http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51972
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-05
09:46:24 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Feb 5 09:46:20 2012
New Revision: 183904
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183904
Log:
2012-02-05 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/51
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52101
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-05
09:58:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I believe that John is correct. The form 'CHARACTER*n string'
> is obsolescent while the form 'CHARACTER string*n' is not.
After re-checking the standard,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51754
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52114
--- Comment #11 from Daniel Krügler
2012-02-05 11:00:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> But using decltype((o<
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52114
--- Comment #12 from Paolo Carlini 2012-02-05
11:11:34 UTC ---
I agree it should, thanks Daniel. In fact, I see that implementing the trick in
a fully correct way is less than trivial and, AFAIK, there is no hint at all in
the Standard that somet
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37304
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28685
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52119
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-05 12:58:56 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Sun Feb 5 12:58:51 2012
New Revision: 183905
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183905
Log:
2012-02-05 Jeffrey Yasskin
Pa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52119
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Component|libstd
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51956
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-05
13:29:07 UTC ---
I think my preferred format is (count N + M weak)
(gdb) p sp
$2 = std::shared_ptr (count 1 + 1 weak) 0x602010
(gdb) p wp
$3 = std::weak_ptr (count 1 + 1 weak) 0x602010
I'm also goi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51835
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- Comment #5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52125
Bug #: 52125
Summary: Problems with LO16 asm operands on MIPS
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52125
rsand...@gcc.gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||mips*-*-*
Status|UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52125
--- Comment #1 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-05 14:56:39 UTC ---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Sun Feb 5 14:56:35 2012
New Revision: 183910
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183910
Log:
gcc/testsuite/
PR target/52125
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51929
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka 2012-02-05 15:15:07
UTC ---
Created attachment 26575
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26575
autoreduced testcase
Probably the same problem.
$ gcc -O -fno-guess-branch-probability -fipa-cp -fip
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52111
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44960
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43179
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-02-05
17:37:33 UTC ---
With trunk at revision 183904 or with 4.6.2, I get
pr43179.f90:6.14:
if (allocated(foo(1)%a)) call abort()
1
Error: 'array' argument of 'allocated' intrinsic at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48374
--- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-02-05
17:51:49 UTC ---
Seems you forgot to actually add the test case.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52101
--- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl
2012-02-05 18:00:59 UTC ---
On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 09:58:46AM +, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52101
>
> --- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-05
> 09:58
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52101
--- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-05
18:11:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> > However, I have just check it and the font size seems to be the normal one.
>
> It is sufficient once one reads B.2.8.
No, it isn't. B.1.8 gives a good h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52104
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51956
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-05
19:10:26 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Sun Feb 5 19:10:15 2012
New Revision: 183914
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183914
Log:
PR libstdc++/51956
* python/libstdcxx/v6/p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52110
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51956
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52104
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-05
19:17:41 UTC ---
Created attachment 26576
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26576
define destructor inline when TLS isn't supported
does this help?
inherited::foo;
};
};
The code seems to be valid. Compilation output (the gcc_47_error.cpp file is
attached):
$ g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 4.7.0 20120205 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52102
--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas 2012-02-05 19:56:16
UTC ---
Author: pault
Date: Sun Feb 5 19:56:09 2012
New Revision: 183915
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183915
Log:
2012-02-05 Paul Thomas
* trans-array.c (gfc_a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52102
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48847
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig 2012-02-05
20:14:10 UTC ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Feb 5 20:14:00 2012
New Revision: 183916
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183916
Log:
2012-02-05 Thomas König
PR fortran/48847
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48847
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52126
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51617
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52126
--- Comment #2 from tmmikolajczyk at gmail dot com 2012-02-05 20:57:29 UTC ---
Further investigation shows that the issue appears only when inheritance from
the template class (class B : private A) is provided explicitly. According
to the standard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-05
21:00:36 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Yeah, IMHO the removal of gets (== ::gets) for _GNU_SOURCE is very much
> intentional. C++ probably only talks about std::gets, doesn't it?
No, std::gets
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51522
--- Comment #9 from Janne Blomqvist 2012-02-05 21:04:18
UTC ---
So the complete valgrind error message I get (with the comment #4 testcase
fixed per Tobias instructions in comment #6) is:
==14281== Invalid read of size 4
==14281==at 0x528B66
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52127
Bug #: 52127
Summary: pedantic-errors is inconsistent in its behavior
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51785
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-05
21:26:26 UTC ---
Though personally I'm not concerned if libstdc++ doesn't define gets(), noone
should be using it, I am concerned that libstdc++ fails to build because of the
using decl.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52127
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-05
21:39:16 UTC ---
You need -Wsystem-headers to enable the diagnostic in a system header
Stripping the # lines means it is no longer considered a system header
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52110
--- Comment #4 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-02-05 21:43:41 UTC ---
On 5-Feb-12, at 2:12 PM, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> --- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou
> 2012-02-05 19:12:36 UTC ---
>> Attached is a possible patch. On "mos
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32373
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig 2012-02-05
21:49:50 UTC ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Feb 5 21:49:46 2012
New Revision: 183917
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183917
Log:
2012-02-05 Thomas König
PR fortran/32373
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32373
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49847
--- Comment #14 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-02-05
21:56:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> In 4.7. Ada is also affected.
Yeah, I got this same ICE in my latest attempt to natively bootstrap 4.7 with
Ada enabled and my patch for the Ada FP b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49791
--- Comment #19 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-05
23:00:16 UTC ---
I think the patch suggested in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-07/msg00252.html is actually correct - which
then fixes the issue of comment 18.
--- ../../libgfortran/io/list_read
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52104
--- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou 2012-02-05
23:27:09 UTC ---
> does this help?
Yes, this yields nominal results again, thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52127
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32380
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52104
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-05
23:55:56 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Sun Feb 5 23:55:51 2012
New Revision: 183920
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183920
Log:
PR libstdc++/52104
* include/std/future (
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52128
Bug #: 52128
Summary: [4.7 regression] r183788 caused massive libstdc++
testsuite regression on i686-linux
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
St
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52128
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48680
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-06
00:38:05 UTC ---
patch submitted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-02/msg00218.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48680
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-06
01:06:10 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Feb 6 01:06:06 2012
New Revision: 183926
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183926
Log:
PR c++/48680
* doc/invoke.texi (C++ Dialec
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48680
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52129
Bug #: 52129
Summary: wrong code to pass parameters to tail call function
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52130
Bug #: 52130
Summary: missing check for matching underlying type during
instantiation of enum member of class template
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52129
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51754
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Benson 2012-02-06
04:14:15 UTC ---
I'll look forward to trying using class arrays again in my code.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51835
--- Comment #6 from amker.cheng 2012-02-06
05:51:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > This is only applicable to the 4.6 branch and trunk since support for the
> > Cortex M4 wasn't added till 4.6.
> >
> > cheers
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51982
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|amodra at gcc dot gnu.org |amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52131
Bug #: 52131
Summary: dynamic allocation?
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
61 matches
Mail list logo
