https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68203
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||memory-hog
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67753
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21643
Gilbie Rivas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rivasgilbie121 at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59832
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||i.am.inuyasha at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68207
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68190
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Howard's suggestion is approved if someone tests it, I only have my phone and
no machine I can build or test on.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68207
Bug ID: 68207
Summary: internal compiler error: in reshape_init_class, at
cp/decl.c:5469 caused by nested struct initialization
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68206
Bug ID: 68206
Summary: ICE: unimplemented: unexpected AST of kind loop_expr
in potential_constant_expression_1
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68205
Bug ID: 68205
Summary: ICE compiling gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-2.c with
-fno-common on arm-none-eabi
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68204
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68202
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68170
--- Comment #1 from Mohammad Alaggan ---
In gcc-6-20151101, the attached example compiles correctly. However, the same
problem manifests in this example:
// { dg-do compile }
// { dg-options "-std=c++1z" }
template
concept bool C() { return __
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24775
--- Comment #7 from tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: tbsaunde
Date: Tue Nov 3 22:43:22 2015
New Revision: 229727
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229727&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
remove usage of ROUND_TYPE_SIZE from encoding.c
gcc got r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68204
Bug ID: 68204
Summary: g++ fails to expand a template parameter pack in with
variable templates in a function
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68203
Bug ID: 68203
Summary: Аbout infinite compilation time on struct with nested
array of pairs with -std=c++11
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68029
--- Comment #9 from Jiří Engelthaler ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #8)
>
> Good catch! In principle your patch seems correct. I think you are only
> missing a testcase. This patch is small enough to not require a copyright
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54224
--- Comment #29 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I have tried the following patch
--- ../_clean/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c 2015-10-29 18:20:14.0 +0100
+++ gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c2015-11-03 19:39:39.0 +0100
@@ -285,7 +285,11 @@ g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68202
Bug ID: 68202
Summary: Missed diagnostic: rvalue reference allowed in
exception-specifier
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67882
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67882
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Nov 3 18:53:19 2015
New Revision: 229717
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229717&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++-common/67882
* c-family/c-common.h (fold_offsetof_1): Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68162
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67982
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67982
--- Comment #8 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to dominiq from comment #7)
> Author: dominiq
> Date: Tue Nov 3 18:03:38 2015
> New Revision: 229716
thanks... just doing this myself :-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67982
--- Comment #7 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Tue Nov 3 18:03:38 2015
New Revision: 229716
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229716&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-11-03 Dominique d'Humieres
PR fortran/67982
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68149
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ktkachov at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68149
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68201
Bug ID: 68201
Summary: alloc_size attribute and memory pools
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68200
--- Comment #1 from Joshua Oreman ---
Correction: the original bug was PR 52604, not PR 52064.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68200
Bug ID: 68200
Summary: g++ 5.2 optimizes out pointer assignment in libstdc++
mt_allocator freelist destructor, causing crash at
global-dtor time
Product: gcc
Vers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66680
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #5 from Domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68179
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|accepts-invalid |wrong-code
Summary|Missing er
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68198
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm, aarch64|arm, aarch64,x86_64, ppc64
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68199
Bug ID: 68199
Summary: avr-gcc rise a warning when defining a custom
interruption
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68190
--- Comment #9 from Howard Hinnant ---
Untested fix suggested:
#if __cplusplus > 201103L
template
auto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68198
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68198
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68179
--- Comment #4 from Troy ---
You are correct that RM 3.5. 56.3/3 says the same for Default_Value, that it
shall only be applied to full_type_declaration. So obviously
full_type_declaration here must include derived types, or the whole feature
wou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68179
--- Comment #3 from Troy ---
RM 3.6. 22.2/3 says that Default_Component_Value should only be specified for a
full_type_declaration. I.e. not for derived types. Is this not correct?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63861
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63861
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The ICE is gone and between revisions r229303 and r229482 compiling the test
gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/goacc/coarray.f95 with '-fcoarray=single -fopenacc'
gives
/opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68190
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Nik Bougalis from comment #6)
> I don't follow why an auto return is used, instead of simply
> iterator/const_iterator which is the required return value per the
> documentation I've read.
