[Bug libstdc++/43451] [C++0x] atomic integral methods missing volatile overloads

--- Comment #4 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-07 21:47 --- sorry p, i have these changes on a branch as part of the constexpr work. will finish up this week. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43451

[Bug libstdc++/45191] New: unqualified atomic access

Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45191

[Bug libstdc++/45193] New: unqualified atomic access

Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45193

[Bug c++/45148] New: [C++0x] constexpr g++ issues

dot org ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45148

[Bug libstdc++/45149] New: [C++0x] constexpr libstdc++ issues

++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45149

[Bug libstdc++/45149] [C++0x] constexpr libstdc++ issues

-- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at redhat dot com, gdr

[Bug c++/45148] [C++0x] constexpr g++ issues

--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-31 01:36 --- Created an attachment (id=21362) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21362action=view) FAIL 01: 20_util/duration/arithmetic/dr934-1.cc Pre-processed source -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla

[Bug libstdc++/45149] [C++0x] constexpr libstdc++ issues

--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-31 01:41 --- As of 2010-07-30, x86_64/linux see: FAIL: abi_check Running /mnt/share/src/gcc.git-constexpr/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/libstdc++-dg/conformance.exp ... FAIL: 20_util/duration/arithmetic/dr934-1.cc (test for excess errors

[Bug c++/45148] [C++0x] constexpr g++ issues

--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-31 01:46 --- That dr-934-1 ICE is the only thing I see. On g++ testing, I see: FAIL: c-c++-common/uninit-17.c (test for warnings, line 14) FAIL: c-c++-common/uninit-17.c (test for excess errors) === g++ Summary

[Bug c++/42346] darwin instantiation vs. optimization oddity

--- Comment #13 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-11 03:47 --- fixed as of comment #11 -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/42460] man page errors for generated libstdc++ man pages

--- Comment #21 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-09 04:50 --- Subject: Bug 42460 Author: bkoz Date: Tue Feb 9 04:49:49 2010 New Revision: 156617 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=156617 Log: 2010-02-08 Benjamin Kosnik b...@redhat.com PR libstdc

[Bug libstdc++/21549] Configure options hard to find

--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-05 17:40 --- Would love to see something standardized for all libs in gcc. My preference is to have libstdc++ config docs linked to in gcc docs. (No duplication, just alias.) One thing that could be done would be to add a C

[Bug libstdc++/42460] man page errors for generated libstdc++ man pages

--- Comment #16 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-04 18:20 --- Subject: Bug 42460 Author: bkoz Date: Thu Feb 4 18:20:34 2010 New Revision: 156502 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=156502 Log: 2010-02-04 Benjamin Kosnik b...@redhat.com PR libstdc

[Bug libstdc++/42460] man page errors for generated libstdc++ man pages

--- Comment #17 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-04 18:27 --- Hey. Can you re-check trunk now? I should have most of the quoting issues fixed. I've uploaded man pages with the new markup here: ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/libstdc++/doxygen/libstdc++-man.20100204.tar.bz2 Can you

[Bug libstdc++/42460] man page errors for generated libstdc++ man pages

-- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org

[Bug libstdc++/41816] libstdc++.so.6.0.14-gdb.py is not an ELF file

--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-03 22:59 --- What's the status here? Any chance we could frame the subject as something that has conflict, instead of a statement everyone agrees with? ldconfig warnings vs. libstdc++.so.6.0.14-gdb.py -- http://gcc.gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/42460] man page errors for generated libstdc++ man pages

--- Comment #14 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-03 23:07 --- Got it Matthias, fixing, thanks for explaining what's up. How do you get these errors and validate the generated man pages? If it's a script can you attach it? Are you re-configuring doxygen? Or is this post

[Bug libstdc++/42460] man page errors for generated libstdc++ man pages

--- Comment #15 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-04 00:16 --- markup options /** * @brief Flags access. * @return The minimum field width to generate on output operations. * * Minimum field width refers to the number of characters

[Bug c++/42346] darwin instantiation vs. optimization oddity

--- Comment #11 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-27 20:13 --- Subject: Bug 42346 Author: bkoz Date: Wed Jan 27 20:12:41 2010 New Revision: 156303 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=156303 Log: 2010-01-27 Benjamin Kosnik b...@redhat.com PR c++/42346

[Bug libstdc++/42460] man page errors for generated libstdc++ man pages

--- Comment #8 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-07 18:37 --- Created an attachment (id=19502) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19502action=view) log of man page creation -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42460

