From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25134 invoked by alias); 7 Oct 2002 21:26:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 25120 invoked by uid 71); 7 Oct 2002 21:26:01 -0000 Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 14:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20021007212601.25119.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pop_S=E9bastian?= Subject: Re: c++/8067: g++ 3.2 internal error: Segmentation fault Reply-To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pop_S=E9bastian?= X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00271.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c++/8067; it has been noted by GNATS. From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pop_S=E9bastian?= To: Gabriel Dos Reis Cc: Jason Merrill , Reichelt , gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, y_fedor@ciam.ru, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/8067: g++ 3.2 internal error: Segmentation fault Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 23:14:02 +0200 > > | What about the following patch for solving the PR following the first suggestion? > > Does it handle similar constructs where you replace > __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ with another id-expression? I'm under the > impression that it does not. > I tested the patch with "make check-c++" and results are exactly the same as on the original version. === g++ Summary === # of expected passes 6979 # of unexpected failures 598 # of unexpected successes 1 # of expected failures 91 # of untested testcases 9 # of unsupported tests 3 /home/pop/gcc/main/bin/gcc/testsuite/../g++ version gcc 3.3 20021005 (experimental) === libstdc++-v3 Summary === # of expected passes 397 # of unexpected failures 16 # of unexpected successes 1 # of expected failures 26 Sebastian