[Bug libstdc++/64649] regex_traits::lookup_classname() only works with random access iterators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64649 Tim Shen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug libstdc++/64680] basic_regex::operator= does not reset flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64680 Tim Shen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug libstdc++/64584] basic_regex::assign breaks *this if it throws regex_error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64584 Tim Shen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug libstdc++/64585] The basic_regex object should not match any character sequence after a call to basic_regex::imbue

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64585 Tim Shen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug libstdc++/63990] regex_search increments a past-the-end iterator

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63990 Tim Shen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/63776] [C++11] Regex collate matching not working

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63776 --- Comment #9 from Tim Shen --- Ping.

[Bug c++/35167] problem with function address constant non-type template parameter in template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35167 Václav Zeman changed: What|Removed |Added Target|i386-portbld-freebsd6.3 | Host|i386-portbld-freebsd6

[Bug libstdc++/64140] match_results.prefix() returns an incorrect result if regex_iterator holds a zero-length match

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64140 Tim Shen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/64239] regex_iterator::operator= should copy match_results::position

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64239 Tim Shen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/64302] The match_results::cbegin()/cend() return incorrect results

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64302 Tim Shen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/64303] The regex_token_iterator's copy constructor creates an incorrect iterator

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64303 Tim Shen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/65358] wrong parameter passing code with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 --- Comment #2 from Honggyu Kim --- Sorry, I miss typed the initial argument status for "foo" I will modified "MEM[sp-4]: p.killer" to "MEM[sp+4]: p.killer" as follows: r0: arg1 r1: arg2 r2: arg3 r3: p.fine MEM[sp]: p.victim MEM[sp+4]: p.killer

[Bug c/65357] aggressive loop optimization not correct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65357 --- Comment #4 from Weiming Shih --- How can I get a warning for such an undefined behavior?

[Bug target/65358] parameter passing bug with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 Honggyu Kim changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Target|

[Bug target/65358] New: parameter passing bug with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 Bug ID: 65358 Summary: parameter passing bug with tail call optimization on arm Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical Prior

[Bug c/65357] aggressive loop optimization not correct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65357 --- Comment #3 from Weiming Shih --- I see. Thank you.

[Bug c/65357] aggressive loop optimization not correct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65357 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- That is addlist goes one past the end of the array tlist.

[Bug c/65357] aggressive loop optimization not correct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65357 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c/65357] New: aggressive loop optimization not correct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65357 Bug ID: 65357 Summary: aggressive loop optimization not correct Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug lto/65243] [5 Regression] lto1 ICE (segfault) on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65243 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug ipa/64253] IPA inline analysis processes a code transform operation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64253 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[5 Regression] IPA inline |IPA inline analysis |ana

[Bug lto/65316] [5 Regression] LTO: Uninitialized memory / ICE with -g -fno-lto-odr-type-merging: in types_same_for_odr, at ipa-devirt.c:465

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65316 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/64091] [5 Regression] ICE in update_debug_stmt, at tree-ssa-tail-merge.c:1620

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64091 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug target/65341] [5 Regression] glibc build failure on ppc64le: setcontext.S:367: Error: junk at end of line: `1,0'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65341 --- Comment #15 from David Edelsohn --- GCC is not magic black box for invoking every other part of the toolchain with the correct options. If the assembly code uses POWER6 (ISA 2.05) instructions, it should set the ISA level appropriately. The

[Bug middle-end/28628] Not forcing alignment of arrays in structs with -fsection-anchors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28628 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org Assig

[Bug tree-optimization/63743] Thumb1: big regression for float operators by r216728

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63743 --- Comment #9 from Thomas Preud'homme --- Author: thopre01 Date: Mon Mar 9 01:31:42 2015 New Revision: 221276 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221276&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2015-03-09 Thomas Preud'homme gcc/ PR tree-optimizatio

[Bug tree-optimization/65356] New: [meta-bug] Port tail-merge fixes to 4.9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65356 Bug ID: 65356 Summary: [meta-bug] Port tail-merge fixes to 4.9 Product: gcc Version: 4.9.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-opti

[Bug tree-optimization/63960] [meta-bug] Port tail-merge fixes to 4.8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63960 --- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- - Fix PR64091 https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg03397.html

[Bug lto/65316] [5 Regression] LTO: Uninitialized memory / ICE with -g -fno-lto-odr-type-merging: in types_same_for_odr, at ipa-devirt.c:465

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65316 --- Comment #12 from Jan Hubicka --- Author: hubicka Date: Mon Mar 9 00:29:14 2015 New Revision: 221275 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221275&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR lto/65316 * ipa-utils.h (types_odr_comparable): Add strict ar

