[Bug libstdc++/90277] Debug Mode test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90277 --- Comment #1 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Sat May 4 07:41:39 2019 New Revision: 270870 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270870&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Add missing PR libstdc++/90277 reference. Modified: trunk/libstdc

[Bug fortran/90329] Incompatibility between gfortran and C lapack calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90329 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2 fr

[Bug tree-optimization/89595] [8 Regression] DOM miscompiles code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89595 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com --- Comm

[Bug fortran/90093] Extended C interop: optional argument incorrectly identified as PRESENT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90093 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org --- Commen

[Bug fortran/90329] Incompatibility between gfortran and C lapack calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90329 Janne Blomqvist changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jb at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 f

[Bug fortran/90329] Incompatibility between gfortran and C lapack calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90329 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/90341] New: pcsx2-git: "At global scope: cc1plus: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90341 Bug ID: 90341 Summary: pcsx2-git: "At global scope: cc1plus: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault" Product: gcc Version: 9.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severi

[Bug c++/90341] pcsx2-git: "At global scope: cc1plus: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90341 --- Comment #1 from Kyle De'Vir --- Created attachment 46286 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46286&action=edit Required preprocessed files

[Bug c++/90341] pcsx2-git: "At global scope: cc1plus: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90341 --- Comment #2 from Kyle De'Vir --- I hope this amount of info is sufficient to debug the issue. :)

[Bug fortran/90329] Incompatibility between gfortran and C lapack calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90329 --- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig --- (In reply to Janne Blomqvist from comment #3) > Ooof! > > (Just for the record, I don't think we should revert to the previous > behavior. Whatever we do should be robust in the face of LTO etc.) I concur.

[Bug fortran/90329] Incompatibility between gfortran and C lapack calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90329 --- Comment #5 from Janne Blomqvist --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #4) > (In reply to Janne Blomqvist from comment #3) > > 1) When compiling an external procedure, for character(len=1) arguments we > > don't generate the hidden strin

[Bug fortran/90112] internal procedure using module procedure instead of "sibling" internal procedure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90112 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/90111] Placement of Fortran OpenACC 'routine' directive inside 'specification-part'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90111 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/90277] Debug Mode test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90277 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- François, are you sure this is the right PR number for commit r270868?

[Bug c++/90339] Change default c++ dialect to -std=gnu++17 in gcc 10 ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90339 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/90339] Change default c++ dialect to -std=gnu++17 in gcc 10 ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90339 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > But bugzilla is not the place for that discussion, it's not a bug. I probably should have said that I think the g...@gcc.gnu.org mailing list is the right pl

[Bug c++/90342] New: Misleading #include system fixit when using an older C++ version

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90342 Bug ID: 90342 Summary: Misleading #include system fixit when using an older C++ version Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/90342] Misleading #include system fixit when using an older C++ version

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90342 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIR

[Bug rtl-optimization/90343] New: ICE: in verify_dominators, at dominance.c:1184 (error: dominator of 7 status unknown)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90343 Bug ID: 90343 Summary: ICE: in verify_dominators, at dominance.c:1184 (error: dominator of 7 status unknown) Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keyw

[Bug libstdc++/90299] std::filesystem::absolute("") and std::filesystem::absolute("", ec) behave differently

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90299 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Sat May 4 14:35:33 2019 New Revision: 270874 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270874&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/90299 make filesystem::absolute overloads consistent In thi

[Bug libstdc++/90299] std::filesystem::absolute("") and std::filesystem::absolute("", ec) behave differently

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90299 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- Fixed on trunk so far.

[Bug fortran/90344] New: small code that compiles and runs in 7.3.0 but not 7.4.1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90344 Bug ID: 90344 Summary: small code that compiles and runs in 7.3.0 but not 7.4.1 Product: gcc Version: 7.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug translation/90176] diagnostics should generally contain underscore only inside quotes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90176 Roland Illig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/90345] New: too pessimistic check whether pointer may alias local variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90345 Bug ID: 90345 Summary: too pessimistic check whether pointer may alias local variable Product: gcc Version: 9.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/90329] Incompatibility between gfortran and C lapack calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90329 --- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig --- (In reply to Janne Blomqvist from comment #5) > (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #4) > > Currently, I am leaning towards using an option with a mandatory > > warning (no way to turn it off) which does

[Bug target/90346] New: gcc generates the "lfence" instruction on CPUs that don't support it

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90346 Bug ID: 90346 Summary: gcc generates the "lfence" instruction on CPUs that don't support it Product: gcc Version: 9.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug sanitizer/90347] New: [UBSAN] __attribute__((weak))__ results in "declared weak after being used" error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90347 Bug ID: 90347 Summary: [UBSAN] __attribute__((weak))__ results in "declared weak after being used" error Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity

[Bug c/90348] New: Small inlined function has local variables in invalid stack location

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90348 Bug ID: 90348 Summary: Small inlined function has local variables in invalid stack location Product: gcc Version: 8.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/90348] Small inlined function has local variables in invalid stack location

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90348 --- Comment #1 from Pieter Wuille --- Created attachment 46290 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46290&action=edit Un-preprocessed test case C file Adding the original .c file as well to demonstrate the problem on different pl

[Bug c++/90349] New: missing return with turned on 03 causes infinite loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90349 Bug ID: 90349 Summary: missing return with turned on 03 causes infinite loop Product: gcc Version: 8.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compon

[Bug other/63509] Misleading error message when building gcc without C++ compiler installed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63509 --- Comment #8 from Jim Wilson --- I filed an autoconf bug http://savannah.gnu.org/support/index.php?109676 The problem here is that autoconf only verifies that the first AC_PROG_X compiler is working. And since we include AC_PROG_CC before

[Bug c++/90349] missing return with turned on 03 causes infinite loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90349 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/90350] New: ubound ICE on assumed size array even though explicit bound is specified

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90350 Bug ID: 90350 Summary: ubound ICE on assumed size array even though explicit bound is specified Product: gcc Version: 7.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug driver/42444] "-march=i386 -march=native -mfpmath=sse" problem

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42444 Sergei Trofimovich changed: What|Removed |Added CC||slyfox at inbox dot ru --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/90345] too pessimistic check whether pointer may alias a local variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90345 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I think there might be a dup of this bug. Where locals should not be able to alias incoming arugments.

[Bug middle-end/90345] too pessimistic check whether pointer may alias a local variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90345 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Related to PR 50262 (and a few others). Looks like GCC did not notice that a->digits comes from an argument so therefor cannot alias the local variable.

[Bug rtl-optimization/90168] context-sensitive local register allocation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90168 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- >or to use float type to hold frequency? This won't work correctly as floating point is different between hosts. There has been some usage of floating point inside of GCC which was removed because of that i

[Bug rtl-optimization/90174] Bad register spill due to top-down allocation order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90174 --- Comment #5 from Feng Xue --- > I would say that top-down algorithm behaves better than bottom-up one. I > implemented Callahan-Koblentz (bottom-up algorithm) in GCC about 10 years > ago and it behaved worse than the current one. I think a

[Bug rtl-optimization/90174] Bad register spill due to top-down allocation order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90174 --- Comment #7 from Feng Xue --- Created attachment 46293 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46293&action=edit asm file 2 generated by gcc

[Bug rtl-optimization/90174] Bad register spill due to top-down allocation order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90174 --- Comment #6 from Feng Xue --- Created attachment 46292 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46292&action=edit test case with less live ranges

[Bug rtl-optimization/90174] Bad register spill due to top-down allocation order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90174 --- Comment #8 from Feng Xue --- Created attachment 46294 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46294&action=edit asm file 2 generated by llvm

[Bug rtl-optimization/90168] context-sensitive local register allocation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90168 --- Comment #4 from Feng Xue --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > >or to use float type to hold frequency? > > This won't work correctly as floating point is different between hosts. > There has been some usage of floating point in