[Bug c++/3187] gcc lays down two copies of constructors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3187 --- Comment #40 from Arunprasad ararunprasad at gmail dot com 2012-10-19 06:41:04 UTC --- Thank you.Is there any way to find it from nm output.?

[Bug fortran/54725] cross gfortran always searches host paths (e.g. /usr/include)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54725 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/54965] [4.6 Regression] sorry, unimplemented: inlining failed in call to 'foo': function not considered for inlining

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54965 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 08:36:06 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) (In reply to comment #4) In the above case you probably want big_function_a to have all calls inlined. You can then

[Bug lto/54966] Does LTO requires a larger inline-unit-growth?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54966 --- Comment #3 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2012-10-19 08:36:20 UTC --- the patch fails w.r.t. 4.7 patch -p0 ../../inline.patch patching file ipa-inline.c Hunk #1 FAILED at 473. Hunk #2 FAILED at 491.

[Bug tree-optimization/54981] [4.8 Regression] Different code generated with / without `-g'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54981 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug lto/54980] [4.8 regression] gimple check: expected gimple_cond(error_mark), have gimple_call() in gimple_cond_set_lhs, at gimple.h:2578

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54980 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/54937] Invalid loop bound estimate

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54937 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|

[Bug tree-optimization/54967] [4.8 Regression] ICE in check_loop_closed_ssa_use, at tree-ssa-loop-manip.c:55

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54967 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|hubicka at ucw dot cz,

[Bug fortran/48636] Enable more inlining with -O2 and higher

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48636 --- Comment #26 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2012-10-19 08:45:03 UTC --- I'm interested to test the patch on our large application currently compiled with 4.7.2. would it be possible to get the same patch

[Bug tree-optimization/54978] Add ability to provide vectorized functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54978 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/54976] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr47975.c (internal compiler error)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54976 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/54977] example3 not vectorized

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54977 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug target/54892] [4.7/4.8 Regression], ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2123

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54892 --- Comment #3 from xuepeng guo xguo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 09:24:48 UTC --- Author: xguo Date: Fri Oct 19 09:24:39 2012 New Revision: 192609 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192609 Log: gcc/ChangeLog

[Bug tree-optimization/54967] [4.8 Regression] ICE in check_loop_closed_ssa_use, at tree-ssa-loop-manip.c:55

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54967 --- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2012-10-19 09:35:37 UTC --- Looking into it. Obviously complette unroling ought not affect loop closedness :) Honza

[Bug target/54892] [4.7/4.8 Regression], ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2123

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54892 --- Comment #4 from xuepeng guo xguo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 09:39:20 UTC --- Author: xguo Date: Fri Oct 19 09:39:13 2012 New Revision: 192610 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192610 Log: gcc/ChangeLog

[Bug tree-optimization/54978] Add ability to provide vectorized functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54978 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at

[Bug c++/3187] gcc lays down two copies of constructors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3187 --- Comment #41 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 10:05:55 UTC --- The reason why this hasn't been closed is that we only use an alias of one kind of ctor (resp. dtor) to the other one if they are the same (and for

[Bug fortran/54884] [4.8 Regression] Externally used PRIVATE module procedure wrongly marked as TREE_PUBLIC()=0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54884 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug lto/54980] [4.8 regression] gimple check: expected gimple_cond(error_mark), have gimple_call() in gimple_cond_set_lhs, at gimple.h:2578

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54980 --- Comment #5 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko dimhen at gmail dot com 2012-10-19 10:26:35 UTC --- 192517 OK 192548 FAIL

[Bug tree-optimization/54976] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr47975.c (internal compiler error)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54976 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 10:32:37 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Oct 19 10:32:29 2012 New Revision: 192611 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192611 Log: 2012-10-19

[Bug c++/3187] gcc lays down two copies of constructors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3187 --- Comment #42 from Arunprasad ararunprasad at gmail dot com 2012-10-19 10:34:11 UTC --- So I'm assuming like the issue still exists in gcc family of tool-chains. Fix has been temporarily suspended due to ABI compatibility.

