* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 may have caused many failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
@ 2009-04-03 16:00 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2009-04-03 17:27 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
` (15 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com @ 2009-04-03 16:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-04-03 16:00 -------
Oops. It is revision 145483:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-04/msg00104.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC|paolo dot carlini at oracle |bkoz at redhat dot com
|dot com |
Summary|[4.5 Regression] Revision |[4.5 Regression] Revision
|145493 may have caused many |145483 may have caused many
|failures |failures
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 may have caused many failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2009-04-03 16:00 ` [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 " hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
@ 2009-04-03 17:27 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
2009-04-03 17:49 ` 3dw4rd at verizon dot net
` (14 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com @ 2009-04-03 17:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-04-03 17:27 -------
Note, most if not all, those fails seem trivial: we are just instantiating with
a second non-type template argument (__w) which is too big compared to the size
of the type of the third argument, a 32-bit unsigned long. We could either
change the latter to unsigned long long or reduce the value of the second. If
Benjamin doesn't come to this I'll do it, to my taste, just to quickly shut-up
the noise.
Also, I'm noticing the use of types like uint_fast64_t in the testcases, that
at the moment is still not safe (will be when Joseph' work on PR 448 will be
complete for all the OSes), because some targets may lack the stdint.h header
completely. For now, instead of guarding the test with dg-require-cstdint I
think we can safely change the types to some normal C++98 types. Or in fact
maybe we could guard, it's easier to keep the test unchanged and remove the
guards when 448 will be closed. Again, up to Benjamin of course, or I will shut
the noise to my taste.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 may have caused many failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2009-04-03 16:00 ` [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 " hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2009-04-03 17:27 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2009-04-03 17:49 ` 3dw4rd at verizon dot net
2009-04-03 19:45 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (13 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: 3dw4rd at verizon dot net @ 2009-04-03 17:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from 3dw4rd at verizon dot net 2009-04-03 17:48 -------
Created an attachment (id=17584)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17584&action=view)
Fix a mistake in operator precedence in bits/random.h (_ShiftMin1)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 may have caused many failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2009-04-03 17:49 ` 3dw4rd at verizon dot net
@ 2009-04-03 19:45 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2009-04-03 19:48 ` dje at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com @ 2009-04-03 19:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-04-03 19:45 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> Created an attachment (id=17584)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17584&action=view) [edit]
> Fix a mistake in operator precedence in bits/random.h (_ShiftMin1)
>
It still doesn't work for 32bit:
Executing on host: /export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/./gcc/g++
-shared-libgcc -B/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/./gcc -nostdinc++
-L/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/32/libstdc++-v3/src
-L/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/32/libstdc++-v3/src/.libs
-B/usr/local/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/
-B/usr/local/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem
/usr/local/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/include -isystem
/usr/local/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/sys-include -m32 -g -O2 -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERT
-fmessage-length=0 -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections -g -O2 -D_GNU_SOURCE -g
-O2 -D_GNU_SOURCE -DLOCALEDIR="." -nostdinc++
-I/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/32/libstdc++-v3/include/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
-I/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/32/libstdc++-v3/include
-I/export/gnu/import/gcc/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++
-I/export/gnu/import/gcc/libstdc++-v3/include/backward
-I/export/gnu/import/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/util -Wl,--gc-sections
/export/gnu/import/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/shared_ptr/thread/default_weaktoshared.cc
-pthread -std=gnu++0x ./libtestc++.a -lm -m32 -o
./default_weaktoshared.exe (timeout = 600)
In file included from
/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/32/libstdc++-v3/include/random:55,^M
from
/export/gnu/import/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/shared_ptr/thread/default_weaktoshared.cc:27:^M
/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/32/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/random.h:
In instantiation of 'const long unsigned int std::__detail::_ShiftMin1<long
unsigned int, 32u, false>::__value':^M
/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/32/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/random.h:390:
instantiated from 'std::mersenne_twister_engine<long unsigned int, 32u, 624u,
397u, 31u, 2567483615ul, 11u, 4294967295ul, 7u, 2636928640ul, 15u,
4022730752ul, 18u, 1812433253ul>'^M
/export/gnu/import/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/shared_ptr/thread/default_weaktoshared.cc:93:
instantiated from here^M
