* [Bug ada/66162] Bug box compiling Ada.Finalization with -gnatc
2015-05-15 15:52 [Bug ada/66162] New: Bug box compiling Ada.Finalization with -gnatc simon at pushface dot org
@ 2015-05-17 10:39 ` simon at pushface dot org
2015-05-17 12:57 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: simon at pushface dot org @ 2015-05-17 10:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66162
--- Comment #2 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #1)
> Why on Earth are you doing this? No plan to look into it.
Because I agree with Randy Brukardt in
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.ada/ECJm5qlxZKA/RKXuEQWN4NYJ that
“[n]ot having bounded containers is pretty much like not having arrays”.
It’s quite possible to build the Ada 2012 Bounded Vectors & Hashed Maps (&
presumably other bounded containers) without finalization provided you’re
willing to hack out iterators and references, which is the way I’ve gone up to
now; but it seems a real shame not to go the whole hog.
People who want to write Ada for MCUs aren’t necessarily in the high-integrity
world; some would want to cram as much of the language as possible into the
RTS.
>From gcc-bugs-return-486469-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun May 17 11:49:28 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-486469-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 14202 invoked by alias); 17 May 2015 11:49:27 -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 14174 invoked by uid 48); 17 May 2015 11:49:21 -0000
From: "hp at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/66004] [6 Regression]: performance of 26_numerics/random/negative_binomial_distribution/operators/values.cc
Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 11:49:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: ipa
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: hp at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-66004-4-evg4jtYdtJ@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66004-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66004-4@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: 2015-05/txt/msg01309.txt.bz2
Content-length: 754
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf004
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #3)
> Something supposedly very good happened recently, because:
> r223225 18369501023
>
> I'll just have to find out what caused that 50% cut! The test-case is
> unchanged.
> If the cause is related to inlining heuristics, I'll close this PR for sure.
Ignore that. I misobserved the "nearby" test-case
26_numerics/random/poisson_distribution/operators/values.cc probably because
there was a test-run still in progress. Still, that similar test-case indeed
seems to have lower initialization numbers. Lesson learned: always
double-check your end-point observations before bisecting.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* [Bug ada/66162] Bug box compiling Ada.Finalization with -gnatc
2015-05-15 15:52 [Bug ada/66162] New: Bug box compiling Ada.Finalization with -gnatc simon at pushface dot org
2015-05-17 10:39 ` [Bug ada/66162] " simon at pushface dot org
@ 2015-05-17 12:57 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-05-17 14:37 ` simon at pushface dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-05-17 12:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66162
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> People who want to write Ada for MCUs aren’t necessarily in the
> high-integrity world; some would want to cram as much of the language as
> possible into the RTS.
That's not the problem., just avoid using -gnatc on the runtime.
>From gcc-bugs-return-486471-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun May 17 13:45:49 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-486471-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 123182 invoked by alias); 17 May 2015 13:45:49 -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 123130 invoked by uid 55); 17 May 2015 13:45:45 -0000
From: "tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/37131] inline matmul for small matrix sizes
Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 13:45:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.4.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-37131-4-antDquObVV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-37131-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-37131-4@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: 2015-05/txt/msg01311.txt.bz2
Content-length: 605
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id7131
--- Comment #31 from Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun May 17 13:45:07 2015
New Revision: 223268
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev"3268&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-05-17 Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/37131
* gfortran.dg/matmul_bounds_6.f90: New test.
* gfortran.dg/matmul_bounds_7.f90: New test.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/matmul_bounds_6.f90
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/matmul_bounds_7.f90
Modified:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* [Bug ada/66162] Bug box compiling Ada.Finalization with -gnatc
2015-05-15 15:52 [Bug ada/66162] New: Bug box compiling Ada.Finalization with -gnatc simon at pushface dot org
2015-05-17 10:39 ` [Bug ada/66162] " simon at pushface dot org
2015-05-17 12:57 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-05-17 14:37 ` simon at pushface dot org
2015-05-17 15:22 ` [Bug ada/66162] segfault on code using controlled types in -gnatc mode ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: simon at pushface dot org @ 2015-05-17 14:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66162
--- Comment #4 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #3)
> > People who want to write Ada for MCUs aren’t necessarily in the
> > high-integrity world; some would want to cram as much of the language as
> > possible into the RTS.