[Bug libstdc++/42460] man page errors for generated libstdc++ man pages

--- Comment #9 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-07 18:40 --- The rest of these look bogus to me. __gnu_cxx::enc_filebuf.3cxx 805: warning: macro `If' not defined __gnu_cxx::stdio_sync_filebuf.3cxx 699: warning: macro `If' not defined std::basic_filebuf.3cxx 905: warning

[Bug bootstrap/40221] Powerpc bootstrap is broken in building libstdc++

--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-06 18:20 --- Fixed. -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/42639] New: ICE: copy_fn_p at cp/decl.c:9973

Version: 4.5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42639

[Bug c++/42639] ICE: copy_fn_p at cp/decl.c:9973

--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-06 22:47 --- Created an attachment (id=19492) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19492action=view) pre-processed -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42639

[Bug c++/42634] ICE with -g -O2 -std=c++0x in copy_fn_p, at cp/decl.c:9973

--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-06 22:49 --- *** Bug 42639 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/42639] ICE: copy_fn_p at cp/decl.c:9973

--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-06 22:49 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 42634 *** -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/42634] ICE with -g -O2 -std=c++0x in copy_fn_p, at cp/decl.c:9973

--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-06 22:50 --- Running into this as well. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42634

[Bug libstdc++/42491] performance/30_threads/future/polling.cc fails at compile time

--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-06 22:56 --- Subject: Bug 42491 Author: bkoz Date: Wed Jan 6 22:55:52 2010 New Revision: 155681 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=155681 Log: 2010-01-06 Benjamin Kosnik b...@redhat.com PR libstdc

[Bug libstdc++/42491] performance/30_threads/future/polling.cc fails at compile time

--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-06 22:57 --- Sure. We can fix this by adding -std=gnu++0x for all compiles, and then marking up the testcase appropriately. Sadly, this results in widespread observance of: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42634

[Bug libstdc++/42491] performance/30_threads/future/polling.cc fails at compile time

--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-06 22:58 --- Sure. We can fix this by adding -std=gnu++0x for all compiles, and then marking up the testcase appropriately. Sadly, this results in widespread observance of: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42634

[Bug c++/42346] darwin instantiation vs. optimization oddity

--- Comment #10 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-06 01:08 --- RE: PR40459 The errors are different between that PR and this one. So, my guess is that these are not related. That is also a warning, and this is an error. FWIW, I think this should be a P1. -- http

[Bug c++/42346] darwin instantiation vs. optimization oddity

--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-04 20:35 --- Created an attachment (id=19468) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19468action=view) remove -O1 to cause fail With this patch, the following gcc: ames:gcc benjamin$ ./gcc/xgcc -v Using built

[Bug c++/42346] darwin instantiation vs. optimization oddity

--- Comment #6 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-04 20:38 --- Optimization Error on Valid -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42346

[Bug c++/42346] darwin instantiation vs. optimization oddity

--- Comment #8 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-05 01:10 --- Glad you can reproduce now. Sorry I was so vague before. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42346

[Bug libstdc++/21772] exception safety testing

--- Comment #17 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-01 03:39 --- Subject: Bug 21772 Author: bkoz Date: Fri Jan 1 03:38:58 2010 New Revision: 155545 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=155545 Log: 2009-12-31 Benjamin Kosnik b...@redhat.com PR libstdc

[Bug libstdc++/21772] exception safety testing

--- Comment #18 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-01 03:54 --- multiset error ... was bogus. I adjusted the traits to fix this. The std::array error seems indeed bogus: if I'm not wrong, it happens when swapping arrays, and there are no guarantees that the operation

[Bug libstdc++/42456] [4.5 Regression] Revision 155377 failed some C++ atomic tests

--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-22 08:01 --- Mine. -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned

[Bug libstdc++/42456] [4.5 Regression] Revision 155377 failed some C++ atomic tests

--- Comment #6 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-22 08:01 --- Created an attachment (id=19367) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19367action=view) add new signature to exports -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42456

[Bug libstdc++/42456] [4.5 Regression] Revision 155377 failed some C++ atomic tests

--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-22 08:23 --- Subject: Bug 42456 Author: bkoz Date: Tue Dec 22 08:23:08 2009 New Revision: 155393 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=155393 Log: 2009-12-21 Benjamin Kosnik b...@redhat.com PR libstdc