/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/32/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/random.h:83:
error: 'max' is not a member of '__gnu_cxx::__numeric_traits<long unsigned
int>'^M
/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/32/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/random.h:
In instantiation of 'std::mersenne_twister_engine<long unsigned int, 32u, 624u,
397u, 31u, 2567483615ul, 11u, 4294967295ul, 7u, 2636928640ul, 15u,
4022730752ul, 18u, 1812433253ul>':^M
/export/gnu/import/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/shared_ptr/thread/default_weaktoshared.cc:93:
instantiated from here^M
/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/32/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/random.h:410:
error: non-constant condition for static assertion^M
/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/32/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/random.h:
In instantiation of 'std::mersenne_twister_engine<long unsigned int, 32u, 624u,
397u, 31u, 2567483615ul, 11u, 4294967295ul, 7u, 2636928640ul, 15u,
4022730752ul, 18u, 1812433253ul>':^M
/export/gnu/import/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/shared_ptr/thread/default_weaktoshared.cc:93:
instantiated from here^M
/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/32/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/random.h:412:
error: non-constant condition for static assertion^M
/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/32/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/random.h:
In instantiation of 'std::mersenne_twister_engine<long unsigned int, 32u, 624u,
397u, 31u, 2567483615ul, 11u, 4294967295ul, 7u, 2636928640ul, 15u,
4022730752ul, 18u, 1812433253ul>':^M
/export/gnu/import/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/shared_ptr/thread/default_weaktoshared.cc:93:
instantiated from here^M
/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/32/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/random.h:414:
error: non-constant condition for static assertion^M
compiler exited with status 1
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 may have caused many failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2009-04-03 19:45 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
@ 2009-04-03 19:48 ` dje at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-04-03 21:41 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
` (11 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: dje at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-04-03 19:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #5 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-03 19:48 -------
I see similar failures on AIX.
--
dje at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-04-03 19:48:03
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 may have caused many failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2009-04-03 19:48 ` dje at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-04-03 21:41 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
2009-04-03 22:18 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (10 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com @ 2009-04-03 21:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-04-03 21:40 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > Created an attachment (id=17584)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17584&action=view) [edit]
> > Fix a mistake in operator precedence in bits/random.h (_ShiftMin1)
> >
> It still doesn't work for 32bit:
>
> /export/gnu/import/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/shared_ptr/thread/default_weaktoshared.cc:93:
HJ, I'm sorry, I do not understand your english: you say "it *still* doesn't
work", but this *specific* fail was not present in your initial list. Thus, is
Ed's patchlet introducing one *additional* fail?
Note, in general Ed's patchlet alone *cannot* *fix* the fails I discussed in my
previous message, I outlined what is wrong and the proper fix for those. I just
want to understand if it makes things worse or not. Note that so far, that is
according to the current mainline status, we *cannot* say to have properly
*regressions* because all the tests you mentioned in this audit so far are
*new*. Just to be accurate.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 may have caused many failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2009-04-03 21:41 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2009-04-03 22:18 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2009-04-03 22:43 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
` (9 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com @ 2009-04-03 22:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-04-03 22:17 -------
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > (In reply to comment #3)
> > > Created an attachment (id=17584)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17584&action=view) [edit]
> > > Fix a mistake in operator precedence in bits/random.h (_ShiftMin1)
> > >
> > It still doesn't work for 32bit:
> >
> > /export/gnu/import/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/shared_ptr/thread/default_weaktoshared.cc:93:
>
> HJ, I'm sorry, I do not understand your english: you say "it *still* doesn't
> work", but this *specific* fail was not present in your initial list. Thus, is
> Ed's patchlet introducing one *additional* fail?
>
"make check" was clean before revision 145483. Now I have many failures
on 32bit. Revision 145508 with patch in comment #3 still have many failures
on 32bit.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 may have caused many failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2009-04-03 22:18 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
@ 2009-04-03 22:43 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
2009-04-04 0:48 ` 3dw4rd at verizon dot net
` (8 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com @ 2009-04-03 22:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-04-03 22:43 -------
(In reply to comment #7)
> "make check" was clean before revision 145483. Now I have many failures
> on 32bit. Revision 145508 with patch in comment #3 still have many failures
> on 32bit.
