This is the mail archive of the
gcc-regression@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 6 GCC regressions, 2 new, with your patch on 2003-03-20T17:13:34Z.
- From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>
- To: gcc-regression at gcc dot gnu dot org, jason at redhat dot com
- Cc: pbothner at apple dot com, rearnsha at arm dot com
- Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 10:59:56 +0000
- Subject: Re: 6 GCC regressions, 2 new, with your patch on 2003-03-20T17:13:34Z.
- Organization: ARM Ltd.
- Reply-to: Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com
> With your recent patch, GCC has some regression test failures, which
> used to pass. There are 2 new failures, and 4
> failures that existed before and after that patch; 0 failures
> have been fixed.
>
> The new failures are:
> native g++.sum g++.ext/overload1.C
Jason, this seems to be the result of
2003-03-19 Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
PR c++/8316, c++/9315, c++/10136
* call.c (print_z_candidate): Split out from...
(print_z_candidiates): ...here.
(joust): Use it.
we are getting extra warnings now for each of the candidates.
> native g++.sum g++.other/new2.C
>
This one is because we are now getting
FAIL: g++.other/new2.C (test for excess errors)
<internal>:0: error: candidates are: void* operator new [](long unsigned
int)
which appears in the log after line 19. I'm not sure exactly what the
cause of this might be.
Both of these have probably crept in while the regression tester was
failing to build correctly (several days now).
R.