[Bug c++/58948] c++0x support for enums in namespaces

[Bug c++/58948] c++0x support for enums in namespaces

[daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58948

Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
                   |                            |com

--- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> ---
The example code looks invalid to me, because

::G::A ::G::ref()

is parsed as

::G::A::G::ref()

but there is no nested G in A and even it it where this could never contain a
member function ref. To fix this write any of

::G::A G::ref()
auto ::G::ref() -> ::G::A

I don't think that the code was guaranteed to be well-formed in C++03, but the
wording has been improved since then to clarify it isn't.
>From gcc-bugs-return-433236-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Fri Nov 01 07:38:50 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-433236-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 12363 invoked by alias); 1 Nov 2013 07:38:49 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 12321 invoked by uid 48); 1 Nov 2013 07:38:45 -0000
From: "mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/58957] [4.8 Regression] compilation hangs at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu (both 32-bit and 64-bit modes)
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 07:38:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.2
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on cc target_milestone short_desc everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-58957-4-JMJ5ee3o3D@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-58957-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-58957-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-11/txt/msg00013.txt.bz2
Content-length: 903

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idX957

Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2013-11-01
                 CC|                            |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.8.4
            Summary|compilation hangs at -O3 on |[4.8 Regression]
                   |x86_64-linux-gnu (both      |compilation hangs at -O3 on
                   |32-bit and 64-bit modes)    |x86_64-linux-gnu (both
                   |                            |32-bit and 64-bit modes)
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed.

[Bug c++/58948] c++0x support for enums in namespaces

[paolo.carlini at oracle dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58948

Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |INVALID

--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> ---
Closing.

[Bug c++/58948] c++0x support for enums in namespaces

[daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58948

--- Comment #4 from Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> ---
(In reply to sshannin from comment #2)
> I wonder if there's any way to declare it such that the namespaces/types are
> unambiguous that will parse correctly in both the c++11 and c++03 modes.

The following approach should realize that:

::G::A (::G::ref)()
>From gcc-bugs-return-433279-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Fri Nov 01 17:43:03 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-433279-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 26574 invoked by alias); 1 Nov 2013 17:43:03 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 26540 invoked by uid 48); 1 Nov 2013 17:42:59 -0000
From: "congh at google dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/58963] New: Does C++ need flag_complex_method = 2?
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 17:43:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: congh at google dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter
Message-ID: <bug-58963-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-11/txt/msg00056.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1147

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idX963

            Bug ID: 58963
           Summary: Does C++ need flag_complex_method = 2?
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.9.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: congh at google dot com

In the patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00560.html, the
builtin function is used to perform complex multiplication and division. This
is to comply with C99 standard, but I am wondering if C++ also needs this.

There is no complex keyword in C++, and no content in C++ standard of the
behavior of operations on complex types. <complex> header file is all written
in source code, including complex multiplication and division. GCC should not
do too much for them by using builtin calls by default (also we can set
-fcx-limited-range to prevent GCC doing this), which has a big impact on
performance (let alone there may exist vectorization opportunities).

So I propose to not set flag_complex_method to 2 for C++. Any comment?


thanks,
Cong