2007 New Revision: 126446 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=126446 Log: PR target/31331 * config/avr/avr.c

[Bug tree-optimization/32663] [4.3 regression]: revision 126369 went into an infinite loop

2007-07-07 Thread hjl at lucon dot org
--- Comment #6 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-07-07 19:35 --- If I revert - if (lhsval) + if (lhsval vuse_equiv (lhsval, stmt)) the regression is gone. I suspected that the original code: if (lhsval) { set_value_handle (newt,

[Bug c++/31780] [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with incompatible types for ?: with complex type conversion

2007-07-07 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 19:35 --- I do think that the error is bogus. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31780

[Bug target/31331] [avr] ICE on function attribute syntax for main()

2007-07-07 Thread aesok at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from aesok at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 19:37 --- Fixed. -- aesok at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug target/31331] [avr] ICE on function attribute syntax for main()

2007-07-07 Thread aesok at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from aesok at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 19:39 --- Subject: Bug 31331 Author: aesok Date: Sat Jul 7 19:39:36 2007 New Revision: 126447 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=126447 Log: PR target/31331 * config/avr/avr.c

[Bug tree-optimization/32663] [4.3 regression]: revision 126369 went into an infinite loop

2007-07-07 Thread dberlin at dberlin dot org
--- Comment #7 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 20:07 --- Subject: Re: [4.3 regression]: revision 126369 went into an infinite loop On 7 Jul 2007 19:35:01 -, hjl at lucon dot org [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Comment #6 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-07-07

[Bug tree-optimization/32663] [4.3 regression]: revision 126369 went into an infinite loop

2007-07-07 Thread hjl at lucon dot org
--- Comment #8 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-07-07 20:08 --- I am testing this patch: --- gcc/tree-ssa-pre.c.bad 2007-07-07 08:18:31.0 -0700 +++ gcc/tree-ssa-pre.c 2007-07-07 12:48:47.0 -0700 @@ -3362,7 +3362,8 @@ make_values_for_stmt (tree stmt, basic_b

[Bug tree-optimization/32663] [4.3 regression]: revision 126369 went into an infinite loop

2007-07-07 Thread dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 20:09 --- (In reply to comment #8) I am testing this patch: --- gcc/tree-ssa-pre.c.bad 2007-07-07 08:18:31.0 -0700 +++ gcc/tree-ssa-pre.c 2007-07-07 12:48:47.0 -0700 @@ -3362,7 +3362,8 @@

[Bug middle-end/32398] [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files: cannot compile

2007-07-07 Thread danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 20:30 --- There is some dependency on the pointer plus merge. After the merge, Steve's testcase fails with the stage1 compiler as previously shown. Before the merge, the test doesn't fail. However, the GCC build still fails

[Bug middle-end/32668] The type-generic builtins apply default promotions

2007-07-07 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 20:39 --- Confirmed. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug middle-end/32398] [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files: cannot compile

2007-07-07 Thread dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-07 22:02 --- Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f objeRO The REG_DEAD problem is a red herring. The notes are recomputed after the sched1

[Bug c++/31780] [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with incompatible types for ?: with complex type conversion

2007-07-07 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 22:12 --- Created an attachment (id=13867) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13867action=view) Patch -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31780

[Bug c++/31780] [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with incompatible types for ?: with complex type conversion

2007-07-07 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 22:21 --- I've attached a patch which fixes this bug in an obvious way. Since complex types are arithmetic types in GNU C++, we should allow standard conversions to them from integers, just as we do for all other

[Bug middle-end/23488] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] GCSE load PRE does not work with non sets (or missing load PRE with plain decls)

2007-07-07 Thread dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #22 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-07 22:23 --- Subject: Bug 23488 Author: dberlin Date: Sat Jul 7 22:23:26 2007 New Revision: 126449 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=126449 Log: 2007-07-07 Daniel Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Revert

Re: make exit because build/genmodes.exe doesn't exist

2007-07-07 Thread Dilano K. Saldin
Hi, I note that the above problem has been reported before by others. I am getting the same error message when trying to build gcc and gfortran (v.4.2.0) under cygwin. Has there been any resolution of this problem? Any help would be much appreciated. Dilano Saldin

[Bug c++/32667] builtin operator= generates memcpy with overlapping memory regions

2007-07-07 Thread Raimund dot Merkert at baesystems dot com
--- Comment #2 from Raimund dot Merkert at baesystems dot com 2007-07-07 22:36 --- This may be an old bug and may have crept in between 3.3.3 and 3.4.0 (latter has it, former doesn't) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32667

[Bug middle-end/32398] [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files: cannot compile

2007-07-07 Thread zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
--- Comment #9 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-07-07 22:40 --- Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files: cannot compile dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote: --- Comment #8

[Bug c++/31780] [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with incompatible types for ?: with complex type conversion

2007-07-07 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
--- Comment #8 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-07-07 22:44 --- Hi Mark. First, I can point you to C++/21210. In that occasion (see in particular Comment #3) we struggled with the issue quite a bit (if I remember correctly we tried to avoid adding constructors...) then you came up with

[Bug c++/31780] [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with incompatible types for ?: with complex type conversion

2007-07-07 Thread mark at codesourcery dot com
--- Comment #9 from mark at codesourcery dot com 2007-07-07 22:51 --- Subject: Re: [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with incompatible types for ?: with complex type conversion pcarlini at suse dot de wrote: --- Comment #8 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-07-07 22:44 --- Hi Mark.

