--- Comment #9 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-10-19 16:44 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/bb-reorg.c compilation,
-fprofile-use -D_PROFILE_USE
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009, rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
I don't think there should be such notes on ARM due
--- Comment #10 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-10-19 16:46
---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/bb-reorg.c compilation,
-fprofile-use -D_PROFILE_USE
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009, rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Created an attachment (id=18826)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-10-25 17:43 ---
Subject: Re: libstdc++.so.6.0.14-gdb.py is not an ELF
file
Some people dislike a few warnings from ldconfig. I think having this as
a text file alongside the library is much better than alternative
suggestions
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-10-29 15:47 ---
Subject: Re: New: Translation time Floating Point precision
is too small
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009, tydeman at tybor dot com wrote:
The following code fails on (at least) Intel x86/x87 systems running Linux:
Please
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-11-04 19:42 ---
Subject: Re: New: __attribute__ ((visibility)) weird with
functions returning pointers
Visibility attributes are in the nature of storage class specifiers and so
should be placed at the start of the declaration
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-11-09 13:16 ---
Subject: Re: ICE on invalid dereferencing of void *
On Mon, 9 Nov 2009, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
the C standard doesn't claim dereferencing a void pointer is invalid, so
the gimplifier should deal
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-11-11 23:35 ---
Subject: Re: server not respond
This is probably a duplicate of bug 41343 (it's reported against a trunk
version more than a month old).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42012
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-11-12 03:01 ---
Subject: Re: Make -mfloat-gprs=double the default when
compiling for powerpc-linux-gnuspe target
Note that there are more than just e500 processors with the SPE
functionality; for example, at least some e200
--- Comment #19 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-11-12 17:20
---
Subject: Re: String not extracted for translation
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, pearly dot zhao at oracle dot com wrote:
Run make gcc.pot in objdir/gcc/ can extract both branches of this
conditional
expression
--- Comment #21 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-11-13 13:26
---
Subject: Re: String not extracted for translation
On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, pearly dot zhao at oracle dot com wrote:
(In reply to comment #19)
Subject: Re: String not extracted for translation
It didn't do
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-11-20 01:13 ---
Subject: Re: New: c99-stdint test fails for ptrdiff test
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
__PTRDIFF_MAX__ is set by gcc at 32767 and so stdint.h gives PTRDIFF_MAX 32767
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-11-20 02:36 ---
Subject: Re: c99-stdint test fails for ptrdiff test
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
So should I skip ptrdiff limit test based on pointers being 32 bits? Perhaps
ints 32 bits
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-11-20 20:57 ---
Subject: Re: g++ should warn or error on internal 0 size
array in struct
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, david dot resnick at comverse dot com wrote:
(In reply to comment #3)
(In reply to comment #2)
In standard C
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-12-20 01:16 ---
Subject: Re: New: Linux kernel BUILD_BUG_ON() broke
This is a different sort of not-an-integer-constant-expression from the
previous cases the kernel was found to use with invalid unevaluated
operands (I asked
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-12-22 12:15 ---
Subject: Re: New: 33 typos in gcc-4.5-b20091203.pot
file
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009, karvonen dot jorma at gmail dot com wrote:
I have picked the following lines from file gcc-4.5-b20091203.pot:
This is not a useful
--- Comment #28 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-12-27 18:33
---
Subject: Re: stdint.h-related issues (C99 issues)
On Sun, 27 Dec 2009, laurent at guerby dot net wrote:
Is the following page up to date?
http://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html
The table appears to be up
--- Comment #29 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-12-27 18:37
---
Subject: Re: stdint.h-related issues (C99 issues)
Actually, the Broken marker for complex numbers support should now be
Done, as per what I said in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-05/msg00460.html
--- Comment #21 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-12-29 21:44
---
Subject: Re: gcc 4.4.0 error at postreload.c:396
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009, bonzini at gnu dot org wrote:
True, it is P5 but it is not invalid. Andreas, if you want to close this as
invalid you should first follow
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-12-31 17:03 ---
Subject: Re: Bad codegen with signed short cast to unsigned
int, then promoted to unsigned long long
The first place to look for a problem would be shorten_compare.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #17 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2010-01-02 15:04
---
Subject: Re: LTO configuration should detect if the
target is ELF
On Sat, 2 Jan 2010, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Fixed. The way to support LTO on non-ELF targets is to wrap all LTO sections
--- Comment #17 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2010-01-05 11:25
---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] IMA is broken
See what I said in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-09/msg00519.html
suggesting deprecating the implementation of -combine and keeping the
interface.
--
http
--- Comment #13 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2010-01-13 13:55
---
Subject: Re: Gcc doesn't follow x86-64 psABI on _Bool
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, matz at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
The ABI (http://www.x86-64.org/documentation/abi.pdf) now contains this
language:
Any chance you
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-09-23 22:24 ---
Subject: Re: New: gcc.dg/20001012-1.c depends on IEEE
FP encoding
As a maintainer of a non-mainstream target you'll need to submit testsuite
patches to disable tests inapplicable on your target; it's unlikely
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-09-27 18:20 ---
Subject: Re: long double is buggy on sparc64
On Sat, 27 Sep 2008, bagnara at cs dot unipr dot it wrote:
This is good news. However, is there any known workaround for versions before
4.4?
If you want
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-10-03 17:00 ---
Subject: Re: New: NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C for newlib
I've argued before and will argue again that NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C should
be the default with a macro IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C defined for only those
targets known
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-10-06 11:58 ---
Subject: Re: New: Segmentation Fault Exception with -O and
signed array index
On Mon, 6 Oct 2008, gcc at jme dot de wrote:
The following code produces a segmentation fault when compiled with -O.
Environment
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-10-06 21:39 ---
Subject: Re: New: Mistaken Segmentation fault
On Mon, 6 Oct 2008, charpour at gnet dot gr wrote:
printf(%s\n, make_person().name);
make_person().name is a non-lvalue array, so it only decays to a pointer
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-10-08 16:15 ---
Subject: Re: New: bogus warnings on x86_64-mingw32 due to
attribute((format(printf))) breakage
On Wed, 8 Oct 2008, mikpe at it dot uu dot se wrote:
When gcc is configured to generate code for x86_64-pc-mingw32
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-10-16 16:31 ---
Subject: Re: gcc ignores FP_CONTRACT pragma set to OFF
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Confirmed. The FP_CONTRACT macro is not implemented, but the default behavior
of GCC
--- Comment #15 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-10-16 16:39
---
Subject: Re: Optimization generates incorrect code
with -frounding-math option (#pragma STDC FENV_ACCESS not implemented)
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008, vincent at vinc17 dot org wrote:
The compiler should generate
--- Comment #8 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-10-17 11:22 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2/4.3/4.4 Regression] casts to void do not
silence -Wunused warnings for the case of __attribute__(( warn_unused_result
))
On Fri, 17 Oct 2008, bonzini at gnu dot org wrote:
It seems bad
--- Comment #17 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-10-17 15:31
---
Subject: Re: can't disable __attribute__((warn_unused_result))
On Fri, 17 Oct 2008, bonzini at gnu dot org wrote:
It does not matter if it is a security issue; if void-ifying is not an
acceptable workaround
--- Comment #19 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-10-17 16:55
---
Subject: Re: can't disable __attribute__((warn_unused_result))
On Fri, 17 Oct 2008, bonzini at gnu dot org wrote:
In the case of fwrite, for example, the only obvious case where checking
would be useless
--- Comment #8 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-10-18 18:06 ---
Subject: Re: infinite recursive call to __mulsc3 when
multiplying not-constant complexs
On Sat, 18 Oct 2008, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
The question is whether the standard requires actual complex
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-10-20 01:51 ---
Subject: Re: gcc sometimes accepts attribute in identifier list
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008, sabre at nondot dot org wrote:
It also accepts this:
void f4(__attribute__(()));
This is documented in Attribute Syntax
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-10-20 12:48 ---
Subject: Re: gcc sometimes accepts attribute in identifier list
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008, sabre at nondot dot org wrote:
as it turns out, f3 could also be considered valid in c89... because it makes
x
and y
--- Comment #10 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-11-03 12:58
---
Subject: Re: [4.2/4.3/4.4 Regression] Wrong error message with
unsigned char a = uchar512
On Mon, 3 Nov 2008, manu at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Joseph,
Will this be fixed by your new code for 4.5?
As I
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-11-05 13:47 ---
Subject: Re: Cannot use nested designated initializer with
unnamed inner aggregate
On Wed, 5 Nov 2008, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
I get
t.c: In function 'vec_add':
t.c:10: error: unknown field 'x
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-11-07 12:46 ---
Subject: Re: New: 'warning: comparison between signed and
unsigned' shouldn't be given for equality comparisons
On Fri, 7 Nov 2008, edwintorok at gmail dot com wrote:
Consider this code:
int foo(int
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-11-28 17:26 ---
Subject: Re: -Wformat does not work for wide strings
In view of the removal of c4x support I don't now think any patch for this
needs to address the format of STRING_CSTs for non-8-bit target bytes
--- Comment #14 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-11-30 15:37
---
Subject: Re: O2 causes invalid code
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Note that the C standard forbids type-punning through a union.
