From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25545 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2006 07:28:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 25504 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2006 07:28:41 -0000 Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 07:28:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060307072841.25503.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug fortran/24406] EQUIVALENCE broken in 32-bit code with optimization -O2 In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2006-03/txt/msg00699.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #13 from paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr 2006-03-07 07:28 ------- Subject: RE: EQUIVALENCE broken in 32-bit code with optimization -O2 Andrew, Oh, I did miss something, then! > The symptom of this testcase passing might work but the bug > is still there and > most likely cannot expose it at the tree level and it is semi > hard to expose it > even on the RTL level. If it is hard to expose, do we care about it? Is it certain systems that are sensistive to it.... or....? > Comment #5 shows what needs to be added to the Fortran > front-end which I will > do sometime this week when I get some time (but note I have > two papers to write > which is what is right now taking up my time). Me too. *sigh* All the best Paul -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24406