https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61819
--- Comment #23 from Hossein Talebi ---
Thank you also for the great work and such a nice compiler. I should have
actually noticed this a lot sooner but I was trying to keep my code
compiling with gcc 4.8.
> It is comments like the above that i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68867
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle ---
In the test case, I need to adjust the line;
if (astring(2:2) /= '9') then
to:
if (astring(3:3) /= '9') then
since the previous patch corrected a missing leading zero on the formatting.
I will do so tomo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68867
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68863
Tim Shen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||timshen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68867
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64919
--- Comment #28 from Alexander ---
this one file should recompile with -O1 optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68869
--- Comment #3 from TC ---
This was http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2005.
I don't think the S example breaks any rule in the pre-LWG2005 version, either.
That version requires that "P shall be convertible to value type", and
st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68869
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Hmm, maybe the change was already in C++14. I'll still look into what was
intended, my memory is that it was just an editorial simplification.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68869
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That's a recent edit to the draft, not yet part of the standard. I don't think
it was meant to change any behaviour, so I don't consider this a bug in
libstdc++ until I get some clarification whether this c
-trunk/configure --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20151211 (experimental) [trunk revision 231553] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O0 -c small.c
$ gcc-5.3 -O1 -c small.c
$
$ gcc-trunk -O1 -c small.c
small.c: In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68869
Bug ID: 68869
Summary: map::insert(P&&) broken in some cases
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68868
Bug ID: 68868
Summary: atomic_init emits an unnecessary fence
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68844
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68844
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Fri Dec 11 23:18:22 2015
New Revision: 231577
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231577&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PATCH][PR tree-optimization/68844] Fix testcase expected output
P
six
gcc version 6.0.0 20151211 (experimental) [trunk revision 231573] (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50703
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53477
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56861
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68867
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68867
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68799
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68799
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
Created attachment 37008
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37008&action=edit
test patch to gather more information
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61819
--- Comment #22 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Hossein Talebi from comment #20)
> I just submitted a new bug. It is a pity that my code cannot be compiled
> with gfortran 4.9 and above for more than a year now..
It is comments lik
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68867
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67116
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, this would happen if you're setting CC and CXX, causing libstdc++ to be
configured using the compiler specified by those variables, not the one that
has just been built. So I think this is user error.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68844
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68867
Bug ID: 68867
Summary: numeric formatting problem in the fortran library
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68865
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt ---
That's very possible. No doubt r231165 just caused it to come out of the
woodwork again. However, I verified that it didn't ICE with r230600 - r231164,
so something about r231165 managed to trigger the issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67116
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The thread model is determined using:
target_thread_file=`$CXX -v 2>&1 | sed -n 's/^Thread model: //p'`
where $CXX is *supposed* to be the newly-built GCC, e.g. for my native builds
the value of CXX is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56564
--- Comment #21 from H.J. Lu ---
This bug isn't fixed in GCC 4.9. -O3 increases alignment from
64 bits to 128 bits on the original testcase:
Hardware watchpoint 6: *(unsigned int *) 0x7fffee9b4468
Old value = 64
New value = 128
ensure_base_ali
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61617
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63617
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The currently supported releases are shown on https://gcc.gnu.org/
At any time there are two supported releases series, currently 4.9.x and 5.x,
which changes annually when the new release happens (GCC 6 i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46496
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||valeryweber at hotmail dot com
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68856
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68865
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61819
--- Comment #21 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I just submitted a new bug. It is a pity that my code cannot be compiled
> with gfortran 4.9 and above for more than a year now..
(Part of) your code should compile with the 5.3.0 release.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68864
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|bug 61819 is not completely |[6 Regression] ICE: in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68864
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67116
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68215
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68215
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Dec 11 21:58:48 2015
New Revision: 231575
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231575&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/68215
* tree-vect-generic.c (tree_vec_ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41628
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Roland, could you please clarify the request, or I'll close this report as
WORKSFORME. What do you mean by "unstable iterator" and what is the problem you
want to solve?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59768
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59768
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Dec 11 21:45:51 2015
New Revision: 231574
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231574&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix std::invoke support for reference_wrappers
PR libstdc++/5976
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68866
Bug ID: 68866
Summary: ICE in set_lattice_value, at tree-ssa-cpp.c:490
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68865
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68865
Bug ID: 68865
Summary: [6 regression] gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-2.c fails
since r231165
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68847
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Whoops pasted to the wrong bug. Please ignore.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68851
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68847
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68543
--- Comment #4 from Michael Collison ---
Okay thanks. After looking into the topic I did not see the direct
connection either.