[Bug target/62247] [5 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/abi/anon3.C -std=c++98 scan-assembler .weak(_definition)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62247 --- Comment #10 from John David Anglin --- Author: danglin Date: Sun Mar 8 23:46:34 2015 New Revision: 221271 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221271&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/62247 * g++.dg/abi/anon3.C: Skip failing scan-ass

[Bug tree-optimization/65355] New: [4.8/4.9 Regression] vectorizer increase alignment of symbols already placed in anchors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65355 Bug ID: 65355 Summary: [4.8/4.9 Regression] vectorizer increase alignment of symbols already placed in anchors Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Sev

[Bug ipa/65334] [5 Regression] r221099 caused: FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 execution, -O2 -ftree-vectorize -msse2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65334 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/65334] [5 Regression] r221099 caused: FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 execution, -O2 -ftree-vectorize -msse2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65334 --- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka --- Author: hubicka Date: Sun Mar 8 23:12:25 2015 New Revision: 221268 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221268&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR ipa/65334 * cgraph.h (symtab_node): Add definition_alignment,

[Bug target/62251] FAIL: gfortran.dg/quad_2.f90 execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62251 John David Anglin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/62251] FAIL: gfortran.dg/quad_2.f90 execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62251 --- Comment #8 from John David Anglin --- Author: danglin Date: Sun Mar 8 22:58:52 2015 New Revision: 221267 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221267&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/62251 * gfortran.dg/quad_2.f90: xfail hppa*-*-hpux

[Bug c++/65354] Converting lambda to pointer results in double destruction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65354 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.

[Bug ipa/64896] [5 Regression] ICE in get_address_mode, at rtlanal.c:5442

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64896 Yvan Roux changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mingw.android at gmail dot com --- Comment #

[Bug middle-end/61207] [4.9 Regression] Win64 gcc 4.9.0: ICE in in expand_expr_addr_expr_1 at -Os compiling some C++ code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61207 Yvan Roux changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug go/65353] [5 Regression] unknown ptrSize for $GOARCH "arm64" on aarch64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65353 Michael Hudson-Doyle changed: What|Removed |Added CC||michael.hudson at canonical dot c

[Bug preprocessor/51776] fixincludes hacks around a C++ deficiency

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51776 Bruce Korb changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/65354] New: Converting lambda to pointer results in double destruction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65354 Bug ID: 65354 Summary: Converting lambda to pointer results in double destruction Product: gcc Version: 4.8.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pri

[Bug ada/62236] : error: aggregate value used where an integer was expected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62236 --- Comment #3 from Victor Porton --- It does not work also with GANT 4.9.2.

[Bug ada/62235] segmentation fault on Ada 2012 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62235 --- Comment #4 from Victor Porton --- Also does not work with GNAT 4.9.2.

[Bug ada/62205] GNAT does not accept class types for Default_Iterator

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62205 Victor Porton changed: What|Removed |Added Version|4.9.1 |4.9.2 --- Comment #2 from Victor Porton

[Bug go/65353] [5 Regression] unknown ptrSize for $GOARCH "arm64" on aarch64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65353 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Matthias Klose from comment #1) > patch by Michael Hudson posted at https://launchpad.net/bugs/1361946 > > --- a/libgo/go/cmd/cgo/main.go > +++ b/libgo/go/cmd/cgo/main.go > @@ -133,6 +133,7 @@ >

[Bug go/65353] [5 Regression] unknown ptrSize for $GOARCH "arm64" on aarch64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65353 --- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose --- patch by Michael Hudson posted at https://launchpad.net/bugs/1361946 --- a/libgo/go/cmd/cgo/main.go +++ b/libgo/go/cmd/cgo/main.go @@ -133,6 +133,7 @@ "386": 4, "amd64": 8, "arm":

[Bug libstdc++/65352] array::begin()/end() etc. forms a null reference and breaks on clang+ubsan

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65352 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Oops, that should be: --- a/libstdc++-v3/include/std/array +++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/std/array @@ -58,9 +58,9 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_CONTAINER { struct _Type { }; - static constexpr _T

[Bug libstdc++/65352] array::begin()/end() etc. forms a null reference and breaks on clang+ubsan

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65352 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug go/65353] New: [5 Regression] unknown ptrSize for $GOARCH "arm64" on aarch64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65353 Bug ID: 65353 Summary: [5 Regression] unknown ptrSize for $GOARCH "arm64" on aarch64-linux-gnu Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/65352] New: array::begin()/end() etc. forms a null reference and breaks on clang+ubsan

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65352 Bug ID: 65352 Summary: array::begin()/end() etc. forms a null reference and breaks on clang+ubsan Product: gcc Version: 4.9.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug target/65351] [5 Regression] ld: absolute addressing (perhaps -mdynamic-no-pic) used in _byte_common_op_match_null_string_p from ../libiberty/pic/libiberty.a(regex.o) not allowed ... on powerpc-a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65351 --- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres --- Patch posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg00017.html.

