https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61677
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab ---
That's why it's called -W*maybe*-uninitialized, false positives are expected.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61681
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61682
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61628
--- Comment #17 from Arjen Markus ---
Hi Jerry,
thank you very much for looking into this problem. I stopped reducing
the test case because I thought it had to do with pack creating a
temporary array, but obviously the problem has nothing to do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61382
--- Comment #11 from Brooks Moses ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #10)
> Thanks. Does removing "PUSH_ARGS_REVERSED &&" from the cp_gimplify_expr
> change fix it?
Nope -- I just gave it a try, and it doesn't seem to change things. S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61382
--- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Brooks Moses from comment #9)
> FWIW, the new initlist86.C test that this adds is failing on the
> google/gcc-4_9 branch on powerpc64le and aarch64, though it passes on
> x86_64. I haven't yet
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61683
Bug ID: 61683
Summary: decltype-specifier not accepted as mem-initializer-id
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51253
--- Comment #19 from Jason Merrill ---
That's odd. Can you investigate further?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61382
Brooks Moses changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||brooks at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58393
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
version 4.10.0 20140702 (experimental) [trunk revision 212218] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O2 small.c; a.out
$ gcc-4.9 -O3 small.c; a.out
$
$ gcc-trunk -O3 small.c
$ a.out
Aborted (core dumped)
$
--
int a, b;
static int *c = &b;
int
main ()
{
int *d = &a;
for (
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.10.0 20140702 (experimental) [trunk revision 212218] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O1 small.c; a.out
0
$ gcc-4.8 -Os small.c; a.out
0
$
$ gcc-trunk -Os small.c; a.out
1
$ gcc-4.9 -Os small.c; a.out
1
$
---
int printf (const char
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61680
Bug ID: 61680
Summary: vectorization gives wrong answer for sandybridge
target
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61679
Bug ID: 61679
Summary: build fails with G++ 4.5.1 - prototype for hash_table
does not match any in class
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
/cfgexpand.c:3354
0x6c656a expand_gimple_basic_block
../../gcc/gcc/cfgexpand.c:5192
0x6c8166 execute
../../gcc/gcc/cfgexpand.c:5799
This is with $ /opt/gcc/gcc-trunk/bin/g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 4.10.0 20140702 (experimental)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61677
Bug ID: 61677
Summary: False positive with -Wmaybe-uninitialized (test case
included)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58393
Thomas Petazzoni changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||thomas.petazzoni@free-elect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58693
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Lennox ---
As the original poster, I agree -- GCC Aarch64 should implement the intrinsics
in ACLE 2.0 (Neon and otherwise), and so should Clang.
At the time I filed the bug ACLE 2.0 hadn't been made public yet.
Mark
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58693
jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61676
Bug ID: 61676
Summary: Allocatable string as type component causes compile
time segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61622
--- Comment #6 from Mikael Pettersson ---
This _is_ a dup of PR57431 -- unfortunately PR57431 didn't fill out the "known
to work" or "known to fail" fields, so you might think it only applied to
trunk-to-be-4.9.0, but in fact its test case also I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58155
--- Comment #1 from Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd at verizon dot net> ---
Created attachment 33053
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33053&action=edit
Patch to not warn if skipping.
I still need a testcase or two.
2014-07-02 Edwar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61637
--- Comment #22 from David Edelsohn ---
It is specific functionality that has not yet been implemented for 64 bit AIX.
It works for 32 bit AIX.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61674
baoshan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pangbw at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from ba
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61675
--- Comment #1 from Oliver Stoeneberg ---
Sorry, I forgot the data for the ubuntu 14.04 MinGW compiler:
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=i686-w64-mingw32-gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/i686-w64-mingw32/4.8/lto-wrapper
Target: i686-w64-min
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61675
--- Comment #2 from Oliver Stoeneberg ---
Created attachment 33052
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33052&action=edit
The preprocessed file using GCC 4.8.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61675
Bug ID: 61675
Summary: Wrong code generation for 32-bit x86 with
i686-w64-mingw32
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61673
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 33050
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33050&action=edit
gcc49-pr61673.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60010
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61674
--- Comment #4 from Alex Finch ---
I should add that this problem was not observed in gcc 4.4.7 and earlier.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61674
--- Comment #2 from Alex Finch ---
Created attachment 33048
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33048&action=edit
source file
source file attached
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61674
--- Comment #3 from Alex Finch ---
Created attachment 33049
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33049&action=edit
header file
header file attached
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61628
--- Comment #16 from Jerry DeLisle ---
There is nothing special about the 5227, more to do with array size.