Basically it says that you may only read from
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-02 01:36 ---
Subject: Re: New: Use of Unicode quotes depends on LC_CTYPE
rather than LC_MESSAGES
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org wrote:
gcc uses Unicode quote marks with LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-06 19:09 ---
Subject: Re: __builtin_constant_p(t) ? t : 1 is not considered
a constant integer expression
On Sat, 6 Dec 2008, sabre at nondot dot org wrote:
This is a bug in the C front-end. They need to use
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-06 22:53 ---
Subject: Re: __builtin_constant_p(t) ? t : 1 is not considered
a constant integer expression
On Sat, 6 Dec 2008, sabre at nondot dot org wrote:
Ok, so this is a special case when __builtin_constant_p
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-07 00:28 ---
Subject: Re: New: Incorrect handling of line termination
character with trailing spaces
On Sat, 6 Dec 2008, eric dot niebler at gmail dot com wrote:
In the attached file, there is a comment terminated
--- Comment #8 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-08 21:00 ---
Subject: Re: dead link on onlinedocs/gccint/Top-Level.html
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Well, I can't even find this paragraph you want to reference.
The reference is to a whole
--- Comment #10 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-09 13:40
---
Subject: Re: dead link on onlinedocs/gccint/Top-Level.html
On Tue, 9 Dec 2008, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ??? This manual is apparently not available online. Keep
the cross
--- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-12 00:01 ---
Subject: Re: New: Gcc misaligns arrays when stack is
forced follow the x8632 ABI
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008, whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu wrote:
I notice that gcc does not follow the 32-bit ABI for the x86
--- Comment #10 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-12 01:25
---
Subject: Re: Gcc misaligns arrays when stack is forced
follow the x8632 ABI
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008, whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu wrote:
I suppose that by 32-bit ABI for the x86 you mean a document with
1990
--- Comment #12 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-15 00:21
---
Subject: Re: Gcc misaligns arrays when stack is forced
follow the x8632 ABI
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008, whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu wrote:
LSB may be a starting point for plausible hypotheses about the ABIs
--- Comment #8 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-15 00:31 ---
Subject: Re: __builtin_constant_p(t) ? t : 1 is not considered
a constant integer expression
I also added more __builtin_constant_p tests (gcc.dg/bconstp-[34].c) to
c-4_5-branch, following this discussion
--- Comment #14 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-15 18:17
---
Subject: Re: Gcc misaligns arrays when stack is forced
follow the x8632 ABI
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008, whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu wrote:
And also one without application here. I am aware of no other standard
--- Comment #20 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-16 00:09
---
Subject: Re: Gcc misaligns arrays when stack is forced
follow the x8632 ABI
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008, whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu wrote:
If you thought the standard adopted by LSB was the wrong
one, you should
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-24 17:28 ---
Subject: Re: ICE passing fixed point to function
On Wed, 24 Dec 2008, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
x86_64 does not support fixed point modes at all. Someone needs to come up
with an ABI
--- Comment #9 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-24 18:01 ---
Subject: Re: ICE passing fixed point to function
On Wed, 24 Dec 2008, hjl dot tools at gmail dot com wrote:
I verified that there is
auto-host.h:#define ENABLE_FIXED_POINT 0
But I still got ICE
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-02-23 13:47 ---
Subject: Re: Function macro nesting depth appears
to be uncomfortably limited.
I think GCC aims to implement the version of the rescanning rules
described in X3J11/86-196, as posted in Dave Prosser's message
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-03-02 19:01 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] bootstraping on
powerpc-apple-darwin9 fails with revision 132578
On Sun, 2 Mar 2008, fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
(gdb) p mode
$4 = TFmode
(gdb) p debug_rtx(x
--- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-03-02 19:52 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] bootstraping on
powerpc-apple-darwin9 fails with revision 132578
On Sun, 2 Mar 2008, fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
So maybe a likely culprit would be:
2008-02-22
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-03-12 18:38 ---
Subject: Re: -Wparentheses not useful in its current form
On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, manu at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
My opinion is that since -Wparentheses appears in released versions, we should
keep its
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-03-26 15:08 ---
Subject: Re: New: Bootstrap failure on i686-apple-darwin9
at revision 133519 (take 2).
