--- Comment #41 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-22 16:07 ---
Subject: Bug 40860
Author: aph
Date: Thu Apr 22 16:06:39 2010
New Revision: 158648
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158648
Log:
2010-04-19 Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com
PR libgcj/40860
--- Comment #42 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-22 16:08 ---
Fixed.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #39 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-21 16:34 ---
Subject: Bug 40860
Author: aph
Date: Wed Apr 21 16:34:01 2010
New Revision: 158611
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158611
Log:
2010-04-19 Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com
PR libgcj/40860
--- Comment #40 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-21 17:05 ---
Subject: Bug 40860
Author: aph
Date: Wed Apr 21 17:04:42 2010
New Revision: 158614
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158614
Log:
2010-04-19 Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com
PR libgcj/40860
--- Comment #35 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-13 16:36 ---
I've been trying this on gcc trunk, and it doesn't have the problem.
It seems that merging is not done.
I get
...
0x8684 f2: @0x8808
Compact model 1
0xb1 0x08 pop {r3}
0x84 0x00 pop {r14}
0xb0 finish
--- Comment #38 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-13 17:25 ---
I think I can fairly easily add an option to the linker to suppress table
merging when linking Java libraries, and that will completely solve the
problem, at least from my point of view. To that end, it would
--- Comment #12 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-28 10:07 ---
I can't duplicate this problem with gcc trunk and binutils 2.20-0ubuntu2.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40860
--- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-24 15:34 ---
Subject: Bug 40816
Author: aph
Date: Wed Feb 24 15:34:19 2010
New Revision: 157047
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157047
Log:
2010-02-24 Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com
PR java/40816
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:31 ---
This does indeed look like PR42698. The pattern of backwards branching
indirect jumps is the same, and I'm pretty sure that this is the test case to
fix.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42739
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-20 16:01 ---
Subject: Bug 28474
Author: aph
Date: Tue Oct 20 16:01:21 2009
New Revision: 153021
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=153021
Log:
2009-10-20 Joel Dice di...@mailsnare.net
PR java/28474
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-19 08:49 ---
We need a standalone test case for this. Please cut the problem down to
something fairly simple and cmplete.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-19 08:55 ---
This is a deliberate design decision.
If you really need to refer to classes with dlsym, use -fno-indirect-classes.
However, this has a number of restrictions: in particular it fixes the ABI
to the specific libgcj
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-19 09:01 ---
Works for me on GNU/Linux:
ClassNotFoundException: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: my.other.class not
found in gnu.gcj.runtime.SystemClassLoader{urls=[file:./],
parent=gnu.gcj.runtime.ExtensionClassLoader{urls
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-19 09:08 ---
Works for me:
$ gcj -o ecj --main=org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.batch.Main
/usr/share/java/ecj.jar
$ ./ecj HelloWorld.java
$ java HelloWorld
Hello World!
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #8 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-23 14:10 ---
This patch is fine. Post it to the gcc list and I'll approve it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41443
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-01 14:06 ---
Assigning to Tom tromey: this is his area.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-01 17:09 ---
Hmm, I seem to have approved that patch.
I agree with you: I can't see why the specfile change requires ecjx.cc.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40868
--- Comment #8 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-03 17:55 ---
Subject: Bug 40867
Author: aph
Date: Mon Aug 3 17:55:11 2009
New Revision: 150376
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=150376
Log:
2009-07-31 Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com
PR java/40867
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-30 07:37 ---
This regression in debuginfo seems to have been downgraded to P4, with no
explanation or discussion of which I'm aware.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40867
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-30 11:36 ---
Hmm, this seems to me as a rather perverse interpretation of the rule that
Java issues are not release-critical: this bug may be manifested in Java
programs, but there is no evidence of which I'm aware
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-30 17:24 ---
This seems to be happening very early, because the very first tree dump shows:
StackTrace2$Inner.doCrash(java.lang.Object) (struct StackTrace2$Inner * this,
struct java.lang.Object * o)
[StackTrace2.java : 0:0
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-28 08:02 ---
This is actually a regression in debuginfo: the line number info is being
corrupted, somewhere after the front end. I don't know if this was caused by
the gimplify unit-at-a-time patch.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot
Priority: P3
Component: java
AssignedTo: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40590
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-29 16:12 ---
See the thread at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/2009-06/msg00066.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40590
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-29 16:26 ---
Created an attachment (id=18093)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18093action=view)
Test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40590
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-29 17:51 ---
Subject: Bug 40590
Author: aph
Date: Mon Jun 29 17:50:59 2009
New Revision: 149059
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=149059
Log:
2009-06-29 Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com
PR java/40590
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-16 10:12 ---
Thanks for the patch, Andreas. Please push upstream(s).