[Bug tree-optimization/54976] [4.8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr47975.c (internal compiler error)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54976 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/54894] [4.6/4.7 Regression] internal compiler error: in vect_get_vec_def_for_operand, at tree-vect-stmts.c:1286

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54894 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||54976

[Bug c/54983] New: ARM gcc creates invalid assembly: bad immediate value for 8-bit offset (1024)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54983 Bug #: 54983 Summary: ARM gcc creates invalid assembly: bad immediate value for 8-bit offset (1024) Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.3

[Bug c++/54984] New: Array allocated with new in a template class is default initialised

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54984 Bug #: 54984 Summary: Array allocated with new in a template class is default initialised Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.3 Status:

[Bug middle-end/54985] New: Dom optimization erroneous remove conditional goto.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985 Bug #: 54985 Summary: Dom optimization erroneous remove conditional goto. Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/54985] Dom optimization erroneous remove conditional goto.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985 --- Comment #1 from Vladimir Yakovlev vbyakovl23 at gmail dot com 2012-10-19 10:58:26 UTC --- Created attachment 28489 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28489 Test case

[Bug middle-end/54985] Dom optimization erroneous remove conditional goto.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985 --- Comment #2 from Vladimir Yakovlev vbyakovl23 at gmail dot com 2012-10-19 10:59:15 UTC --- Created attachment 28490 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28490 Main routine

[Bug target/54983] ARM gcc creates invalid assembly: bad immediate value for 8-bit offset (1024)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54983 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 11:01:13 UTC --- I think there might be an issue with some of the inline-asm in asm/io.h: static inline __attribute__((always_inline))

[Bug tree-optimization/54981] [4.8 Regression] Different code generated with / without `-g'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54981 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 11:06:16 UTC --- +not generating builtin, partition has scalar uses outside of the loop that check is confused by debug stmts. I have a simple patch, let's watch

[Bug c++/54569] Compiling code with -O3 results to segfault in MAME/MESS binary

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54569 Lars l.gronning at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||l.gronning at

[Bug tree-optimization/54985] [4.7/4.8 Regression] dom optimization erroneous remove conditional goto.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/54985] [4.7/4.8 Regression] dom optimization erroneous remove conditional goto.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at

[Bug c++/54986] New: Internal Error: segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54986 Bug #: 54986 Summary: Internal Error: segmentation fault Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c/54983] ARM gcc creates invalid assembly: bad immediate value for 8-bit offset (1024)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54983 Bastian Hecht hechtb at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Component|target |c ---

[Bug c++/54986] Internal Error: segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54986 --- Comment #1 from Rémi Vanicat vanicat at debian dot org 2012-10-19 12:06:30 UTC --- I forgot to give you the version: I'm using debian unstable gcc: g++-4.7 (Debian 4.7.2-4) 4.7.2 Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

[Bug target/54974] [4.8 Regression] [ARM] Incorrect placement of constant pools

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54974 Matthias Klose doko at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work|4.7.2 |4.6.3

[Bug debug/54693] VTA guality issues with loops

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54693 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 12:34:14 UTC --- Thanks, the threadedge patch looks reasonable (I think gimple_location on debug stmts is ignored, so we don't need to drop it). As for ivopts, there

[Bug c++/54984] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Array allocated with new in a template class is default initialised

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54984 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/54967] [4.8 Regression] ICE in check_loop_closed_ssa_use, at tree-ssa-loop-manip.c:55

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54967 --- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 12:50:57 UTC --- OK, the problem is that unloop is shuffling a basic block out of the outer loop: DO m=1,6 after unrolling the inner loop: DO j=1,2 12

[Bug tree-optimization/54981] [4.8 Regression] Different code generated with / without `-g'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54981 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 13:05:45 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Oct 19 13:05:40 2012 New Revision: 192612 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192612 Log: 2012-10-19

[Bug tree-optimization/54981] [4.8 Regression] Different code generated with / without `-g'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54981 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/54987] New: missed ambiguity in template function call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54987 Bug #: 54987 Summary: missed ambiguity in template function call Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/54945] Too strong non-aliasing analysis?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54945 --- Comment #13 from Michael Matz matz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 13:12:35 UTC --- (In reply to comment #12) What do you mean by invalid? It is certainly not undefined behavior. No, but the expectation implicitely coded into the

[Bug middle-end/54945] Too strong non-aliasing analysis?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54945 --- Comment #14 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 13:18:12 UTC --- I agree and do not plan to work on fixing that. (The intptr_t change is already approved and will be comitted shortly though.)