On 12/11/2015 7:21 AM, ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68543
>
> --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61819
--- Comment #20 from Hossein Talebi ---
I just submitted a new bug. It is a pity that my code cannot be compiled
with gfortran 4.9 and above for more than a year now..
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 9:01 PM, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org <
gcc-bugzi...@gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68864
Bug ID: 68864
Summary: bug 61819 is not completely fixed
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61819
--- Comment #19 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Hossein Talebi from comment #18)
> I am now trying this bug and the Bug 68415 with the new GCC from trunc and
> it is fine. Nevertheless, this other code does not compile.
> (gcc ver
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64919
--- Comment #27 from The Written Word
---
(In reply to John Buddery from comment #24)
> You can use --disable-libgomp in the configure command, I had to do this on
> my HP builds.
I rebuilt without --disable-libgomp and get:
/opt/build/gcc-4.8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61819
--- Comment #18 from Hossein Talebi ---
I am now trying this bug and the Bug 68415 with the new GCC from trunc and it
is fine. Nevertheless, this other code does not compile.
(gcc version 6.0.0 20151129 (experimental))
Module part_base2_clas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68863
Bug ID: 68863
Summary: Regular expressions: Backreferences don't work in
negative lookahead
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68848
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Kahn Gillmor ---
Created attachment 37007
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37007&action=edit
ignore -fdebug-prefix-map when generating DW_AT_producer
Here is an alternate approach (suggested by Bern
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64919
--- Comment #26 from The Written Word
---
(In reply to Alexander from comment #25)
> ../gcc-4.8.5/configure \
> --enable-languages=c,c++
> --prefix=/import/home/nskdvlp/CC_Libs/CC/ia64-hp-hpux_11.31_-64 \
> --with-local-prefix=/usr/CC/ia64-hp-hp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59768
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68853
--- Comment #9 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Thanks Andrew.
Turned out the issue from comment 2 is similar.
Both issues are solved with -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks.
Maybe the chromium devs should add that flag to their default gcc flags...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68862
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka ---
Created attachment 37006
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37006&action=edit
reduced testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68862
Bug ID: 68862
Summary: [6 Regression] g++.dg/torture/pr59163.C FAILs with
-flive-range-shrinkage
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68473
--- Comment #9 from David Malcolm ---
Updated patch kit posted here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg01291.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68861
Bug ID: 68861
Summary: [6 regression] FAIL: libgomp.fortran/vla8.f90 -O3 -g
execution test
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68848
Daniel Kahn Gillmor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #37003|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68848
Daniel Kahn Gillmor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #37004|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68848
Daniel Kahn Gillmor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #37001|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68853
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68854
--- Comment #2 from vasyl.vavrychuk at globallogic dot com ---
--ansi is passed by build system of a big 3rd party project that I compile. It
is possible to change it to remove --ansi but in my opinion there is gcc bug
too. Gcc should either:
* ig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64919
--- Comment #25 from Alexander ---
../gcc-4.8.5/configure \
--enable-languages=c,c++
--prefix=/import/home/nskdvlp/CC_Libs/CC/ia64-hp-hpux_11.31_-64 \
--with-local-prefix=/usr/CC/ia64-hp-hpux_11.31_-64 --with-gnu-as \
--with-as=/usr/local/bin/as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64919
--- Comment #24 from John Buddery ---
You can use --disable-libgomp in the configure command, I had to do this on my
HP builds.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64919
--- Comment #23 from The Written Word
---
(In reply to Alexander from comment #22)
> I tried using libgomp but is the same as your error has occurred.
> After that , I only used libgmp, libmpc and libmpfr ( in the GCC source tree
> ) .
How do y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64919
--- Comment #22 from Alexander ---
I tried using libgomp but is the same as your error has occurred.
After that , I only used libgmp, libmpc and libmpfr ( in the GCC source tree )
.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64919
--- Comment #21 from The Written Word
---
I built gcc-4.7.4 with the change to gcc/config/ia64/hpux.h of "#undef
MAKE_DECL_ONE_ONLY" and just tried building gcc-4.8.5. Is anyone else seeing
this when trying to build libgomp:
/opt/build/gcc-4.8.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68851
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Created attachment 37002
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37002&action=edit
unreduced testcase
Reducing is very slow. Here is the unreduced testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68851
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68851
>
> --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
> So the mentioned revision is responsible for creation of a new consprop clone:
>
> IPA decision stage:
> ...
>
=, arg4=, arg3=,
arg2=, arg1=)
at /usr/local/gcc/gcc-20151211/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c:12
12char *x = __builtin_alloca (arg7);
$1 =
$2 = 1
!= 1
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O3 -g line 16 arg1 == 1
15a1fce36358508909f2013fd6d07e0b9fcad97a is the first bad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68854
--- Comment #1 from Richard Earnshaw ---
ANSI is a dialect of C. Why are you passing that flag to an assembler file?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68841
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68848
Daniel Kahn Gillmor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #36989|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66740
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35710
--- Comment #17 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Feel free to commit your patch, Dominique. You've been faster with providing
> a fix. :) (But maybe incorporate the whitespace fixes as well.)
Done.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33120
--- Comment #27 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Fri Dec 11 16:39:49 2015
New Revision: 231571
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231571&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-12-11 Jan-Benedict Glaw
Dominique d'Hum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26427
--- Comment #25 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Fri Dec 11 16:39:49 2015
New Revision: 231571
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231571&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-12-11 Jan-Benedict Glaw
Dominique d'Hum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35710
--- Comment #16 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Fri Dec 11 16:39:49 2015
New Revision: 231571
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231571&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-12-11 Jan-Benedict Glaw
Dominique d'Hum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68859
--- Comment #1 from Ryan Johnson ---
(I would be happy to do some legwork on this if somebody is willing to send a
few pointers by PM. I know the code in gcc/cp/init.c, particularly functions
`perform_member_init` and `sort_mem_initializers` are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68744
--- Comment #4 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2015-12-11 6:45 AM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> Is this PR fixed by revision r231485?
No. It just fixed the undefined __sync function warnings from HP ld.
The above
revision was appl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68859
Bug ID: 68859
Summary: Add a less strict/smarter version of -Wreorder
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35710
--- Comment #15 from Jan-Benedict Glaw ---
Feel free to commit your patch, Dominique. You've been faster with providing a
fix. :) (But maybe incorporate the whitespace fixes as well.) Actually, there
are some more in the initial commit, but clean
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68841
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68833
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 37000
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37000&action=edit
gcc6-pr68833.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64818
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68810
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66616
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
After looking at all the wrong places I finally found the correct
one. I have proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg01271.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35710
--- Comment #14 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Created attachment 36996 [details]
> Patch to fix indention/trailing whitespace
Similar patch posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg01249.html
and approved at https://gcc.gnu.org/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68775
--- Comment #10 from William Seurer ---
It fails with -fdbg-cnt=vect_slp:31 and succeeds with -fdbg-cnt=vect_slp:30
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68853
--- Comment #7 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
The while loop in:
421 void IncrementalMarking::ActivateIncrementalWriteBarrier() {
422 ActivateIncrementalWriteBarrier(heap_->old_space());
423 ActivateIncrementalWriteBarrier(heap_->map_space(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68858
Bug ID: 68858
Summary: Cannot use fold expression in requirements with two
parameters packs
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26427
--- Comment #24 from Jan-Benedict Glaw ---
Created attachment 36998
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36998&action=edit
Patch to fix indention/trailing whitespace
1 - 100 of 163 matches
Mail list logo