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008, dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr wrote:
This is the second time in less than a week that thefile gcc
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-03-28 12:48 ---
Subject: Re: New: libfortran should use gettext to for
localized error messages
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Currently, only libcpp and the compilers (gcc) use gettext
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-04-02 17:52 ---
Subject: Re: Bootstrap of combined gcc + binutils, with
--enable-shared, with sysroot fails
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Sounds like you should be using --build-sysroot= and not set
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-04-10 00:15 ---
Subject: Re: Vector load/store from a packed struct does
not work (without -mstrict-align)
On Tue, 8 Apr 2008, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
With -mstrict-align, we get the correct (but suboptimal
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-04-11 16:58 ---
Subject: Re: New: Dubious charset conversions
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, neil at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
GCC accepts the following with -ansi -pedantic -Wall without diagnostics
#include stdlib.h
wchar_t z
--- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-05-07 11:25 ---
Subject: Re: C++ compiler should issue a warning with missing
new operator
On Wed, 7 May 2008, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
aligned memory. PPC LV2 returns 16byte aligned memory. PPC Linux should
--- Comment #15 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-05-11 12:15
---
Subject: Re: Werror problem in build
On Sun, 11 May 2008, aaronavay62 at aaronwl dot com wrote:
--- Comment #13 from aaronavay62 at aaronwl dot com 2008-05-11 03:04
---
What would be an acceptable
--- Comment #16 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-05-11 12:17
---
Subject: Re: I64d format Werror problem in build
On Sun, 11 May 2008, aaronavay62 at aaronwl dot com wrote:
Another question: why does lld not cause warnings on linux here? I don't
see
what the difference
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-05-14 00:28 ---
Subject: Re: Duplicate PCH test names
On Tue, 13 May 2008, janis at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
The PASS or FAIL messages come from a few levels deeper within the testsuite
infrastructure, so dg-pch.exp can't
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-06-01 12:22 ---
Subject: Re: -0x8000 (INT_MIN) erroneously treated as
unsigned
On Sun, 1 Jun 2008, gcczilla at achurch dot org wrote:
Fair enough, but GCC's documentation explicitly says (gcc.info section 4.5):
It also
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-06-02 19:35 ---
Subject: Re: Option -mno-isel not working
On Mon, 2 Jun 2008, edmar at freescale dot com wrote:
The lines deleted in the patch are executed after the command line is parsed.
The variable rs6000_isel is already
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-06-02 21:34 ---
Subject: Re: Option -mno-isel not working
On Mon, 2 Jun 2008, edmar at freescale dot com wrote:
Wouldn't it better then, to remove the duplicate code from linuspe.h and
eabispe.h ?
It would be best for powerpc
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-07-26 17:32 ---
Subject: Re: complex folding inexact
The example in this bug deals with excess overflow for division. For
infinities computing as NaN + iNaN, an example is (NaN + iInf) * (NaN
+iInf) (where NaN +iInf
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-07-26 21:43 ---
Subject: Re: New: Designated initializers for multi-dimensional
arrays fail in Objective-C
On Sun, 26 Jul 2009, sergei dot yakovlev at gmail dot com wrote:
Designated initializers for multi-dimensional arrays
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-07-27 21:02 ---
Subject: Re: New: stdarg.h does not define va_copy when building
for C89+POSIX
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009, bmerry at gmail dot com wrote:
POSIX 2001 specifies that va_copy
(http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs
--- Comment #17 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-07-28 11:55
---
Subject: Re: String not extracted for translation
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009, manu at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-27 16:55 ---
(In reply to comment #2
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-07-30 11:24 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] FAIL: StackTrace2 output
- source compiled test
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009, aph at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
This regression in debuginfo seems to have been downgraded to P4
--- Comment #8 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-07-30 16:30 ---
Subject: Re: 4.5 weekly snapshot: failed to pre-compile
bits/stdc++.h.gch/O2ggnu++0x.gch
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009, paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com wrote:
As a side note, I want to mention that we are very close
--- Comment #10 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-07-30 19:28
---
Subject: Re: 4.5 weekly snapshot: failed to pre-compile
bits/stdc++.h.gch/O2ggnu++0x.gch
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009, htl10 at users dot sourceforge dot net wrote:
I can't say about the others alpha*-dec-osf[45
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-07-30 23:45 ---
Subject: Re: New: missed optimization: x +
(-y * z * z) = x - y * z * z
Note that -frounding-math should disable the proposed optimization.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40921
--- Comment #21 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-07-31 12:54
---
Subject: Re: stdint.h-related issues (C99 issues)
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com wrote:
I'm wondering if there is something we can/should do here about C++1x: in the
new Standard