[Bug c++/31780] [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with incompatible types for ?: with complex type conversion

2007-07-07 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
--- Comment #10 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-07-07 22:57 --- (In reply to comment #9) Ah, thanks for finding the old PR. In looking at the mail threads, I fail to find my magic solution. :-( Do you have a pointer to it? Well, that PR is *closed as fixed*. Maybe at the time I

[Bug fortran/32669] New: Actual argument contains too few elements for dummy argument is triggered for valid code

2007-07-07 Thread jaydub66 at gmail dot com
The following piece of code is rejected: program tfe implicit none real ,dimension(1:4) :: x real ,dimension(0:3) :: y real ,dimension(-1:2) :: z call sub(x(:)) call sub(y(:)) call sub(z(:)) contains subroutine sub(a) implicit none real,dimension(1:4) :: a end subroutine sub

[Bug fortran/32644] [4.3 Regression] CHARACTER*1, c produces Unclassifiable statement

2007-07-07 Thread patchapp at dberlin dot org
--- Comment #6 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-07-07 23:20 --- Subject: Bug number PR32644 A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker. The mailing list url for the patch is http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-07/msg00660.html --

[Bug middle-end/32398] [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files: cannot compile

2007-07-07 Thread dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
--- Comment #10 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-07 23:30 --- Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f obje suggest a way that we could accommodate this? Prior to reload being completed, I

[Bug fortran/32644] [4.3 Regression] CHARACTER*1, c produces Unclassifiable statement

2007-07-07 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-08 00:05 --- Subject: Bug 32644 Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Jul 8 00:05:27 2007 New Revision: 126450 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=126450 Log: 2007-07-07 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR

[Bug fortran/32644] [4.3 Regression] CHARACTER*1, c produces Unclassifiable statement

2007-07-07 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-08 00:09 --- Subject: Bug 32644 Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Jul 8 00:09:20 2007 New Revision: 126451 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=126451 Log: 2007-07-07 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR

[Bug fortran/32644] [4.3 Regression] CHARACTER*1, c produces Unclassifiable statement

2007-07-07 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-08 00:10 --- Fixed on trunk. Closing. -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/32398] [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files: cannot compile

2007-07-07 Thread zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
--- Comment #11 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-07-08 00:57 --- Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files: cannot compile dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote: --- Comment

[Bug preprocessor/32670] New: '$' is handled as a part of identifiers in asm

2007-07-07 Thread kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org
i686-pc-linux-gnu build fails with libtool: link: /exp/ldroot/dodes/i686-gcc-orig/gcc/gcj -B/exp/ldroot/dodes/i686-gcc-orig/i686-pc-linux-gnu/libjava/ -B/exp/ldroot/dodes/i686-gcc-orig/gcc/ -ffloat-store -fomit-frame-pointer -Usun -g -O2 -o .libs/jv-convert --main=gnu.gcj.convert.Convert

[Bug fortran/32554] [4.2 Only] Bug in P formatting

2007-07-07 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-08 02:20 --- Subject: Bug 32554 Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Jul 8 02:20:10 2007 New Revision: 126456 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=126456 Log: 2007-07-07 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR

[Bug fortran/32554] [4.2 Only] Bug in P formatting

2007-07-07 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-08 02:24 --- Subject: Bug 32554 Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Jul 8 02:24:37 2007 New Revision: 126457 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=126457 Log: 2007-07-07 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR

[Bug middle-end/32398] [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files: cannot compile

2007-07-07 Thread dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
--- Comment #12 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-08 02:29 --- Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f objeRO Why can't you put something in the prologue that sets the reg and has an unspec

[Bug middle-end/32398] [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files: cannot compile

2007-07-07 Thread zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
--- Comment #13 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-07-08 02:41 --- Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files: cannot compile dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote: --- Comment

[Bug c++/32671] New: Segment violation

2007-07-07 Thread kmikc dot cvb at gmail dot com
GCC crashed when I was compiling the Wormux game version 0.8alpha1. The GCC report: g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I/usr/include/SDL -D_GNU_SOURCE=1 -D_REENTRANT -DINSTALL_DATADIR=\/usr/share/games/wormux\ -DINSTALL_LOCALEDIR=\/usr/share/locale\

[Bug c++/32671] Segment violation

2007-07-07 Thread kmikc dot cvb at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from kmikc dot cvb at gmail dot com 2007-07-08 03:52 --- Created an attachment (id=13868) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13868action=view) File that contains the error -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32671

[Bug c++/32671] Segment violation

2007-07-07 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-08 04:02 --- The bug is not reproducible, so it is likely a hardware or OS problem. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32671

[Bug middle-end/32398] [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f object files: cannot compile

2007-07-07 Thread dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
--- Comment #14 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-08 05:12 --- Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: cannot compute suffix of f objeRO There is nothing magical about the entry block defs except that they are all