[Bug target/65351] [5 Regression] ld: absolute addressing (perhaps -mdynamic-no-pic) used in _byte_common_op_match_null_string_p from ../libiberty/pic/libiberty.a(regex.o) not allowed ... on powerpc-a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65351 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Target|powerpc-apple-darwin9 |m32 *-apple-darwin* Status|UNC

[Bug target/65351] New: [5 Regression] ld: absolute addressing (perhaps -mdynamic-no-pic) used in _byte_common_op_match_null_string_p from ../libiberty/pic/libiberty.a(regex.o) not allowed ... on powe

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65351 Bug ID: 65351 Summary: [5 Regression] ld: absolute addressing (perhaps -mdynamic-no-pic) used in _byte_common_op_match_null_string_p from ../libiberty/pic/libiberty

[Bug c/65350] [C++14] operator new[] should not be called if # of initializer elements exceeds # of elements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65350 --- Comment #1 from Mitsuru Kariya --- Created attachment 34985 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34985&action=edit g++ -v

[Bug c/65350] New: [C++14] operator new[] should not be called if # of initializer elements exceeds # of elements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65350 Bug ID: 65350 Summary: [C++14] operator new[] should not be called if # of initializer elements exceeds # of elements Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/65341] [5 Regression] glibc build failure on ppc64le: setcontext.S:367: Error: junk at end of line: `1,0'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65341 --- Comment #14 from Martin Sebor --- I'm confused: I thought gcc defining the _ARCH_PWR6 macro in response to -mcpu=power6 or some such implied that the target was power6. Shouldn't gcc then also invoke the assembler with the -mpower6 option to

[Bug go/65349] New: [5 Regression] go tool crashes, can't compile go code on 32bit linux systems

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65349 Bug ID: 65349 Summary: [5 Regression] go tool crashes, can't compile go code on 32bit linux systems Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug libstdc++/65348] libstdc++ gdb pretty printer: Use relative imports

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65348 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/65246] [5 Regression] libstdc++ pretty printers don't work anymore with Python3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65246 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mustrumr97 at gmail dot com --- Commen

[Bug libstdc++/65348] New: libstdc++ gdb pretty printer: Use relative imports

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65348 Bug ID: 65348 Summary: libstdc++ gdb pretty printer: Use relative imports Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/65341] [5 Regression] glibc build failure on ppc64le: setcontext.S:367: Error: junk at end of line: `1,0'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65341 --- Comment #13 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- It starts with: .machine "altivec" instead. But we are talking about powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu here. And -mpower8 is always right in this case, no?

[Bug target/59828] Broken assembly on ppc* with two -mcpu= options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59828 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Target||powerpc*-*-* Target Milestone|4.8.3

[Bug target/59828] Broken assembly on ppc* with two -mcpu= options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59828 --- Comment #1 from David Edelsohn --- Author: dje Date: Sun Mar 8 13:40:42 2015 New Revision: 221263 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221263&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Add missing PR target/59828 to ChangeLog entry. Modified: trunk/gcc/Ch

[Bug target/65341] [5 Regression] glibc build failure on ppc64le: setcontext.S:367: Error: junk at end of line: `1,0'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65341 --- Comment #12 from David Edelsohn --- The assembly file should start with .machine power4 which is the lowest level ISA supported on PPC64 Linux, GLIBC and mtfsf. If one invokes GCC with multiple -m options, it is complicated to calculate th

[Bug fortran/65347] New: Final subroutine are not called

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65347 Bug ID: 65347 Summary: Final subroutine are not called Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran A

[Bug fortran/60898] [4.8/4.9/5 Regression] model compile error with gfortran 4.7 and gcc 4.9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60898 --- Comment #23 from Mikael Morin --- Author: mikael Date: Sun Mar 8 11:52:51 2015 New Revision: 221262 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221262&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR fortran/60898 fortran/ * resolve.c (resolve_symbol): C

[Bug middle-end/65346] [5 Regression] glibc make check failures since r214941

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65346 --- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- Created attachment 34984 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34984&action=edit unreduced testcase

[Bug middle-end/65346] New: [5 Regression] glibc make check failures since r214941

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65346 Bug ID: 65346 Summary: [5 Regression] glibc make check failures since r214941 Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug preprocessor/65238] [5 Regression] __has_attribute is not handled properly with -traditional-cpp.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65238 Kai Tietz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6 fro

[Bug target/64785] [5 Regression][SH] and|or|xor #imm not used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64785 --- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo --- (In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #6) > > I like your pre-RA pass even if it's a too big hammer for > this specific problem. It should wait the next stage1, though. It seems that this PR's issue is not