Bec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54224
--- Comment #28 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #27)
> > At some moment, the Fortran FE sets DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION() on a tree,
> > probably using loc->lb->line. Finding out where this happens probably
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62007
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #9 from Domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54224
--- Comment #27 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> At some moment, the Fortran FE sets DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION() on a tree,
> probably using loc->lb->line. Finding out where this happens probably
> requires a bit of debugging.
/* Set the backend sourc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59577
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51024
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||06needhamt at gmail dot com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68029
--- Comment #8 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Jiří Engelthaler from comment #7)
> Created attachment 36638 [details]
> diag_color.patch
>
> fdiagnostics_color_idx can by on first place so comparing as > 1 will miss
> it.
> There shoul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54224
--- Comment #26 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #25)
> > Nonetheless, as a work-around, you could use:
> >
> >unsigned int offset = loc->nextc - loc->lb->line;
> >location = linemap_posi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52531
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #9 from Domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68198
--- Comment #1 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
I'm on the road the rest of this will, but will definitely take a look at this
ASAP.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68198
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
Summary|Exce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68198
Bug ID: 68198
Summary: Excessive code size, compile time and memory usage
bloat due to FSM threading in 453.povray
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40876
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38724
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67742
--- Comment #6 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Just this patch left: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg00202.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49429
--- Comment #20 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #19)
> Would you guys with access to the affected platforms please let me know in
> case revision 229696, just installed in the trunk, regresses this?
Yes, I w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68192
--- Comment #3 from David Edelsohn ---
This is a regression, but only indirectly a GCC regression.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54224
--- Comment #25 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Nonetheless, as a work-around, you could use:
>
>unsigned int offset = loc->nextc - loc->lb->line;
>location = linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset (line_table,
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68194
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 36641
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36641&action=edit
cse2 dump containing the 'bad' RTL
attaching the cse2 dump.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68194
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 36640
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36640&action=edit
cprop dump before the suspected bad transformation
Confirmed the failure.
However I think the cite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68189
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Component|tree-optimizatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68189
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Symptom in the asm is that %ecx is used uninitialized.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68178
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65751
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I don't understand comment 2
> And I think an English error message that points out the place
> of the error is more useful than a native-language one which doesn't,
> so I would favor back porting.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68189
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68184
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68188
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68194
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68189
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68193
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68194
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66465
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.9.2,5.1.0,6.0.0] |Procedure pointer component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67657
--- Comment #20 from Oleg Endo ---
OK, thanks for checking.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67657
--- Comment #19 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #18)
> Sorry, I don't think anybody will remember to keep polling the build
> machines to monitor the build of this package.
You don't have to. The package bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67657
--- Comment #18 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #17)
> I have scheduled a rebuild of libjpeg-turbo now. The package is now waiting
> for the next free buildd. Please have a look at the package log here [1]
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68196
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65251
--- Comment #6 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #5)
> Hmm, the build now failed due to "out of memory" apparently [1]:
>
> [ 7%] Building CXX object
> libs/network/src/CMakeFiles/cppnetlib-uri.dir/uri/uri.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68197
Bug ID: 68197
Summary: negative index to ios_base::iword lead to
unpredictable result
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68192
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Is this a regression?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68190
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68196
Bug ID: 68196
Summary: [6.0.0] ICE on function result with procedure pointer
component
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68071
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from TC ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68179
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68029
--- Comment #7 from Jiří Engelthaler ---
Created attachment 36638
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36638&action=edit
diag_color.patch
fdiagnostics_color_idx can by on first place so comparing as > 1 will miss it.
There should
84 matches
Mail list logo
