http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54117
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
08:19:43 UTC ---
Because -gstabs etc. are still supported on most of the primary and secondary
targets, and (to my surprise) some projects are still using it (I believe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56086
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56117
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56117
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
08:51:39 UTC ---
Created attachment 29289
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29289
gcc48-pr56117.patch
Untested fix. For MEMs, sched-deps.c is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56094
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
08:55:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
Created attachment 29272 [details]
gcc48-pr56094.patch
input_location is used heavily in the gimplifier,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56125
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
09:45:06 UTC ---
label_visit () seems to collect recursively points_to bits over the predecessor
graph, thus using a quadratic amount of memory. It does so to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
10:04:46 UTC ---
Moving -points_to to a separate obstack might also help (performing
label_visit
in topological order we could then free -points_to once we have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56127
Bug #: 56127
Summary: Incorrect code with -O2
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56127
--- Comment #1 from Till trosenband at gmail dot com 2013-01-28 10:20:48 UTC
---
Created attachment 29291
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29291
exp_results.ii
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56125
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56127
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56118
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56127
--- Comment #3 from Till trosenband at gmail dot com 2013-01-28 11:20:46 UTC
---
Thank you for checking. You are right, this seems to be a version-specific
problem for Sourcery CodeBench. I don't see an obvious bug in the assembly
code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54314
--- Comment #25 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
11:27:51 UTC ---
I meant the ABI checkers only. Anyway, on the other side given comments like:
This mangling isn't part of the ABI specification; in the ABI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56127
Till trosenband at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48659
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Starke daniel.f.starke at freenet dot de
2013-01-28 11:53:14 UTC ---
I can confirm this bug for gcc 4.7.2 mingw64. The -mstackrealign command-line
flag can be used as workaround as described on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56034
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
11:57:25 UTC ---
We have the producer of the loop closed PHI use not in the last partition
as it is designed to happen. I have a patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56053
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
12:07:12 UTC ---
The optimization is sound without -fno-builtin-memset. Otherwise not - why
would that not be in effect for darwin? Can you attach preprocessed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56053
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56128
Bug #: 56128
Summary: [4.8 Regression] No way to disable build of
libsanitizer
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56053
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2013-01-28
12:16:32 UTC ---
Created attachment 29293
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29293
preprocessed source for global-overflow-1.c
Can you attach
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56128
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
12:21:14 UTC ---
13:17 jakub richi: libgomp defines FUTEX_{WAIT,WAKE} on its own rather then
including linux/futex.h, guess the googlers could
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54107
--- Comment #23 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
12:31:19 UTC ---
Created attachment 29294
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29294
Draft patch for comment #4, to be tested.
As I said on @fortran, I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56129
Bug #: 56129
Summary: Seg fault on 256.bzip2 from spec2000 with -lto and
pre-reload scheduler for x86 Atom
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56053
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
12:34:15 UTC ---
Seems to fortify by default and thus expose a builtin anyway.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56118
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28 12:40:21
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
The original testcase is a dup of PR33562, it's a missed dead store
elimination, not constant propagation.
Ah, thanks, I am
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56053
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56128
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56130
Bug #: 56130
Summary: __attribute__((deprecated)) does not affect C++
reference
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56130
--- Comment #1 from chen3feng chen3feng at gmail dot com 2013-01-28 13:17:52
UTC ---
Tested on gcc 4.1.2 4.5.3 4.6.3 4.7.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
13:33:47 UTC ---
The problem here is in dfs_enumerate_from, which wrongly detects the number of
BBs in a loop. get_loop_body_with_size calls dfs_enumerate_from with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
13:35:15 UTC ---
Maybe just remove the assert? We know, that dfs_enumerate_from can sometimes
return bogus number.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56128
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Bonzini bonzini at gnu dot org 2013-01-28 13:36:36
UTC ---
--disable-target-libsanitizer should work:
# Handle --disable-component generically.
for dir in $configdirs $build_configdirs $target_configdirs ; do
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de
2013-01-28 13:39:28 UTC ---
On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270
--- Comment #5 from Marek
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
13:42:51 UTC ---
Yeah, on the second thought, that is nonsense, sorry.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
13:48:29 UTC ---
BB 12 does not belong to loop 1 but is marked so. Broken by late phicprop.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54107
--- Comment #24 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28 13:48:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #23)
Created attachment 29294 [details]
Draft patch for comment #4, to be tested.
Thanks! Seems to work on comment 4 at least. I'll try a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
14:03:18 UTC ---
When propagate_rhs_into_lhs alters the CFG from
if ()
{
if ()
exit_loop;
}
to
if ()
{
exit_loop;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56094
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
14:05:48 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 28 14:05:40 2013
New Revision: 195504
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195504
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56053
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2013-01-28
14:06:35 UTC ---
Created attachment 29295 [details]
gcc48-pr56053.patch
Untested fix.
