https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89769
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xuzheliang at huawei dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Joseph, can we reject the testcase?
OTOH a 16 aligned struct UINT192 should have size 32 (but appearantly it does
not when using a typedef because of sharing of TYPE_FIELDs and friends?)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89772
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89771
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
We can't pad, that is against the ABI.
I think we've discussed this many times in the past, the fact is that people do
use this kind of mess when they want to say that the whole array has certain
alignment o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Maybe the TREE_OVERFLOW check should be done only for the error, even with
TREE_OVERFLOW we should be able to check the low bits of the size.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
>
> --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> We can't pad, that is against the ABI.
> I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89773
Bug ID: 89773
Summary: Fortran OpenACC 'routine' directive refuses procedures
with implicit EXTERNAL attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Key
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
See above, I'm afraid that would break a lot of code in the wild. We've been
accepting it for way too long and handling the way those users expect (i.e.
that the whole array is 16 byte aligned), clang accep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89773
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Acjusted patch that uses build_aligned_type instead of doing it on its own.
--- gcc/stor-layout.c.jj2019-01-01 12:37:17.296972670 +0100
+++ gcc/stor-layout.c 2019-03-20 11:15:12.166935041 +0100
@@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The type that is not processed by free_lang_data_in_type is created with:
#1 0x0180f42c in copy_node (node=) at
../../gcc/tree.c:1183
#2 0x0182555e in build_distinct_type_copy (type=) at ../
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60790
--- Comment #14 from Florian Weimer ---
Author: fw
Date: Wed Mar 20 10:42:35 2019
New Revision: 269818
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269818&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libgcc/60790: x86: Do not assume ELF constructors run before IFUNC resol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60790
Florian Weimer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
There is:
fld_worklist_push (TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t), fld);
/* Do not walk TYPE_NEXT_VARIANT. We do not stream it and thus
do not and want not to reach unused variants this way. */
I beli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
>
> --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> There is:
> fld_worklist_push (TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t), fld);
> /* Do not walk TYPE_NEXT_VARIANT. We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89752
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 20 11:26:42 2019
New Revision: 269819
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269819&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/89752
* lra-constraints.c (process_alt_operands
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89752
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-reduction |
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86928
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm. I think we should prune the variant list down to what is actually used
but to fix the GC issue I was raising make sure the pruned variants appear
as main variants (thus NULL their TYPE_NEXT_VARIANT and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83515
Kwok Yeung changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kcy at codesourcery dot com
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Can't we change that way e.g. TYPE_CANONICAL of some type?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83515
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
With the patch in comment 8 all the tests compile and the original test in
comment 0 gives ta runtime
gfc::bank testing status:0 (PASSED): Performance:
3532045.4736842103
gfc::v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I would feel much safer if we do this TYPE_NEXT_VARIANT adjustment with turning
those types left out into distinct type if we'd fld_worklist_push
(TYPE_CANONICAL (type), fld); and so there would be at least s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86928
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #2)
> We're not somehow updating liveness information at all times when we change
> control flow. E.g. we do update liveness in sel_split_edge, but not in
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89774
Bug ID: 89774
Summary: Add flag to force single precision
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88055
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P1
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boess
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89775
Bug ID: 89775
Summary: Stackpointer save/restore instructions optimized away
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> Can't we change that way e.g. TYPE_CANONICAL of some type?
The types are unused, otherwise they'd be visited by fld.
> I would feel much safer if we do this T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89774
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89772
JunMa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||JunMa at linux dot alibaba.com
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> > Can't we change that way e.g. TYPE_CANONICAL of some type?
>
> The types are unused, otherwise they'd be visit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87808
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
playback::context::invoke_driver builds the command line for the driver.
Does it work with each of these:
gcc_jit_context_set_bool_use_external_driver (ctxt, 1);
gcc_jit_context_set_bool_use_external_d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89776
Bug ID: 89776
Summary: sse-movmskb-1.c testcase fails on PPC64 BE 32 bit
Power8
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
>
> --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #12)
> All varaints have the same TYPE_CANONICAL, that of the main variant, and
> we never throw away the main variant. Basically
>
> gcc_assert (TYPE_CANONICAL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener ---
IMHO if we silently lower alignment of UINT192 as array elements we
should at least warn for
typedef __attribute__((aligned(16)))
struct {
unsigned long long w[3];
} UINT192;
UINT192 bid_Kx192[32];
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
--- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
>
> --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87808
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
You definitely need binutils for libgccjit; it calls the driver (embedded
internally in the .so by default), which invokes the assembler and linker.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43798
--- Comment #17 from Alexander Monakov ---
> Can the bogus situation be reproduced with C _Alignas?
C11 does not allow _Alignas on typedefs, so don't see how; likewise for alignas
in C++11.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89775
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89775
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Wed Mar 20 15:28:38 2019
New Revision: 269823
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269823&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
S/390: Fix PR89775. Stackpointer save/restore instructions removed
Ev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89774
Marius Messerschmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WORKSFORME |FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Marius
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87808
--- Comment #4 from Matthias Klose ---
Understood, that I need binutils. However if you remove the driver (or rename
it on your system), then the debug output reads:
JIT:entering: virtual void
gcc::jit::playback::compile_to_memory::postproce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89777
Bug ID: 89777
Summary: Any optimizaton level over -O0 causes crash in
dynamic_cast
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89777
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|wrong-code |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89621
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The problem is that tree-inline.c will remap variably_modified_type_p types
unconditionally.
