[Bug middle-end/29609] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Even with -O0 -g gcc optimizes a goto away and I cannot debug

2008-01-07 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW Last reconfirmed|2007-04-30 11:52:08 |2008-01-07

[Bug middle-end/29609] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Even with -O0 -g gcc optimizes a goto away and I cannot debug

2007-12-19 Thread hainque at adacore dot com
--- Comment #6 from hainque at adacore dot com 2007-12-19 08:30 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Even with -O0 -g gcc optimizes a goto away and I cannot debug Hi Steven, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: xf. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01789.html I

[Bug middle-end/29609] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Even with -O0 -g gcc optimizes a goto away and I cannot debug

2007-12-19 Thread hainque at adacore dot com
--- Comment #7 from hainque at adacore dot com 2007-12-19 10:06 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Even with -O0 -g gcc optimizes a goto away and I cannot debug Olivier Hainque wrote: We can definitely resubmit the current version we have (I copied the author). Thanks

[Bug middle-end/29609] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Even with -O0 -g gcc optimizes a goto away and I cannot debug

2007-12-18 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-18 23:31 --- xf. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01789.html I was wrong to object to this patch -- there really doesn't seem to be any other way. It's funny, on the one hand we complain about the code quality of

[Bug middle-end/29609] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Even with -O0 -g gcc optimizes a goto away and I cannot debug

2007-05-11 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-11 21:51 --- There doesn't seem to be another way to get this to work, than the proposed way with extra basic blocks. The things I've tried either break gcc, or gdb, or debug info. Unassigning. -- steven at gcc dot gnu dot

[Bug middle-end/29609] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Even with -O0 -g gcc optimizes a goto away and I cannot debug

2007-04-30 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |steven at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org

[Bug middle-end/29609] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Even with -O0 -g gcc optimizes a goto away and I cannot debug

2007-04-30 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-30 12:01 --- There are at least 2 issues here: 1) We just lose the locus of the goto statements when we lower GIMPLE and when we jump across forwarded blocks. 2) When we don't lose the locus in GIMPLE, we lose it in cfgexpand.

[Bug middle-end/29609] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Even with -O0 -g gcc optimizes a goto away and I cannot debug

2007-04-25 Thread janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 21:31 --- A regression hunt on powerpc-linux looking for DWARF2 line number information for lines with gotos identified this patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revrev=83385 r83385 | hubicka | 2004-06-19 15:33:06

[Bug middle-end/29609] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Even with -O0 -g gcc optimizes a goto away and I cannot debug

2007-03-22 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29609

[Bug middle-end/29609] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Even with -O0 -g gcc optimizes a goto away and I cannot debug

2007-03-14 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Component|debug |middle-end