--- Comment #2 from dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-11-09
08:20 ---
This a target bug (stdcall symbol name decorati0on on windows targets)
--
dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-11-09
08:24 ---
Patch at:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-11/msg00321.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38054
--- Comment #4 from d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com 2008-11-09
11:30 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Ok, thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38054
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-09 10:57 ---
Created an attachment (id=16639)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16639action=view)
gcc44-pr37323.patch
I guess the following patch should fix it. The question is if it doesn't break
other
on a dual core Athlon chip. I'm using the gcc-trunk
build:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/design/gfortran/production gfortran --version
GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.4.0 20081109 (experimental) [trunk revision 141714]
Copyright (C) 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Thank you for your attention.
Norm Clerman
--- Comment #1 from clerman at fuse dot net 2008-11-09 14:57 ---
Subject: bug 38065 (my bug5)
Attached is the file you will need to reproduce the problem.
Thanks again for your assistance.
Norm Clerman
--- Comment #2 from clerman at fuse dot net 2008-11-09 14:57 ---
Hello everyone,
I have created a small example to reproduce another bug I have found when I
attempt to build my lens design program. I will upload a file to you,
bug6M.tgz, as soon as I am assigned a bug number.
The bug occurs in file bug6M.f90:
bug6M.f90:17.21:
CALL GetNullSet
--- Comment #1 from clerman at fuse dot net 2008-11-09 15:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=16641)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16641action=view)
see bug explanation
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38066
--- Comment #11 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2008-11-09
16:28 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] __builtin_apply failures
I guess the following patch should fix it. The question is if it doesn't
break
other targets...
I'll give it a try. If this fixes the
--- Comment #3 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2008-11-09 17:22 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Created an attachment (id=16640)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16640action=view) [edit]
the shell script seems to have a few lines referring to your home, but it looks
--- Comment #1 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2008-11-09
17:28 ---
Patch posted to gcc-patches...
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-11/msg00328.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38008
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-09 18:18
---
After doing some more testing and comparing g77 vs gfortran, gfortran actually
provides higher resolution 1000 ticks/sec then g77 100 ticks/second on at least
my platform (x86-64-linux) On Cygwin, results are
--
rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #4 from clerman at fuse dot net 2008-11-09 21:54 ---
Subject: Re: bug5
Thank you for your prompt reply. I have reassembled all the files to reproduce
the problem and they are in the attached file bug5a.tgz.
My apologies for any problem this has caused.
Norm Clerman
Hello,
I am a bit surprised that GCC (Ubuntu 4.3.2-1ubuntu11) 4.3.2 picks the
char* operator rather than the const char* one in the code attached...
I thought I'd report it in case someone case explain it to me, or in
case it might be a bug.
Thanks an regards,
Hervé
#include iostream
#include
--- Comment #7 from michael dot a dot richmond at nasa dot gov 2008-11-10
00:09 ---
I get a compile-time error:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ cat sort1.f90
PROGRAM sort1
INTEGER Count(1) !Current value of system clock
CALL Random_Seed(Put=Count)
END PROGRAM sort1
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$
--- Comment #7 from samuel dot thibault at ens-lyon dot org 2008-11-09
23:50 ---
libiberty actually already has its own powerful getpwd () Attaching patches
currently fails, I'll try to submit later if I remember (else remind me).
--
samuel dot thibault at ens-lyon dot org
--- Comment #8 from samuel dot thibault at ens-lyon dot org 2008-11-09
23:52 ---
Created an attachment (id=16643)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16643action=view)
better patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21706
.)
This is, of course, fixed (GNU Fortran (GCC) version 4.4.0 20081109). What do
you want to do with 4.3?? If I remove the offedning part of
gfc_get_parentheses in 4.3.3 20081108 (prerelease), it bootstrap and regtests
OK. Further, this bug is gone:-)
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-10 03:16
---
If you check, the minimum size of count is 8 as returned by the size= argument
if you use it. Try this. size is intent OUT.
PROGRAM sort1
INTEGER Count(1) !Current value of system clock
integer Size
CALL
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-09 17:41 ---
Subject: Bug 37836
Author: pault
Date: Sun Nov 9 17:40:30 2008
New Revision: 141717
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141717
Log:
2008-11-09 Paul Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #1 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2008-11-09
21:12 ---
Patch posted to gcc-patches...
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-11/msg00333.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38010
--- Comment #7 from suckfish at ihug dot co dot nz 2008-11-10 07:44 ---
Could someone commit the patch?
[http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-11/msg00147.html] I don't have SVN
commit access.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37809
23 matches
Mail list logo