I did go to the official mingw site and used thier "get" utility and installled
the latest of everything and get the exact same result wi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61674
--- Comment #1 from Alex Finch ---
Created attachment 33047
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33047&action=edit
.ii file zipped to get under 1000 byte limit
added .ii file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61674
Bug ID: 61674
Summary: The destructor of a simple class is removed by
optimization
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60079
--- Comment #4 from Tejas Belagod ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #3)
> I can't reproduce this with current trunk either.
> Tejas, do you think this can be closed?
I remember the ICE was quite sensitive to any small change to the test cas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61673
Bug ID: 61673
Summary: [4.9/4.10 Regression] Miscompilation of
_gnutls_hostname_compare on s390
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61144
--- Comment #24 from Rich Felker ---
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 12:22:40PM +, patrick at parcs dot ath.cx wrote:
> It looks like this bug has been recently fixed in the trunk (no testsuite
> addition however). I'm not sure what its status is on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61620
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61620
--- Comment #1 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Wed Jul 2 14:23:45 2014
New Revision: 212233
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212233&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/61620
runtime: Don't free tiny blocks in map deletion.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61062
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||armeb*
Status|N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61672
Bug ID: 61672
Summary: Less redundant instructions deleted by pre_delete
after r208113.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60010
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61345
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60580
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60723
--- Comment #18 from Dodji Seketeli ---
Thanks Christophe,
The attached patch above should hopefully fix the issue it was causing. Is
there a chance that you test that it doesn't break your arm build before I try
to commit it again?
Thanks in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60723
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #33010|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61522
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59843
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61651
--- Comment #1 from Martin Husemann ---
Passing AS_FOR_TARGET (and friends) in the configure environment does not help,
but explicitly adding --with-as=.. does fix the issue.
So this looks like a pure configure bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60079
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29349
chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61637
--- Comment #21 from Krishnamoorthy C ---
(In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #20)
> This probably is related to PR 28586. The detail that the failure occurs
> when exceptions are thrown within constructors was important.
>
> MD_FALLBACK_FR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61671
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61671
--- Comment #2 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
class A {
public:
virtual int GetNilString();
};
class B {
public:
B(A *p1) { p1->GetNilString(); }
};
template class F : B {
public:
F(int) : B(StringTraits::GetDefaultManager()) {}
};
class CD
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61637
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||EH
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61671
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61144
patrick at parcs dot ath.cx changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||patrick at parcs dot ath.cx
--enable-version-specific-runtime-libs --enable-static
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.10.0 20140702 (experimental) [trunk revision 212219] (GCC)
$ /usr/local/gcc_current/bin/g++ -O -flto -c au.ii -o au.o
$ /usr/local/gcc_current/bin/g++ -shared au.o -flto -o au.so
In function 'fn1':
lto1
--enable-static
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.10.0 20140702 (experimental) [trunk revision 212219] (GCC)
[dimhen@dim x]$ /usr/local/gcc_current/bin/g++ -c au.ii -o au.o
au.ii:3:3: error: expected ';' at end of member declaration
0
^
au.ii: In instantiation of 'class A':
a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61669
Bug ID: 61669
Summary: Error recovery ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61668
--- Comment #7 from Andreas Schwab ---
Don't try to emulate decimal arithmetics with binary arithmetics.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61668
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
See also https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/#nonbugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61668
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61668
Peter Ketel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |critical
--- Comment #4 from Peter Ketel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61668
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61668
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61667
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61668
--- Comment #1 from Peter Ketel ---
Created attachment 33044
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33044&action=edit
The next division returns the correct result
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61668
Bug ID: 61668
Summary: Division returns an error in some cases
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59937
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61667
Bug ID: 61667
Summary: setting max_load_factor of unordered_map cause buckets
shrink
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58753
--- Comment #18 from christophe.lyon at st dot com ---
Actually fixed by followup commit 212208. Sorry for the noise.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58753
christophe.lyon at st dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||christophe.lyon at st dot
74 matches
Mail list logo