>
> That's not the problem., just avoid using -gnatc on the runtime.
I see, sorry for the misunderstanding. That was the workround I had thought of.
The reason I used -gnatc is that the latest Emacs ada-mode doesn’t have a
compile-current-file, just check-current-file; and it’s worked for the rest of
the runtime!
That said, I get a very similar error compiling something that _uses_ the
runtime:
-- Copyright (C) Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
-- This unit is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
-- as you wish. This unit is distributed in the hope that it will be
-- useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty
-- of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
with Ada.Finalization;
package Finalizing is
type F is new Ada.Finalization.Controlled with record
V : Integer;
end record;
overriding
procedure Adjust (Obj : in out F);
overriding
procedure Finalize (Obj : in out F);
end Finalizing;
results in
$ PATH=/opt/gcc-5.1.0/bin:$PATH gprbuild -P testbed -c -u -f -gnatc
finalizing.adb
arm-eabi-gcc -c -g -Og -gnatqQafoy -gnatwaL.X -gnatc finalizing.adb
+===========================GNAT BUG DETECTED==============================+
| 5.1.0 (arm-eabi) Constraint_Error erroneous memory access |
| Error detected at finalizing.ads:19:4 |
| Please submit a bug report; see http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html. |
| Use a subject line meaningful to you and us to track the bug. |
| Include the entire contents of this bug box in the report. |
| Include the exact command that you entered. |
| Also include sources listed below. |
+==========================================================================+
where line 19 is the declaration of procedure Finalize.
Your suggested workround is OK for this too.
>From gcc-bugs-return-486474-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun May 17 15:08:53 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-486474-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 29823 invoked by alias); 17 May 2015 15:08:53 -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 29791 invoked by uid 55); 17 May 2015 15:08:49 -0000
From: "uros at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/66174] [6 Regression] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2341 (unrecognizable insns) with -ftree-vectorize -mavx512ifma
Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 15:08:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: uros at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-66174-4-Xv7wAVg2W7@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66174-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66174-4@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: 2015-05/txt/msg01314.txt.bz2
Content-length: 636
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf174
--- Comment #5 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Sun May 17 15:08:16 2015
New Revision: 223269
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev"3269&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/66174
* config/i386/i386.c (expand_vec_perm_blend): Enable HImode and
QImode inner modes for TARGET_AVX512BW. Force mask operand
to a register for AVX512F modes.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR target/66174
* gcc.target/i386/pr66174.c: New test.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* [Bug ada/66162] segfault on code using controlled types in -gnatc mode
2015-05-15 15:52 [Bug ada/66162] New: Bug box compiling Ada.Finalization with -gnatc simon at pushface dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2015-05-17 14:37 ` simon at pushface dot org
@ 2015-05-17 15:22 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-06-02 11:36 ` simon at pushface dot org
2015-06-02 16:49 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-05-17 15:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66162
Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|SUSPENDED |NEW
Summary|Bug box compiling |segfault on code using
|Ada.Finalization with |controlled types in -gnatc
|-gnatc |mode
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> That said, I get a very similar error compiling something that _uses_ the
> runtime:
>
> -- Copyright (C) Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
>
> -- This unit is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
> -- as you wish. This unit is distributed in the hope that it will be
> -- useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty
> -- of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
>
> with Ada.Finalization;
> package Finalizing is
>
> type F is new Ada.Finalization.Controlled with record
> V : Integer;
> end record;
>
> overriding
> procedure Adjust (Obj : in out F);
>
> overriding
> procedure Finalize (Obj : in out F);
>
> end Finalizing;
OK, this one ought to compile with -gnatc.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* [Bug ada/66162] segfault on code using controlled types in -gnatc mode
2015-05-15 15:52 [Bug ada/66162] New: Bug box compiling Ada.Finalization with -gnatc simon at pushface dot org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2015-05-17 15:22 ` [Bug ada/66162] segfault on code using controlled types in -gnatc mode ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-06-02 11:36 ` simon at pushface dot org
2015-06-02 16:49 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: simon at pushface dot org @ 2015-06-02 11:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8", Size: 3582 bytes --]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66162
--- Comment #6 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #3)
> That's not the problem., just avoid using -gnatc on the runtime.