[Bug tree-optimization/54985] [4.7/4.8 Regression] dom optimization erroneous remove conditional goto.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985 Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at

[Bug debug/54693] VTA guality issues with loops

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54693 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 13:49:03 UTC --- What I had in mind for ivopts is roughly this. Not sure about the last argument to get_computation_at. For normal statements I'd hope it shouldn't

[Bug c++/54986] Internal Error: segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54986 --- Comment #2 from Rémi Vanicat vanicat at debian dot org 2012-10-19 14:13:21 UTC --- Created attachment 28492 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28492 Small test case I've isolated the bug to a relatively small file (140 line,

[Bug c++/54986] Internal Error: segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54986 Markus Trippelsdorf markus at trippelsdorf dot de changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug target/54988] New: fpmath=sse target pragma causes inlining failure because of target specific option mismatch

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54988 Bug #: 54988 Summary: fpmath=sse target pragma causes inlining failure because of target specific option mismatch Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version:

[Bug debug/54971] SRA pessimizes debug info by not creating debug stmts for fields without replacements

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54971 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 16:01:20 UTC --- Created attachment 28493 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28493 Untested patch I'm currently bootstrapping and testing this

[Bug tree-optimization/54978] Add ability to provide vectorized functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54978 --- Comment #3 from Daniel Davis ddesics at gmail dot com 2012-10-19 16:14:36 UTC --- Obviously, it would be nice if gcc can build the functions if they are pure functions. But that would require somehow knowing that those functions should

[Bug middle-end/54885] [4.8 Regression] lto/profiledbootstrap broken

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54885 Markus Trippelsdorf markus at trippelsdorf dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug target/54989] New: FAIL: gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure.c scan-rtl-dump hoist PRE/HOIST: end of bb .* copying expression on darwin

at -m32 and r192611. The test passes at -m64. Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=gcc-fsf-4.8 COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/sw/lib/gcc4.8/libexec/gcc/x86_64-apple-darwin12.2.0/4.8.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-apple-darwin12.2.0 Configured with: ../gcc-4.8-20121019/configure --prefix=/sw --prefix=/sw

[Bug c/54983] ARM gcc creates invalid assembly: bad immediate value for 8-bit offset (1024)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54983 Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/54945] Too strong non-aliasing analysis?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54945 --- Comment #15 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 16:55:13 UTC --- Author: mpolacek Date: Fri Oct 19 16:53:39 2012 New Revision: 192617 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192617 Log: PR54945

[Bug middle-end/54945] Too strong non-aliasing analysis?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54945 --- Comment #16 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 17:01:37 UTC --- Author: mpolacek Date: Fri Oct 19 17:00:50 2012 New Revision: 192618 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192618 Log: PR54945

[Bug middle-end/54945] Too strong non-aliasing analysis?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54945 --- Comment #17 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 17:03:40 UTC --- Author: mpolacek Date: Fri Oct 19 17:03:07 2012 New Revision: 192619 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192619 Log: PR54945

[Bug middle-end/54945] Too strong non-aliasing analysis?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54945 Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug fortran/54990] New: [4.8 Regression] [OOP] ICE in tree_operand_check on SELECT TYPE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54990 Bug #: 54990 Summary: [4.8 Regression] [OOP] ICE in tree_operand_check on SELECT TYPE Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/54224] [4.8 Regression] Bogus -Wunused-function warning with static function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54224 --- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 17:15:01 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Fri Oct 19 17:14:46 2012 New Revision: 192620 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192620 Log: 2012-10-19 Janus Weil

[Bug fortran/54224] [4.8 Regression] Bogus -Wunused-function warning with static function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54224 --- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 17:22:44 UTC --- r192620 fixes the bogus warning on comment 0, which was a 4.8 regression. Leftover things to check/fix: * unused-warnings for internal procedues *