--- Comment #23 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-07-31 13:09
---
Subject: Re: stdint.h-related issues (C99 issues)
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com wrote:
Note, in C++1x, those macros should be effectively predefined *only* when
cstdint is included
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-03 19:16 ---
Subject: Re: New: Type-checking when returning from function
missing
On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, pratik dot j dot ashar at intel dot com wrote:
Function foo() returns a char to the caller. Running objdump
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-04 14:54 ---
Subject: Re: POSIX requires that option -D have a lower precedence
than -U
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, vincent at vinc17 dot org wrote:
There would the possibility to have a POSIX mode implied by c99, but I don't
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-07 17:24 ---
Subject: Re: New: alloca broken for -fno-builtin
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
The function alloca (for cygwin/mingw target _alloca) is broken or not
available (for linux64), when
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-07 22:36 ---
Subject: Re: alloca broken for -fno-builtin
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Well, if so. It makes no sense that -fno-builtins tries to call a function
which isn't present. But for other
--- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-08 10:37 ---
Subject: Re: alloca broken for -fno-builtin
On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Well, IMHO it is the same for alloca, as for setjmp, or longjmp. Even some
code
for detecting alloca
--- Comment #11 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-08 16:33
---
Subject: Re: (Natural) language independent error / warning
classification
On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, manu at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
I am not planning to work on this further. This patch shows that it can
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-13 01:25 ---
Subject: Re: complex folding inexact
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #3 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-12 22:28 ---
(In reply to comment #2
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-13 12:23 ---
Subject: Re: Warning cannot pass objects of non-POD type
should be an error
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009, redi at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
I don't know about C, but C++ says:
permissible undefined behavior ranges
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-18 15:58 ---
Subject: Re: New: openMP include file causes errors when
compiling with standards checking
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, ian dot bush at nag dot co dot uk wrote:
Due to non-standard code in the supplied openMP header
--- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-18 16:52 ---
Subject: Re: openMP include file causes errors when
compiling with standards checking
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, ian dot bush at nag dot co dot uk wrote:
Also Fortran doesn't have the concept of system headers, so
--- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-19 23:58 ---
Subject: Re: 'configure' checks for Ada compiler but
does not build one
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009, jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
obj-c++ isn't built by default either. And in both cases it is intentional
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-25 14:48 ---
Subject: Re: undefined reference to `typeinfo for __int128'
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009, bangerth at gmail dot com wrote:
With current mainline, I just get these errors:
g/x /home/bangerth/bin/x86/gcc-mainline/bin/c
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-25 16:23 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] Syntax error: Unterminated
quoted string
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009, rwild at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
AFACIS, the bug is in the test_summary script, it tries to parse the
internals
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-25 16:58 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] Syntax error: Unterminated
quoted string
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009, rwild at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #3 from rwild at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-25 16:32
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-09-02 14:39 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 regression] Revision 151313 caused many
regressions on trunk
On Wed, 2 Sep 2009, jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Only pr40753.c is a regression, the rest are new tests. And guality tests
--- Comment #28 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-09-03 11:04
---
Subject: Re: can not build gcc 4.4.1 on Snow Leopard
Mac OS X 10.6
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu wrote:
Mike,
Regarding passing -m32 within the x86_64 host case, I
--- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-09-05 11:35 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] FAIL:
gcc.dg/matrix/matrix-2.c scan-ipa-dump-times matrix-reorg Flattened 2
dimensions 1
On Sat, 5 Sep 2009, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
It's glibc prototyping printf
--- Comment #16 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-09-07 17:24
---
Subject: Re: stddef.h assumes machinee/ansi.h defines
_ANSI_H_
On Mon, 7 Sep 2009, prlw1 at cam dot ac dot uk wrote:
I just got stuck with this again: wondered why a NetBSD-5.99.15/i386 box with
gcc-HEAD
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-09-09 20:52 ---
Subject: Re: New: [4.5 Regression] Failed to bootstrap
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, hjl dot tools at gmail dot com wrote:
We aren't consistent where to report gcc bugs:
[...@gnu-31 src-trunk]$ grep ttp://gcc.gnu.org
601 - 700 of 2017 matches
Mail list logo