Eric,
In PR64866 comment 2, Arno said "Visibility in the Ada runtime do not follow
standard Ada rules. In other words, the Ada runtime isn't implemented in Ada,
but in a different dialect very close to Ada, with additional restrictions.â€
He notes two of the additional restrictions: is there a writeup anywhere of the
language restrictions and usage restrictions like this one?
Thanks,
--S
>From gcc-bugs-return-487825-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Jun 02 11:48:40 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-487825-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 98032 invoked by alias); 2 Jun 2015 11:48:40 -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 97865 invoked by uid 48); 2 Jun 2015 11:48:36 -0000
From: "mvo at debian dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug go/66378] New: libgo syscall.Sendfile() does not honor/use offset argument
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2015 11:48:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: go
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.1.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: mvo at debian dot org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ian at airs dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_file_loc bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter cc target_milestone attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-66378-4@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: 2015-06/txt/msg00157.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1121
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf378
Bug ID: 66378
Summary: libgo syscall.Sendfile() does not honor/use offset
argument
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
URL: https://bugs.launchpad.net/snappy/+bug/1460530
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
Assignee: ian at airs dot com
Reporter: mvo at debian dot org
CC: cmang at google dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 35676
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id5676&actioníit
Patch that make syscall.Sendfile() use offset.
The implementation in libgo/go/syscall/libcall_linux.go does not use the
"offset" argument. Instead it uses soff and poff which is never initialized
with the offset provided by the user (so always zero). This means that sendfile
will not be correct for any offset != 0.
Attached is a patch that fixes this issue, I verified the fix against our
failing snappy testsuite that has a test for sendfile with alternative offsets.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* [Bug ada/66162] segfault on code using controlled types in -gnatc mode
2015-05-15 15:52 [Bug ada/66162] New: Bug box compiling Ada.Finalization with -gnatc simon at pushface dot org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2015-06-02 11:36 ` simon at pushface dot org
@ 2015-06-02 16:49 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-06-02 16:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66162
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> In PR64866 comment 2, Arno said "Visibility in the Ada runtime do not follow
> standard Ada rules. In other words, the Ada runtime isn't implemented in
> Ada, but in a different dialect very close to Ada, with additional
> restrictions.”
>
> He notes two of the additional restrictions: is there a writeup anywhere of
> the language restrictions and usage restrictions like this one?
I don't really know, I'm not a specialist of the runtime at all.
>From gcc-bugs-return-487857-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Jun 02 16:57:38 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-487857-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 81809 invoked by alias); 2 Jun 2015 16:57:38 -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 81310 invoked by uid 48); 2 Jun 2015 16:57:34 -0000
From: "simon at pushface dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ada/64866] Lost visibility of package Interfaces after task or PO declaration
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2015 16:57:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: ada
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: simon at pushface dot org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID
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:
Message-ID: <bug-64866-4-wA1XTPFhqW@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-64866-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-64866-4@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: 2015-06/txt/msg00189.txt.bz2
Content-length: 416
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idd866
--- Comment #5 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to Arnaud Charlet from comment #2)
> Visibility in the Ada runtime do not follow standard Ada rules. In other
> words, the Ada runtime isn't implemented in Ada, but in a different
> dialect very close to Ada, with additional restrictions.
Are these additional restrictions documented anywhere, please?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread