new FAILs on HEAD

[Mark Mitchell]

On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 06:21, Roger Sayle wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 gcc@ds217-115-141-84.dedicated.hosteurope.de wrote:
> > If you directly receive this mail, your name is tagged to one of the
> > ChangeLog entries. A copy is also mailed to gcc-regressions.
> >
> > These new FAILs
> >
> > FAIL: 23_containers/bitset/cons/1.cc (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: 23_containers/bitset/test/1.cc (test for excess errors)
> >
> > were caused by one of the following checkins
> 
> My apologies again.  I've now posted a patch to address these
> regressions.  My sincere apologies for somehow missing these new
> failures during testing.
> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-12/msg02266.html

That patch is OK.

Also, note that doing "TREE_TYPE (x) == TREE_TYPE (y)" in the middle end
is almost always wrong.  When typedefs are in play, that test will fail,
even though the types are "the same type" from the point of view of any
optimization, etc.

-- 
Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
CodeSourcery, LLC