[Bug libstdc++/42456] [4.5 Regression] Revision 155377 failed some C++ tests

--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-22 04:20 --- HJ what are the excess errors that you see (from libstdc++.log file?) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42456

[Bug bootstrap/42345] cannot force 32 bit toolchain only

--- Comment #23 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-22 04:33 --- thanks HJ -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42345

[Bug libstdc++/21772] exception safety testing

--- Comment #14 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-17 08:18 --- Created an attachment (id=19333) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19333action=view) part 2 diff after merge of part 1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21772

[Bug libstdc++/21772] exception safety testing

--- Comment #15 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-17 09:37 --- Subject: Bug 21772 Author: bkoz Date: Thu Dec 17 09:37:16 2009 New Revision: 155306 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=155306 Log: 2009-12-16 Benjamin Kosnik b...@redhat.com PR libstdc

[Bug other/41255] [4.5 Regression] Release notes: Advice to use GDB later than 6.8

--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-17 17:04 --- We really need something for gcc-4.5/porting_to.html -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/42273] atomic_2.h:111: = instead of == in if

--- Comment #9 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-15 21:46 --- Fixed. -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug libstdc++/21772] exception safety testing allocator

--- Comment #8 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-16 03:33 --- Created an attachment (id=19319) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19319action=view) c++0x container requirement testing, eh -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21772

[Bug libstdc++/21772] exception safety testing

--- Comment #9 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-16 03:34 --- Tweak summary, mine. -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo

[Bug libstdc++/21772] exception safety testing

--- Comment #10 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-16 03:36 --- Results on x86_64/linux or x86_64/darwin10.2 Status: FAIL: 21_strings/basic_string/requirements/exception/propagation_consistent.cc execution test FAIL: 23_containers/array/requirements/exception

[Bug libstdc++/21772] exception safety testing

--- Comment #11 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-16 05:17 --- Subject: Bug 21772 Author: bkoz Date: Wed Dec 16 05:16:46 2009 New Revision: 155283 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=155283 Log: 2009-12-15 Benjamin Kosnik b...@redhat.com PR libstdc

[Bug c++/42346] New: darwin instantiation oddity

: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: x86_64-apple-darwin10.2.0 GCC host triplet: x86_64-apple-darwin10.2.0 GCC target triplet: x86_64-apple-darwin10.2.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42346

[Bug c++/42346] darwin instantiation oddity

--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-10 08:17 --- Created an attachment (id=19273) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19273action=view) test case for fail. Sorry it's so big. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42346

[Bug c++/42346] darwin instantiation vs. optimization oddity

--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-10 16:06 --- GNU C++ (GCC) version 4.5.0 20091206 (experimental) (x86_64-apple-darwin10.2.0) compiled by GNU C version 4.5.0 20091206 (experimental), GMP version 4.3.1, MPFR version 2.4.1, MPC version 0.8 GGC heuristics

[Bug bootstrap/42345] cannot force 32 bit toolchain only

--- Comment #18 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 00:01 --- agree #17 preferred over existing behaviour and also note this was the syntax originally suggested in #3, so seems like it matches what people expect -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42345

[Bug bootstrap/42345] cannot force 32 bit toolchain only

--- Comment #19 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 00:15 --- Opening again. -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status

[Bug bootstrap/42345] New: cannot force 32 bit toolchain only

: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: i686-unknown-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42345

[Bug bootstrap/42345] cannot force 32 bit toolchain only

--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-09 19:34 --- Created an attachment (id=19269) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19269action=view) configure output -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42345

[Bug bootstrap/42345] cannot force 32 bit toolchain only

--- Comment #4 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-09 19:58 --- Result as per CC=gcc -m32 build in config2.log Ends with: checking for i686-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc... /mnt/share/bld/gcc-i686/./gcc/xgcc -B/mnt/share/bld/gcc-i686/./gcc/ -B/mnt/share/bld/H-i686-gcc/i686-unknown-linux

[Bug bootstrap/42345] cannot force 32 bit toolchain only

--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-09 19:58 --- Created an attachment (id=19270) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19270action=view) configure output when CC=gcc -m32 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42345

[Bug bootstrap/42345] cannot force 32 bit toolchain only

--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-09 20:15 --- Created an attachment (id=19271) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19271action=view) target/libgcc config.log -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42345

[Bug bootstrap/42345] cannot force 32 bit toolchain only

--- Comment #8 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-09 20:16 --- Sorry about that Andrew. Thanks for your help. I have attached the target/libgcc config.log. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42345