Yes, this is clear. I would say redundant.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 may have caused many failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2009-04-03 22:43 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2009-04-04 0:48 ` 3dw4rd at verizon dot net
2009-04-04 0:50 ` 3dw4rd at verizon dot net
` (7 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: 3dw4rd at verizon dot net @ 2009-04-04 0:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #9 from 3dw4rd at verizon dot net 2009-04-04 00:47 -------
Created an attachment (id=17585)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17585&action=view)
better patchlet.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 may have caused many failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2009-04-04 0:48 ` 3dw4rd at verizon dot net
@ 2009-04-04 0:50 ` 3dw4rd at verizon dot net
2009-04-04 23:09 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: 3dw4rd at verizon dot net @ 2009-04-04 0:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #10 from 3dw4rd at verizon dot net 2009-04-04 00:50 -------
(From update of attachment 17585)
The last patchlet got most of the new errors on x86_64 linux.
There was one more mistake that caused an error in mt19937_64.
In bits/random.h -
change this line:
__gnu_cxx::__numeric_traits<_UIntType>::max;
to this:
__gnu_cxx::__numeric_traits<_UIntType>::__max;
Then there are no errors on x86_64 linux targets as of 145513.
The 32-bit target issues will not be addressed by this though some extra
errors will be fixed.
I attached a new patch.
Sorry for any confusion.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 may have caused many failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2009-04-04 0:50 ` 3dw4rd at verizon dot net
@ 2009-04-04 23:09 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-04-05 22:42 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-04-04 23:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #11 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-04 23:09 -------
Subject: Bug 39629
Author: paolo
Date: Sat Apr 4 23:09:02 2009
New Revision: 145553
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=145553
Log:
2009-04-05 Edward M. Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd@verizon.net>
* include/bits/random.h (struct _ShiftMin1): Fix small typo and
thinko.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/mersenne_twister_engine/cons/
default.cc: Enable.
2009-04-05 Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini@oracle.com>
PR libstdc++/39629 (partial)
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/cons/
base_move.cc: Use uint_fast64_t instead of unsigned long.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/cons/
seed1.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/cons/
seed2.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/cons/
base_copy.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/cons/
default.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/cons/
seed_seq.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/
requirements/typedefs.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/
operators/equal.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/
operators/serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/mt19937_64.cc: Use ull.
Modified:
trunk/libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog
trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/random.h
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/cons/base_copy.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/cons/base_move.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/cons/default.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/cons/seed1.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/cons/seed2.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/cons/seed_seq.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/operators/equal.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/operators/serialize.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/independent_bits_engine/requirements/typedefs.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/mersenne_twister_engine/cons/default.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/mt19937_64.cc
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 may have caused many failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2009-04-04 23:09 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-04-05 22:42 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2009-04-05 22:43 ` [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 caused many libstdc++ failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (4 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com @ 2009-04-05 22:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #12 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-04-05 22:42 -------
As of revision 145565, I still see
FAIL: 26_numerics/random/knuth_b.cc execution test
FAIL: 26_numerics/random/piecewise_linear_distribution/operators/serialize.cc
execution test
FAIL: 26_numerics/random/ranlux48.cc execution test
FAIL: 26_numerics/random/ranlux48_base.cc execution test
for Linux/ia32 target.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 caused many libstdc++ failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2009-04-05 22:42 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
@ 2009-04-05 22:43 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2009-04-05 22:53 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
` (3 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com @ 2009-04-05 22:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|[4.5 Regression] Revision |[4.5 Regression] Revision
|145483 may have caused many |145483 caused many libstdc++
|failures |failures
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 caused many libstdc++ failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2009-04-05 22:43 ` [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 caused many libstdc++ failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
@ 2009-04-05 22:53 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
2009-04-07 20:49 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
` (2 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com @ 2009-04-05 22:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #13 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-04-05 22:52 -------
Indeed, the fix is marked as *partial*.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 caused many libstdc++ failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2009-04-05 22:53 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2009-04-07 20:49 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
2009-04-09 23:37 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-04-09 23:47 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com @ 2009-04-07 20:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #14 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-04-07 20:48 -------
*** Bug 39652 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |danglin at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 caused many libstdc++ failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2009-04-07 20:49 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2009-04-09 23:37 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-04-09 23:47 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-04-09 23:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #15 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-09 23:37 -------
Subject: Bug 39629
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Apr 9 23:37:08 2009
New Revision: 145867
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=145867
Log:
2009-04-09 Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini@oracle.com>
PR libstdc++/39629 (final bits)
* include/bits/random.h (subtract_with_carry_engine<>::_S_modulus):
Remove, consistently use __detail::_Shift<_UIntType, __w>::__value.