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-15 09:07 ---
That probably is my fault. However, I can't do anything about it until I see
the testsuite log file.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40385
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-15 09:08 ---
Re http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-06/msg00929.html:
That was answered on Fri, 12 Jun by Kaz Kojima.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40385
--- Comment #9 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-15 09:29 ---
I need to know why it's crashing. Usually there's some sort of error message.
If there's not, there's no choice but to debug.
This Darwin problem is clearly not the same bug as 40385, so it needs a new
Bugzilla entry
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-15 15:47 ---
Adding Andreas Tobler; perhaps he knows.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-09 10:38 ---
These are new tests, and real bugs. They are not regressions, and may be
XFAILed on ia64-unknown-linux-gnu.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40385
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-28 09:35 ---
Subject: Bug 39899
Author: aph
Date: Tue Apr 28 09:35:22 2009
New Revision: 146878
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=146878
Log:
2009-04-28 Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com
PR libgcj/39899
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-28 12:51 ---
Subject: Bug 39899
Author: aph
Date: Tue Apr 28 12:51:10 2009
New Revision: 146890
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=146890
Log:
2009-04-28 Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com
PR libgcj/39899
at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39885
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-24 14:42 ---
Created an attachment (id=17687)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17687action=view)
Class file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39885
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-24 14:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=17688)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17688action=view)
Smaller class file
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-24 14:46 ---
Created an attachment (id=17689)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17689action=view)
Source file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39885
--- Comment #22 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-23 11:08 ---
Re named register variables:
You can, instead of using
[coeff_ptr_l1] +r (coeff_ptr_l1)
declare something like
register long double *coeff_ptr_l1 asm (%%r8);
and then use %%r8 in your asm. This means that you
-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: x86_64-linux-gnu
OtherBugsDependingO 21855
nThis:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39870
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-23 15:46 ---
Sorry, typo'd the first expression. Should be
if ((unsigned)i = (unsigned)length)
abort();
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39870
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-23 15:47 ---
typedef struct
{
int length;
int data[];
} t_m;
t_m *m;
int foo()
{
int val = 0;
int i;
for (i = 0; i m-length; i++)
{
#ifdef BORKED
if ((unsigned int)i = (unsigned int)m-length)
#else
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-23 15:49 ---
-DBORKED on the left
foo: foo:
.LFB0: .LFB0:
.cfi_startproc .cfi_startproc
subq$8, %rsp
.cfi_def_cfa_offset 1
--- Comment #8 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-23 16:15 ---
2 reasons:
1. Habit.
2. The original test case is written in Java: no unsigned types!
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-23 16:16 ---
2 reasons:
1. Habit.
2. The original test case is written in Java: no unsigned types!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39870
--- Comment #10 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-23 16:23 ---
Officially, java doesn't have unsigned types for economy: believe it or not,
Java was once intended to be a small language. However, there are not many
unused bytecodes left, and a full set of signed instructions
--- Comment #8 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-22 16:53 ---
I don't see why this is changed to WONTFIX. Fixing inline asm to allow the use
of all a machine's registers is trivial, and should not be refused for the sake
of a pedantic argument about whether someone should
--- Comment #11 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-22 17:47 ---
I suspect the reason the limit is 30 is that when that code was written the
largest register set was 32 registers, 2 of which were reserved to the
implementation. Inline asm hasn't kept up with the hardware
--- Comment #17 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-22 18:40 ---
I agree with Jakub's point.
David, can you try instead of register operands using named register variables
instead? I think that may work, unless there is some other limit of which I'm
unaware.
--
http
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-26 15:17 ---
Subject: Bug 39380
Author: aph
Date: Thu Mar 26 15:17:26 2009
New Revision: 145091
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=145091
Log:
2009-03-26 Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com
PR C++/39380
gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39380
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-05 09:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=17399)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17399action=view)
Test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39380
--- Comment #9 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-05 09:42 ---
.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
AssignedTo: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39103
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-05 18:18 ---
Created an attachment (id=17250)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17250action=view)
This should do it
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38861
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-16 14:59 ---
Thanks for looking.
As far as I can see _Jv_GetStringChars has been extern inline forever, so
doesn't matter. Probably should have a matching definition, but will never be
called.
_Jv_CreateJavaVM in libgcj.so.9
--- Comment #24 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-12 17:36 ---
Subject: Bug 38396
Author: aph
Date: Mon Jan 12 17:35:48 2009
New Revision: 143301
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=143301
Log:
2009-01-12 Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com
PR libgcj/38396
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38751
--- Comment #10 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-10 11:32 ---
Created an attachment (id=16870)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16870action=view)
Link map
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38396
--- Comment #11 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-10 11:32 ---
This looks like a bug to me.
zorro:tmp $ gcj /home/aph/gcc/trunk/ecj.jar
--main=org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.batch.Main -o ecj -findirect-dispatch
zorro:tmp $ readelf -d ecj
Dynamic section at offset 0xa92728
--- Comment #12 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-10 12:17 ---
Look at the exported symbols in the old version of libgcj_bc.so.
Make sure that these symbols are exported:
_Jv_JNI_PopSystemFrame
_Jv_LookupInterfaceMethod
_Jv_MonitorExit
_Jv_RegisterResource
--
http
--- Comment #16 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-10 13:26 ---
You'll still have the same problem until the change that adds the symbols to
libgcj_bc.so is back-ported to the gcc 4.3 branch.
I should have applied that change to the gcc 4.3 branch, but I didn't
realize
--- Comment #20 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-10 14:29 ---
OK, I will do all these fixes.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 17:56 ---
Please try
jar cf ../tools.zip `find . -name .svn -prune -o -type d -print`
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38251
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 18:29 ---
Yes, of course.
jar has an update mode that adds files, so I can use that. How long may an
arglist be?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38251
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 18:48 ---
Sure, if you can use zip instead, do that.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38251
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 18:52 ---
I suggest
jar cf ... to create it, and
zip u ... to add to it
that way you'll get the correct META-INF directory.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38251
--- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-10 12:10 ---
Subject: Bug 33304
Author: aph
Date: Mon Nov 10 12:08:55 2008
New Revision: 141735
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141735
Log:
2008-11-10 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Backport from
--- Comment #33 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-05 10:06 ---
Subject: Bug 37068
Author: aph
Date: Wed Nov 5 10:05:03 2008
New Revision: 141604
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141604
Log:
2008-11-04 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR java/37068
--- Comment #28 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-04 18:19 ---
So I take it that the libgcj linkage failure is fixed, but some other unrelated
bug now occurs? Sounds like this one needs to be closed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37068
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #13 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-03 10:18 ---
As a Java maintainer I'm happy to have a look at this, but I have no access to
HP/UX hardware.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37068
--- Comment #16 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-03 14:45 ---
Indeed. If that doesn't work, libjava is hosed on that platform.
I'd like to get to the bottom of it. Should the FE be calling
cgraph_build_static_cdtor() or not?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #22 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-03 17:47 ---
I think think this is Java-specific.
It's quite likely that the Java FE should not be calling
cgraph_build_static_cdtor(), but when that call is removed some test
cases fail. Rather than arguing what priority
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-24 13:41 ---
I found this bug.
There's a long discussion at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2008-q3/msg00094.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37051
--- Comment #7 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-23 13:52 ---
Subject: Bug 8995
Author: aph
Date: Tue Sep 23 13:51:58 2008
New Revision: 140593
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=140593
Log:
2008-09-17 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR libgcj/8995
--- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-22 16:05 ---
Subject: Bug 8895
Author: aph
Date: Fri Aug 22 16:04:29 2008
New Revision: 139492
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=139492
Log:
2008-08-22 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR libgcj/8895
--- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-22 16:18 ---
Subject: Bug 8995
Author: aph
Date: Fri Aug 22 16:17:19 2008
New Revision: 139493
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=139493
Log:
Fix PR#.
2008-08-22 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-22 16:20 ---
Subject: Bug 8995
Author: aph
Date: Fri Aug 22 16:04:29 2008
New Revision: 139492
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=139492
Log:
2008-08-22 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR libgcj/8895
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-22 16:58 ---
Subject: Bug 8995
Author: aph
Date: Fri Aug 22 16:57:11 2008
New Revision: 139494
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=139494
Log:
2008-08-22 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR libgcj/8995
--- Comment #14 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-30 09:23 ---
This patch limits recursion in tree-vrp.
Index: tree-vrp.c
===
--- tree-vrp.c (revision 136670)
+++ tree-vrp.c (working copy)
@@ -4049,6 +4049,8
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-03 10:14 ---
Subject: Bug 33305
Author: aph
Date: Thu Jul 3 10:13:48 2008
New Revision: 137411
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=137411
Log:
2008-07-03 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR preprocessor
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-03 10:31 ---
Subject: Bug 33304
Author: aph
Date: Thu Jul 3 10:31:03 2008
New Revision: 137413
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=137413
Log:
2008-07-03 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR bootstrap
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-03 10:32 ---
Subject: Bug 33305
Author: aph
Date: Thu Jul 3 10:31:50 2008
New Revision: 137414
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=137414
Log:
2008-06-13 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR preprocessor
--- Comment #10 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-14 06:27 ---
The only way I can find out which file in libgcj causes the stack overflow is
to try to build it again with an unoptimized gcc. I can do so next week.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36218
--- Comment #7 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-11 10:49 ---
This isn't just a mingw bug. It is also manifested in GNU/Linux if gcc itself
is built with -O0, as you need to do when debugging gcc.
There perhaps should be some limit to how far VRP goes before giving up
--- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-23 13:05 ---
Subject: Bug 35020
Author: aph
Date: Fri May 23 13:04:18 2008
New Revision: 135801
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=135801
Log:
2008-05-22 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR libgcj/35020
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-23 13:05 ---
Fixed.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-22 16:21 ---
Subject: Bug 35020
Author: aph
Date: Thu May 22 16:20:55 2008
New Revision: 135771
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=135771
Log:
2008-05-22 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR libgcj/35020
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-12 10:27 ---
What on earth is this asm supposed to do?
The compiler is quite entitled to complain about this: the memory
at char x[10] is being used as an ouput operand, but it is not in scope.
The text in the gcc texinfo refers
--- Comment #7 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-11 09:58 ---
Okay, but I don't quite understand this final sentence:
Still with C++ now reducing operations on bit-precision types
you get different answers for the above case now.
What exactly do you mean by this?
--
http
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-10 19:06 ---
No, it will not generate the wrong code for
jboolean i = 1;
i += 2;
You are wrong to assume that jboolean must behave in the same way as boolean.
It's a Java type, not a C++ type.
Having exact conformance with C
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-15 15:13 ---
Fixed in trunk.
Tested:
zorro:~ $ ~/gcc/trunk/install/bin/gcj -shared -Wl,-Bsymbolic -fPIC
-findirect-dispatch -fjni -g0 -O0 -mtune=nocona -march=nocona -pipe -w
-save-temps -o libjunit.jar.so junit.jar
gcj: warning
--- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-15 15:32 ---
.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-15 15:32 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 33639 ***
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-15 15:32 ---
*** Bug 32484 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-04 11:07 ---
Subject: Bug 17779
Author: aph
Date: Fri Jan 4 11:06:34 2008
New Revision: 131319
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=131319
Log:
2008-01-03 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR java/17779
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #12 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-04 15:14 ---
Subject: Bug 17779
Author: aph
Date: Fri Jan 4 15:13:53 2008
New Revision: 131324
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=131324
Log:
2008-01-04 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR java/17779
1 - 100 of 440 matches
Mail list logo
