https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67919
Xinus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |blocker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50069
zmi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zmi007 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6 from zmi -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67888
Dimitry Andric changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dimitry at andric dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67927
Bug ID: 67927
Summary: array new expression with excessive number of elements
not diagnosed
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33483
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
It might makes sense to provide the functionality under the
-Wunevaluated-expression option for compatibility with clang:
$ cat u.c && clang -Wall -c u.c
int foo (int i)
{
int a [i];
return sizeof (a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67926
Bug ID: 67926
Summary: Using folding expressions in a constexpr context ice's
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67896
--- Comment #1 from Roger Ferrer Ibanez ---
Hi,
after some debugging I think I understand what happens but I'm not sure I can
provide an acceptable fix for that.
When comparing __Poly8x8_t and __Poly16x8_t types (these are the builtin types
for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67834
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67912
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target|i3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67925
Mikhail Maltsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67925
--- Comment #1 from Arkadiusz Drabczyk ---
BTW, the same incorrect wording is repeated in doc/extend.texi in GCC source
tarball.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67925
Bug ID: 67925
Summary: docs lie about being unable to inline function call
before definition
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #11 from Jack Howarth ---
Changing...
--- gcc-5.2.0.orig/boehm-gc/include/private/gcconfig.h 2013-12-21
15:42:39.0 -0500
+++ gcc-5.2.0/boehm-gc/include/private/gcconfig.h 2015-10-11
15:41:26.0 -0400
@@ -1041,10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61362
--- Comment #5 from Ville Voutilainen ---
Oh, some crash with -std=c++1z but not with the current default of -std=c++14.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61362
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ville.voutilainen at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58566
--- Comment #5 from Ville Voutilainen ---
Ahem, make that https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg01076.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58566
--- Comment #4 from Ville Voutilainen ---
Patch available: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg01075.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67921
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58566
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67814
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #10 from Jack Howarth ---
FYI, the earliest upstream boehm-gc which builds and passes make check on 10.11
under the Apple clang 7.0 compiled system unwinder is gc-7.2alpha6.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67924
Bug ID: 67924
Summary: Gcov statistics branches error
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: gcov-profile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67912
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I think this bug affects all platforms, see the thread
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg01013.html.
Right, I've since see
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67366
Fredrik Hederstierna changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fredrik.hederstierna@securi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67779
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The problem is not limited to strings. If I add the following lines
array(1)%value = 2
array(9)%value = 10
write( string_array(1)%value, '(a,i0)' ) "String = ", 2
write
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67864
--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Sun Oct 11 09:03:09 2015
New Revision: 228692
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228692&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
bb-reorder: Improve the simple algorithm for -Os (PR67864)
As the P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67923
Bug ID: 67923
Summary: [6 Regression] ICEs in the gfortran test suite with
-flto after r228680
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
27 matches
Mail list logo