[Bug fortran/54224] [4.8 Regression] Bogus -Wunused-function warning with static function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54224 --- Comment #13 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 17:48:50 UTC --- (In reply to comment #12) Leftover things to check/fix: * unused-warnings for internal procedues Test case: module m private contains subroutine s1

[Bug fortran/54224] Warn for unused (private) module variables and internal procedures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54224 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[4.8 Regression] Bogus |Warn for unused

[Bug rtl-optimization/54991] New: [LRA] internal compiler error: in lra_assign, at lra-assigns.c:1361

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54991 Bug #: 54991 Summary: [LRA] internal compiler error: in lra_assign, at lra-assigns.c:1361 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status:

[Bug rtl-optimization/54850] [4.8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20041113-1.c execution, -Os

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54850 --- Comment #10 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-10-19 18:33:27 UTC --- I'm not seeing the fail with the candidate patch.

[Bug c++/54987] missed ambiguity in template function call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54987 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 18:46:26 UTC --- Comeau C/C++ 4.3.10.1 (Oct 6 2008 11:28:09) for ONLINE_EVALUATION_BETA2 Copyright 1988-2008 Comeau Computing. All rights reserved. MODE:strict

[Bug rtl-optimization/54991] [LRA] internal compiler error: in lra_assign, at lra-assigns.c:1361

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54991 --- Comment #1 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 2012-10-19 18:58:31 UTC --- Created attachment 28495 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28495 testcase, including source, .mod and .gcda files

[Bug fortran/54992] New: [OOP] Wrong offset in the array offset calculation when using nonclass%class(index)%nonclass

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54992 Bug #: 54992 Summary: [OOP] Wrong offset in the array offset calculation when using nonclass%class(index)%nonclass Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version:

[Bug fortran/54992] [4.8 Regression] [OOP] Wrong offset in the array offset calculation when using nonclass%class(index)%nonclass

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54992 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug fortran/54992] [4.8 Regression] [OOP] Wrong offset in the array offset calculation when using nonclass%class(index)%nonclass

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54992 --- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2012-10-19 21:37:08 UTC --- Revision 187190 is OK, revision 187198 is not - likely r187192.

[Bug rtl-optimization/54993] New: [4.8 regression] PIC register not marked as live

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54993 Bug #: 54993 Summary: [4.8 regression] PIC register not marked as live Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords:

[Bug middle-end/54961] [4.8 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr48757.f -O (internal compiler error) after revision 192440

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54961 --- Comment #2 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-19 21:57:54 UTC --- Something I'm going to test: Index: ira-lives.c === --- ira-lives.c (revision

[Bug tree-optimization/54985] [4.7/4.8 Regression] dom optimization erroneous remove conditional goto.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54985 --- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com 2012-10-19 22:00:45 UTC --- This is definitely something introduced when I extended the threading code last year. When threading across a backedge in the CFG we run the risk of

[Bug tree-optimization/54967] [4.8 Regression] ICE in check_loop_closed_ssa_use, at tree-ssa-loop-manip.c:55

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54967 --- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2012-10-19 22:15:09 UTC --- The test libgomp.graphite/force-parallel-6.c fails to execute with a bus error on x86_64-apple-darwin10 at revision 192538. Is it related to this

[Bug middle-end/54961] [4.8 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr48757.f -O (internal compiler error) after revision 192440

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54961 --- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2012-10-19 23:18:39 UTC --- Something I'm going to test: It does not fix the ICE, at least on x86_64-apple-darwin10.

[Bug c++/54994] New: [4.8 regression] New ICE in tsubst_copy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54994 Bug #: 54994 Summary: [4.8 regression] New ICE in tsubst_copy Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/54844] [4.8 Regression] ice tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:12352

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54844 Wolfgang Bangerth bangerth at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

This Company featured in our Newest Explode Report

Morning Day Traders!!! T_LP C is making ripples! Top Queried Stock On Board Central This Morning! Get Your Orders In Pronto!!! Trade Date: Oct, 22nd Company Name: TELPAC INDUSTRIES, INC. Ticker: T_LP C Price: .32 Long Term Target: 2.50 T_LP C has hired established mobile application

[Bug target/54989] FAIL: gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure.c scan-rtl-dump hoist PRE/HOIST: end of bb .* copying expression on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54989 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|