On x86_64-apple-darwin10, with the patch
make -k check-gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56053
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
14:28:24 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 28 14:28:16 2013
New Revision: 195505
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195505
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56088
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56053
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56094
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
14:33:18 UTC ---
Should be fixed now on the trunk, but keeping the PR open, so that we don't
forget to revert and do a better fix instead.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56061
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53537
--- Comment #7 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
14:37:26 UTC ---
Author: mikael
Date: Mon Jan 28 14:37:20 2013
New Revision: 195506
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195506
Log:
2013-01-28
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56125
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
14:43:07 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 28 14:43:03 2013
New Revision: 195507
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195507
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56034
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
14:45:50 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jan 28 14:45:46 2013
New Revision: 195508
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195508
Log:
2013-01-28
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56034
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54314
--- Comment #26 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2013-01-28 14:56:12
UTC ---
perhaps making them hidden whenever possible is really desirable.
Yes, this seems fine to me. Just to be sure I understand the problem fully.
I believe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56125
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.7/4.8 Regression] -O2|[4.7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35294
--- Comment #17 from Nick Clifton nickc at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
15:07:48 UTC ---
Author: nickc
Date: Mon Jan 28 15:07:41 2013
New Revision: 195510
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195510
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35294
Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54314
--- Comment #27 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
15:42:57 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #26)
1) Just add the check. We will then miss all devirtualization oppurtunities
through the construction vtable.
The
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54107
--- Comment #25 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28 16:04:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #24)
Draft patch for comment #4, to be tested.
Thanks! Seems to work on comment 4 at least. I'll try a regtest.
Regtest went through
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270
--- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
16:43:31 UTC ---
Unfortunately this patch causes a few FAILs, e.g.:
/home/polacek/src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20020604-1.c: In
function ‘foo’:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56117
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
16:50:39 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 28 16:50:22 2013
New Revision: 195513
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195513
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56117
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55221
Thierry Thomas thierry at FreeBSD dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||thierry at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56131
Bug #: 56131
Summary: [4.8 regression] gcc.dg/pr56035.c ICEs gcc on
sparc-linux
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55951
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53073
Steve Ellcey sje at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sje at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56132
Bug #: 56132
Summary: Lengths incorrect on assignment to an allocatable
character scalar.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55342
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54314
--- Comment #28 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2013-01-28 19:05:40
UTC ---
1) Just add the check. We will then miss all devirtualization oppurtunities
through the construction vtable.
The front end does devirtualization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54107
--- Comment #26 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
19:46:01 UTC ---
Thanks for testing.
There is one case that remains to be handled. I suppose it is valid if the
other are valid.
function foo () result(bar)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54814
--- Comment #15 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
20:03:34 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Mon Jan 28 20:03:26 2013
New Revision: 195515
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195515
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54814
Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44830
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55059
--- Comment #5 from Tom Tromey tromey at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28 20:08:11
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
(In reply to comment #3)
If we change gdb to cope with this, I think the effect will be to undo what
the patches here were
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53537
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2013-01-28
20:08:50 UTC ---
After revision 195506, the test in pr44830 compiles without error.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56088
--- Comment #8 from Václav Zeman vhaisman at gmail dot com 2013-01-28
20:12:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
What linker are you using? It seems to work for me with GNU ld 2.23.1.
Using
./xg++ -B. t2.ii -r -nostdlib -flto -std=c++11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52480
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52480
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28 20:44:03
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
As of rev 195493 the test case for this PR is failing again.
In fact, now it doesn't work for little and big endian.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56133
Bug #: 56133
Summary: [x86] align_loops, align_jumps and align_functions
are ignored
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56131
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54107
--- Comment #27 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28 22:42:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #26)
There is one case that remains to be handled. I suppose it is valid if the
other are valid.
function foo () result(bar)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56112
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
23:07:59 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Jan 28 23:07:35 2013
New Revision: 195520
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195520
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56112
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56131
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113
--- Comment #9 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
23:34:36 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
With the patch from comment #7:
n=1000 6.18user 254976k maxresident
n=2000 16.76user 509184k maxresident
n=4000
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56131
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-29 00:28:38 UTC ---
Using NOTE_BASIC_BLOCK instead of BLOCK_FOR_INSN on bb_note allows us to get
the bb.
This tentative patch:
...
Index: cfgrtl.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56134
Bug #: 56134
Summary: ICE: alias attribute on c++ static class member;
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56134
--- Comment #1 from Tristan Wibberley tristan.wibberley at gmail dot com
2013-01-29 01:00:44 UTC ---
$ g++ --version
g++-4.7.real (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.7.2-2ubuntu1) 4.7.2
Copyright © 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56134
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.3.5,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56135
Bug #: 56135
Summary: [c++11] this incorrectly captured as null in template
member function
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
/attachment.cgi?id=29299
The code that causes compiler crash
Upon compiling the following code using GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.8.0 20130128
(experimental):
MODULE A_TEST_M
TYPE :: A_TYPE
CONTAINS
GENERIC :: ASSIGNMENT (=) = ASGN_A
PROCEDURE, PRIVATE :: ASGN_A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56137
Bug #: 56137
Summary: std::initializer_list accepts invalid designated
initializers
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55996
--- Comment #2 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2013-01-29 07:01:24
UTC ---
[4.9 PATCH, alpha]: Switch alpha to LRA
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg01357.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56129
--- Comment #1 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2013-01-29 07:14:37
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
Please, let me know if we are needed any additional info.
Yes, we need all relevant files to recreate the failure. If
91 matches
Mail list logo