* include/bits/random.tcc (shuffle_order_engine<>::operator()()):
Fix formula for __j.
* include/bits/random.tcc (operator==(const normal_distribution<>&,
const normal_distribution<>&): Remove.
* include/bits/random.h (operator==(const uniform_int_distribution<>&,
const uniform_int_distribution<>&), operator==(const
uniform_real_distribution<>&, const uniform_real_distribution<>&),
operator==(const normal_distribution<>&, const normal_distribution<>&),
operator==(const lognormal_distribution<>&,
const lognormal_distribution<>&), operator==(const
chi_squared_distribution<>&, const chi_squared_distribution<>&),
operator==(const cauchy_distribution<>&, const cauchy_distribution<>&),
operator==(const fisher_distribution<>&, const fisher_distribution<>&),
operator==(const student_t_distribution<>&,
const student_t_distribution<>&), operator==(const
bernoulli_distribution<>&, const bernoulli_distribution<>&),
operator==(const binomial_distribution<>&, const
binomial_distribution<>&), operator==(const geometric_distribution<>&,
const geometric_distribution<>&), operator==(const
negative_binomial_distribution<>&, const
negative_binomial_distribution<>&), operator==(const
poisson_distribution<>&, const poisson_distribution<>&),
operator==(const exponential_distribution<>&,
const exponential_distribution<>&), operator==(const
gamma_distribution<>&, const gamma_distribution<>&), operator==(const
weibull_distribution<>&, const weibull_distribution<>&),
operator==(const extreme_value_distribution<>&,
const extreme_value_distribution<>&), operator==(const
discrete_distribution<>&, const discrete_distribution<>&),
operator==(const piecewise_constant_distribution<>&,
const piecewise_constant_distribution<>&), operator==(const
piecewise_linear_distribution<>&, const
piecewise_linear_distribution<>&)): Remove.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/uniform_real_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Remove.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/piecewise_constant_distribution/
operators/serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/chi_squared_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/normal_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/uniform_int_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/poisson_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/bernoulli_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/discrete_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/weibull_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/negative_binomial_distribution/
operators/serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/cauchy_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/gamma_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/fisher_f_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/exponential_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/lognormal_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/binomial_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/extreme_value_distribution/
operators/serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/piecewise_linear_distribution/
operators/serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/student_t_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/geometric_distribution/operators/
serialize.cc: Likewise.
* include/bits/random.h (linear_congruential_engine<>::seed(_Gen&,
true_type), linear_congruential_engine<>::seed(_Gen&, false_type),
mersenne_twister_engine<>::seed(_Gen&,
true_type), mersenne_twister_engine<>::seed(_Gen&, false_type),
subtract_with_carry_engine<>::seed(_Gen&,
true_type), subtract_with_carry_engine<>::seed(_Gen&, false_type)):
Remove, unused.
* include/bits/random.tcc (linear_congruential_engine<>::
seed(_Gen&, false_type): Likewise.
Removed:
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/bernoulli_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/binomial_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/cauchy_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/chi_squared_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/discrete_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/exponential_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/extreme_value_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/fisher_f_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/gamma_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/geometric_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/lognormal_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/negative_binomial_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/normal_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/piecewise_constant_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/piecewise_linear_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/poisson_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/student_t_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/uniform_int_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/uniform_real_distribution/operators/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/26_numerics/random/weibull_distribution/operators/
Modified:
trunk/libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog
trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/random.h
trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/random.tcc
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/39629] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145483 caused many libstdc++ failures
2009-04-03 15:55 [Bug libstdc++/39629] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 145493 may have caused many failures hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (15 preceding siblings ...)
2009-04-09 23:37 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-04-09 23:47 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com @ 2009-04-09 23:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #16 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-04-09 23:47 -------
Fixed.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39629
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread