[Bug c++/101118] coroutines: unexpected ODR warning for coroutine frame type in LTO builds

[john at drouhard dot dev via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101118

--- Comment #5 from John Drouhard  ---
Has there been any progress toward resolution for this? We've been trying to
use coroutines in our project but we require LTO for performance reasons, so
this is holding us back.

[Bug libstdc++/109111] Definition of repeat_view::_Iterator has wrong template-head

[john at drouhard dot dev via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109111

--- Comment #1 from John Drouhard  ---
https://godbolt.org/z/csozden6e

example of gcc not diagnosing mismatched requires clauses (and clang correctly
doing so).

[Bug libstdc++/111050] [11/12/13/14 Regression] ABI break in _Hash_node_value_base since GCC 11

[john at drouhard dot dev via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111050

John Drouhard  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||john at drouhard dot dev

--- Comment #10 from John Drouhard  ---
(In reply to frs.dumont from comment #9)
> To be honest before that report I thought that preserving abi was just a 
> matter of preserving memory layout of types. I had no idea that member 
> methods mattered !

(I was the original reporter of this to TC)

I think the specific issue here is that the member function `_M_valptr()`
returns the address of the storage data member, and that _function_ is used in
a construct call elsewhere to point to the address where a new object should be
placed. It returns the address based on the offset from the beginning of the
object which changed when the base class (which had its own data members) was
removed.

So, if the function isn't inlined, the symbol that's actually loaded by the
dynamic linker during runtime will return a potentially bogus address for that
data member if the definition of that function came from a library compiled
with the other version.

[Bug c++/116534] New: [14 regression] internal compiler error with comparison of pointers calculated with array offset

[john at drouhard dot dev via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116534

Bug ID: 116534
   Summary: [14 regression] internal compiler error with
comparison of pointers calculated with array offset
   Product: gcc
   Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: john at drouhard dot dev
  Target Milestone: ---

The following produces an internal compiler when compiled with -Wall starting
with gcc 14:


$ cat test.cpp
template 
class Test {
void foo(unsigned x, unsigned y) {
bool test = &a[x] == &b[y];
}
unsigned *a;
unsigned *b;
};



$ g++ -Wall ./test.cpp
./test.cpp: In member function 'void Test::foo(unsigned int, unsigned int)':
./test.cpp:4:34: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
4 | bool test = &a[x] == &b[y];
  |  ^
Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source (by using
-freport-bug).
See  for instructions.