I've tried:
--- gcc/tree-inline.c.jj2019-03-11 22:56:55.888667590 +0100
+++ gcc/tree-inline.c 2019-03-20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89621
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In particular, what's going on here is that we have a pointer to VLA type,
remap it once on !$omp parallel (that is required, the decls are remapped in
that case) and once again on !$omp do (which is unexpect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89774
Marius Messerschmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|FI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89774
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89774
--- Comment #5 from Marius Messerschmidt ---
I did checkt the output without --fsingle-precision-constant
Is this only enabled via -fsingle-precision-constant or at any optimization
level?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89777
--- Comment #2 from Nick Savoiu ---
I was afraid that it would be resolved as such.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89774
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89774
--- Comment #7 from Marius Messerschmidt ---
Looks good, which options did you use?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89774
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Marius Messerschmidt from comment #7)
> Looks good, which options did you use?
-O2 -march=native (the last part was done as I wanted to get the fused
multiple-add but it is not needed).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87808
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|gcc_lib_dir is missing from |gcc_lib_dir is missing from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89778
Bug ID: 89778
Summary: std::get_time : %d does not work without leading zeros
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83515
--- Comment #11 from DIL ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #10)
> With the patch in comment 8 all the tests compile and the original test in
> comment 0 gives ta runtime
>
> gfc::bank testing status:0 (PASSED): Perf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83515
--- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Sorry, I am confused, I think Comment 1 already has such a reduced test.
> At least the what it says there ...
It is a reduced test for the ICE (as are further reduced tests in comments 3
and 9),
b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87145
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Slightly different testcase:
struct S {
int val;
constexpr operator int() const {
return static_cast(val);
}
};
template
struct F { };
template
constexpr void foo() {
F f;
}
int
main()
{
fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87145
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
This fixes it. But is it the best fix?
--- a/gcc/cp/pt.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/pt.c
@@ -8056,7 +8056,14 @@ convert_template_argument (tree parm,
t = canonicalize_type_argument (t, complain);
if (!type_de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 45999
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45999&action=edit
gcc9-pr89692.patch
Untested patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89775
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87145
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89778
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45896
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2010-10-05 17:57:04 |2019-3-20
Severity|enhanceme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45896
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||myLC at gmx dot net
--- Comment #9 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89778
--- Comment #2 from myLC at gmx dot net ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> I think this is a dup
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 45896 ***
Thank you, yes indeed. Although, the title
"[C++0x] Facet time_get
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87480
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Mar 20 20:31:40 2019
New Revision: 269826
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269826&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/87480 - decltype of member access in default template arg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89676
--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I am working on it. It is a non-trivial problem. We should somehow exclude
creation of conflicts in lra-lives.c for an early clobber matched with an
input.
I hope to fix it this week.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71861
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Wed Mar 20 21:32:23 2019
New Revision: 269827
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269827&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
fix PR 71861
2019-03-20 Janus Weil
PR fortran/7186
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89676
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I wonder if in this case the instruction couldn't replace the current =&r 0n Ic
constraints e.g. with =r,&r 0n,0n I,c because if the shift count is constant,
then I don't see the point of early-clobber, if th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83515
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83515
--- Comment #14 from DIL ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #13)
> (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #12)
> > > Sorry, I am confused, I think Comment 1 already has such a reduced test.
> > > At least the what it says there ...
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89676
--- Comment #7 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
>
> That said, if you can handle it in the RA, it could handle even those
> variable shift cases better (just make sure it doesn't overlap ecx, but
> otherwise
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83515
--- Comment #15 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to DIL from comment #14)
> Ok, so you are still looking for a single Fortran source file using this
> feature, namely optional dummy procedure pointers, that would do something
> non-tri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85797
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85797
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Revised patch that also addresses PR83515:
The patch fixes the ICE. Compiling the tests z2.f90 or z3.f90 gives the error
2 |c = transfer(a, a)
| 1
Error: Cannot convert PROCEDUR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89779
Bug ID: 89779
Summary: [9 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check:
expected class ‘type’, have ‘exceptional’ (error_mark)
in tree_nop_conversion_p, at tree.c:12798
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89779
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89780
Bug ID: 89780
Summary: -Wpessimizing-move is too agressive with templates and
recommends pessimization
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89017
--- Comment #2 from ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ibuclaw
Date: Wed Mar 20 23:52:48 2019
New Revision: 269828
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269828&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
d: Fix ICE force_type_die, at dwarf2out.c using nested types
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89017
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89779
--- Comment #2 from Sunil Pandey ---
Reduced test:
$ cat x.i
typedef a;
c(a *d, int b) {
int e, f, g;
for (; e; e++)
for (f = 0; f < 4; f++)
if (d)
for (g = e + 1; g; g++)
h(d[g]);
}
i() {
a *j;
int k, l;
fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89571
--- Comment #11 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Mar 21 01:03:30 2019
New Revision: 269832
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269832&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2019-03-21 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/89571
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89571
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89781
Bug ID: 89781
Summary: Misleading error messages when initializing a static
data member in-class
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89766
--- Comment #10 from Rimvydas (RJ) ---
Using 9.0.1 20190319 as reference several ICE cases reduce down to the same
snippet (regression on trunk)?
$ cat trunk_accepts_invalid.ii
class a {
constexpr a();
};
template struct b { static constexpr a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89782
Bug ID: 89782
Summary: Can do an internal READ of a character array when it
is a parameter, but not a scalar character parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89783
Bug ID: 89783
Summary: Can do an internal READ of a character array when it
is a parameter, but not a scalar character parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88838
--- Comment #5 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 46000
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46000&action=edit
RFC patch
RFC patch fixes this for review.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87243
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|FSF needs to use xcrun on |FSF GCC needs to do
|d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87030
--- Comment #16 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #15)
> FWIW I had a quick look the other day if there was an easy fix to this PR,
> and didn't find a '5 minute' one.
>
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #14)
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89530
Qirun Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||qrzhang at gatech dot edu
--- Comment #8 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89784
Bug ID: 89784
Summary: Missing AVX512 intrinsics
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