[Bug bootstrap/42345] cannot force 32 bit toolchain only

--- Comment #11 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-09 20:58 --- Created an attachment (id=19272) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19272action=view) libgcc/config.log -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42345

[Bug bootstrap/42345] cannot force 32 bit toolchain only

--- Comment #10 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-09 20:58 --- result from --build/--target/--host == i686-unknown-linux-gnu in config4.libgcc.log. Fails with: In file included from /usr/include/features.h:376:0, from /usr/include/stdio.h:28

[Bug bootstrap/42345] cannot force 32 bit toolchain only

--- Comment #12 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-09 21:01 --- on the whole though, I don't know why just --with-cpu=i686 isn't enough. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42345

[Bug libstdc++/42273] atomic_2.h:111: = instead of == in if

--- Comment #6 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-09 21:22 --- Mine. Adjusting for 4.4. branch. -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/42273] atomic_2.h:111: = instead of == in if

--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-09 22:07 --- Subject: Bug 42273 Author: bkoz Date: Wed Dec 9 22:06:59 2009 New Revision: 155117 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=155117 Log: 2009-12-09 Roman Odaisky to.roma.from.bu...@qwertty.com

[Bug libstdc++/42273] atomic_2.h:111: = instead of == in if

--- Comment #8 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-09 22:39 --- Subject: Bug 42273 Author: bkoz Date: Wed Dec 9 22:38:57 2009 New Revision: 155118 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=155118 Log: 2009-12-09 Roman Odaisky to.roma.from.bu...@qwertty.com

[Bug bootstrap/42345] cannot force 32 bit toolchain only

--- Comment #14 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-10 02:53 --- #c13 works for me, thanks jakub -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42345

[Bug bootstrap/42345] cannot force 32 bit toolchain only

--- Comment #15 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-10 02:54 --- You can do it, although process is a bit convoluted. So, WORKSFORME. -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/42273] atomic_2.h:111: = instead of == in if

--- Comment #4 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 18:43 --- Agree with #2. This is a one-liner to fix. Jonathan, can you put your comments in 40297 into the wiki page for atomics? I'd forgotten about this whole commentary. We are just starting in again on this. See: http

[Bug c++/41884] diagnostics: error vs. context

--- Comment #10 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-04 19:53 --- FWIW, I think even in the case that the total message (error + context) is more than can fit at one time on the current terminal window, it is advantageous to have the fixed length part (error) first

[Bug libstdc++/38875] parallel fill and copy in the parallel version of libstdc++

--- Comment #6 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-05 02:15 --- Created an attachment (id=18970) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18970action=view) patch for parallel fill and fill_n -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38875

[Bug libstdc++/38875] parallel fill and copy in the parallel version of libstdc++

--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-05 02:16 --- Here's how parallel fill would look, based on Johannes patch. -benjamin -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38875

[Bug libstdc++/38875] parallel fill and copy in the parallel version of libstdc++

--- Comment #9 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-05 02:52 --- Yes, of course. Just providing the framework, since that was a bit tricky. I should add all the steps here to the parallel mode docs to make this less confusing for people trying to experiment. best, benjamin

[Bug c++/41884] diagnostics: error vs. context

--- Comment #6 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-03 23:36 --- Created an attachment (id=18960) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18960action=view) pre-processed source to reproduce diagnostic -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41884

[Bug c++/41884] diagnostics: error vs. context

--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-03 23:43 --- Hey, hey! Cool. So, pre-patch I get this for the attached (get.ii.bz2) file: $bld/H-x86-gcc.20091103/bin/g++ -g -std=gnu++0x -Wall -Wfatal-errors get.ii In file included from /mnt/share/src/gcc/libstdc++-v3

[Bug c++/41884] New: diagnostics: error vs. context

at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41884

[Bug libstdc++/40654] [C++0x] atomic.cc: 'd' is used uninitialized warning

--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-19 16:46 --- In for gcc-4.4.3 -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status

[Bug libstdc++/40826] [C++0x] atomic_flag_{test_and_set,clear}_explicit() are apparently broken

--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-19 16:47 --- Fixed on trunk and gcc-4_4-branch -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/41759] New: [C++0x] random static_assert phrasing should be positive

static_assert phrasing should be positive Product: gcc Version: 4.5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc

[Bug libstdc++/40826] [C++0x] atomic_flag_{test_and_set,clear}_explicit() are apparently broken

--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-18 03:20 --- Mine. -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned

[Bug libstdc++/40654] [C++0x] atomic.cc: 'd' is used uninitialized warning

--- Comment #6 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-18 03:30 --- Subject: Bug 40654 Author: bkoz Date: Sun Oct 18 03:30:03 2009 New Revision: 152965 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=152965 Log: 2009-10-16 Benjamin Kosnik b...@redhat.com * include

[Bug libstdc++/40826] [C++0x] atomic_flag_{test_and_set,clear}_explicit() are apparently broken

--- Comment #4 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-18 03:30 --- Subject: Bug 40826 Author: bkoz Date: Sun Oct 18 03:30:03 2009 New Revision: 152965 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=152965 Log: 2009-10-16 Benjamin Kosnik b...@redhat.com * include

[Bug libstdc++/40826] [C++0x] atomic_flag_{test_and_set,clear}_explicit() are apparently broken

--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-16 07:47 --- Subject: Bug 40826 Author: bkoz Date: Fri Oct 16 07:47:33 2009 New Revision: 152895 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=152895 Log: 2009-10-15 Benjamin Kosnik b...@redhat.com PR libstdc

[Bug libstdc++/40654] [C++0x] atomic.cc: 'd' is used uninitialized warning

--- Comment #4 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-16 07:47 --- Subject: Bug 40654 Author: bkoz Date: Fri Oct 16 07:47:33 2009 New Revision: 152895 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=152895 Log: 2009-10-15 Benjamin Kosnik b...@redhat.com PR libstdc

[Bug web/35777] no DFP announcement, no example text, very vague documentation

--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-15 17:29 --- There is now an announcement and a status page for the library work. Thanks. -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/24985] caret diagnostics

--- Comment #13 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-15 17:33 --- Patch for change to coding conventions: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg00687.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24985

[Bug c++/24985] caret diagnostics

--- Comment #9 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-07 16:56 --- Beyond caret diagnostics there is also range info for the diagnostic location. See: http://clang.llvm.org/diagnostics.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24985

[Bug libstdc++/41510] New: C++0x std::complex vs. initialization lists

: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41510

[Bug libstdc++/41510] C++0x std::complex vs. initialization lists

--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-30 01:48 --- Created an attachment (id=18667) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18667action=view) c++0x test for std::complex -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41510

[Bug c++/40991] New: ICE: at optimization -02

then it's ok. -- Summary: ICE: at optimization -02 Product: gcc Version: 4.5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc

[Bug c++/40991] ICE: at optimization -02

--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-06 18:09 --- Created an attachment (id=18313) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18313action=view) pre-processed sources to reproduce -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40991

[Bug target/40802] Libstdc++ is broken for win64 host

--- Comment #13 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-20 21:52 --- Hi Peter! You say that this is broken as of rev 149763, which is a commit from July 17, 2009. Here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-07/msg00645.html But you also indicate that this has been broken for some time

[Bug c++/40738] New: missing typename error improvement

Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40738

[Bug c++/40738] missing typename error improvement

--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-13 23:40 --- eek that should be expected 'typename' before... -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/28125] Cannot build cross compiler for Solaris: configure: error: Link tests are not allowed after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES

--- Comment #24 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-06 23:49 --- Closing due to lack of feedback -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/40654] atomic.cc: 'd' is used uninitialized warning

--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-06 23:55 --- Yes, I will look at this. I think Ben Elliston pointed this out right after 4.4.0 was released, along with some other uninitialized warnings that I then fixed. Apparently this is also visible on ppc. -- bkoz

[Bug libstdc++/40380] class documentation should mention include file to use

--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-18 00:00 --- Agreed. Thanks for the feedback on docs. Will put this on the docs todo list. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40380

[Bug libstdc++/40297] [C++0x] debug mode vs atomics

--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-18 00:33 --- Jonathan, you are right. These assertions are all backwards. I see this hitting the following members: load store compare_exchange_strong I should have done tests for this, obviously. Ouch. Now you've done

[Bug libstdc++/40380] class documentation should mention include file to use

--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-18 00:34 --- Add documentation keyword -- bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/40094] FAIL: ext/throw_allocator/deallocate_global.cc execution test

--- Comment #14 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-28 18:53 --- Back, and on darwin as well. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-05/msg02455.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-05/msg02457.html Please hang on while I work through this. -- bkoz at gcc dot

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >