http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51494
Bug #: 51494
Summary: Legal program rejection - capturing "this" when using
static method inside lambda
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Statu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45472
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2010-09-01 03:03:31 |2011-12-09
--- Comment #17 from Andrew Pi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51280
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Marlier
2011-12-10 03:35:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 26040
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26040
testcase for gnu-tm
Well, I don't know why I can't reproduce it for openmp. I will try to have a
l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51493
--- Comment #1 from Matt Hargett 2011-12-10 03:24:45 UTC
---
Created attachment 26039
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26039
pre-processed source of the file that triggers the ICE when compiled with -O2
-floop-block
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50913
Matt Hargett changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matt at use dot net
--- Comment #6 from Ma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51493
Bug #: 51493
Summary: [4.7 regression] ICE when compiling scummvm with -O2
and any graphite optimization
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51471
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2011-12-10
02:50:06 UTC ---
(insn 149 77 93 (sequence [
(jump_insn:TI 82 77 121 (set (pc)
(if_then_else (ne (reg/v:SI 3 $3 [orig:210 n ] [210])
(reg:SI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51442
--- Comment #4 from Brendan Conoboy 2011-12-10
01:49:25 UTC ---
FYI, I've checked out svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-4_6-branch
revision 182172, run and rerun the complete testsuite before and after this
patch (As well as the patch Richar
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50561
--- Comment #3 from Matt Hargett 2011-12-10 01:38:00 UTC
---
Just re-verified that this is still a problem with trunk as of 2011-12-09.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51492
Bug #: 51492
Summary: vectorizer generates unnecessary code
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51486
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-10
00:47:16 UTC ---
personally, yes, I'd be happy with when it's a standard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51491
Bug #: 51491
Summary: ccp when converting from alloca should add a CLOBBER
to right before __builtin_stack_restore
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51471
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2011-12-09
23:50:17 UTC ---
The scheduler after reload is what is causing dwarf2cfi to fail ...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51490
Bug #: 51490
Summary: [c++11] push_class_level_binding internal error on
class scoping within a lambda expression
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51489
Bug #: 51489
Summary: constexpr not working consistently
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51488
Bug #: 51488
Summary: ICE on infinite template recursion
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50053
--- Comment #12 from gee 2011-12-09 22:24:56 UTC ---
Created attachment 26037
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26037
proposed patch
(In reply to comment #11)
> Suggested patch for this issue (together with the pending patch for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51291
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez 2011-12-09
21:45:49 UTC ---
Proposed fix:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-12/msg00736.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50053
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51284
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2011-12-09
21:20:08 UTC ---
Created attachment 26036
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26036
symbol.c part of the patch: Allow DIMENSION+VALUE with -std=f2008
First patch: Allow DIMENSION with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51486
--- Comment #7 from Ryan S. Arnold 2011-12-09 20:50:50
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Agreed. Thus, I understand the behavior is absolutely intended, and I see no
> compelling reason to change it now.
Would you see this changing to be locate
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51117
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-09
20:50:50 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Dec 9 20:50:40 2011
New Revision: 182177
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182177
Log:
PR tree-optimization/51117
* tree-eh.c (opt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51151
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2011-12-09
20:18:31 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Dec 9 20:18:22 2011
New Revision: 182175
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182175
Log:
PR c++/51151
* call.c (perform_implicit_con
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51486
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48508
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill 2011-12-09
20:04:44 UTC ---
Created attachment 26035
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26035
Patch to avoid generating abstract function for block extern
While I was looking at what we do in no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51487
Bug #: 51487
Summary: leak memory with eoshift(..,...,boundary)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-09
19:32:28 UTC ---
The issue is what the "correct" definition of the trait is, but I think we need
a DR to clarify it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51291
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21617
Vladimir Makarov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at redhat dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
--- Comment #12 from Paolo Carlini 2011-12-09
18:37:37 UTC ---
Thus Daniel was wrong when he said that fixing 51295 automatically renders
correct his current implementation of the trait? I suspect there is a
misunderstanding here: we are in contr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46041
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40348
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48508
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill 2011-12-09
18:22:38 UTC ---
We shouldn't be emitting anything for that nested function declaration in the
concrete instance of the inlined function, and we don't when compiling without
LTO. In normal compilation
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51289
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51280
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez 2011-12-09
18:13:47 UTC ---
I can't reproduce this:
houston:/build/t/gcc$ cat b.c
int main()
{
return __builtin_omp_get_thread_num();
}
houston:/build/t/gcc$ ./xgcc -B./ -c -fgnu-tm -flto b.c -o b.o
housto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51289
--- Comment #3 from Dodji Seketeli 2011-12-09
18:12:53 UTC ---
Author: dodji
Date: Fri Dec 9 18:12:45 2011
New Revision: 182170
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182170
Log:
PR c++/51289 - ICE with alias template for bound t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
Dave Abrahams changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dave at boostpro dot com
--- Comment #10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50076
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48258
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41787
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51469
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51486
--- Comment #5 from Janis Johnson 2011-12-09
17:04:04 UTC ---
Header didn't go with the standard headers because it's not part of
the standard. My first couple of patches put it in on the
recommendation of Benjamin Kosnik. Ed Smith-Rowland in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51486
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2011-12-09
16:47:48 UTC ---
With the difference vs tr1, that in this case, as far as I can see, there are
no name collision issues, thus installing both decimal and decimal.h at the the
same level of the the othe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51486
--- Comment #3 from Ryan S. Arnold 2011-12-09 16:39:17
UTC ---
Thanks. Using #include instead of #include does
indeed work. I'm just wondering what's correct.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51486
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-09
16:31:44 UTC ---
I assume the reasoning is similar to how we require users to include
to get TR1's
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51486
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janis at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51483
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51486
Bug #: 51486
Summary: g++ doesn't implicitly search for header in
system include path include/c++//decimal/
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51117
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-09
16:09:48 UTC ---
Created attachment 26034
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26034
gcc47-pr51117-sink.patch
So far untested attempt to sink clobbers if a BB with all EH pred edges and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51295
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||d...@boost-consulting.com
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51364
--- Comment #5 from Ryan S. Arnold 2011-12-09 16:03:04
UTC ---
As a temporary fix I've added the following to libdfp:
http://www.eglibc.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/libdfp/trunk/dfp/float.h?view=markup
This adds , which does #include_next , and then
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-09
16:02:11 UTC ---
Corrected testcase:
struct X
{
X() noexcept;
~X() noexcept(false);
};
static_assert( noexcept( X() ), "fails because of ~X" );
static_assert( noexcept(new (nu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46887
--- Comment #4 from Sean McGovern 2011-12-09
16:01:52 UTC ---
Please reconfirm with a recent GCC, or close if it has been fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51479
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-12-09
15:59:56 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Dec 9 15:59:51 2011
New Revision: 182166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182166
Log:
Restore errors.o dependency
2011-12-09 H.J
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
--- Comment #7 from Daniel Krügler
2011-12-09 15:57:15 UTC ---
Please note that this issue here is a simply a dup of bug 51295, which is a
compiler defect and *not* a library problem. See [class.dtor] p3:
"A declaration of a destructor that does
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45448
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51483
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51341
--- Comment #5 from davidz 2011-12-09 14:06:22 UTC
---
This did solve the issue. Thanks a lot for the explain and syntax!
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > I am a little confused. -MT will create .d file. Then make command
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48042
--- Comment #13 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-09
13:49:28 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Dec 9 13:49:22 2011
New Revision: 182163
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182163
Log:
2011-12-09 Richard Guenther
PR lto/48
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48042
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48508
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45416
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eric.weddington at atmel
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40154
--- Comment #7 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2011-12-09 12:57:28 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Dec 9 12:57:24 2011
New Revision: 182162
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182162
Log:
PR middle-end/40154
* em
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51485
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-09
12:34:13 UTC ---
Created attachment 26033
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26033
gcc47-pr51485.patch
Untested fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50279
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48354
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jpfoley2 at verizon dot net
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48042
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49313
--- Comment #14 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-12-09
12:02:14 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Fri Dec 9 12:02:06 2011
New Revision: 182160
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182160
Log:
PR target/49313
* config/avr/t-avr (LIB1A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51425
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51484
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51425
--- Comment #2 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-12-09
11:54:34 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Fri Dec 9 11:54:29 2011
New Revision: 182159
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182159
Log:
PR target/51425
* config/avr/avr.md (confi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51449
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||veksler at il dot ibm.com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51117
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-09
11:48:33 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Dec 9 11:48:30 2011
New Revision: 182158
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182158
Log:
PR tree-optimization/51117
* tree-eh.c (opt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51485
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51485
Bug #: 51485
Summary: [4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE in vectorizable_statement
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-cod
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51484
Bug #: 51484
Summary: Can't create C++ executable with -profile-generate
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51466
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-09
11:32:41 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Dec 9 11:32:35 2011
New Revision: 182157
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182157
Log:
Backport from mainline
2011-12-08 Jakub Je
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50078
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-09
11:32:40 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Dec 9 11:32:35 2011
New Revision: 182157
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182157
Log:
Backport from mainline
2011-12-08 Jakub J
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51482
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51482
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-09
11:23:04 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Dec 9 11:22:59 2011
New Revision: 182156
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182156
Log:
2011-12-09 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51480
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-09
10:02:52 UTC ---
If you think it's useful to modify an object that will never be used, you can
do it like this:
struct A
{
};
void accepted(const A &a = A())
{
}
void rejected(A &a)
{
}
void reje
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51480
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-09
09:58:12 UTC ---
Visual Studio is not a real C++ compiler.
Try http://comeaucomputing.com/tryitout/ or http://llvm.org/demo/
Your code is not valid C++, sorry.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51483
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51480
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Maier-Komor 2011-12-09
09:47:06 UTC ---
Why is that so?
Visual Studio compiler seems to handle that situation without a problem and I
think it could come handy in certain situations...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835
--- Comment #50 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-12-09
09:38:33 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #49)
> No, but the new code (cstand.adb:Register_Float_Type) makes an invalid
> assumption about the size of a FP mode given its precision and alignment,
> in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51483
Bug #: 51483
Summary: [4.7 regression] Ada's cstand.adb:Register_Float_Type
makes invalid assumptions about FP representation
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51480
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51482
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51262
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48600
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fsaresh at ucdavis dot edu
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51482
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48600
--- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-09
09:11:19 UTC ---
Testcase from PR51460
class mx {
public:
mx();
};
int main()
{
while (true) {
mx *bar = new mx;
mx *baz = new mx;
continue;
}
return 0;
}
Honza, plea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51460
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39825
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41518
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29189
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51481
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51472
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-09
09:03:26 UTC ---
It looks like sth forgot to call update_stmt.
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
