https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70449
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70448
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6 Regression] ICE on |ICE on invalid code on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70450
Bug ID: 70450
Summary: [6 Regression] Wrong code with -O0 and -O1.
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70448
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r166167 I think (with -std=c++0x).
,c++,lto
--prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20160329 (experimental) [trunk revision 234516] (GCC)
$
$ g++-trunk -c small.cpp
$ g++-5.3 -c -Wall -std=c++14 small.cpp
: In instantiation of ‘constexpr int f() [with int I = 0]’:
small.cpp:4:22
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70448
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
...which only changes the default, so that's not it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70448
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20160329 (experimental) [trunk revision 234516] (GCC)
$
$ g++-5.3 small.cpp
small.cpp: In function ‘void f()’:
small.cpp:4:16: error: ‘f()’ cannot appear in a constant-expression
enum E { a = f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70447
programmerjake at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||programmerjake at gmail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70447
Bug ID: 70447
Summary: delete operator not called when destructor throws.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63890
--- Comment #30 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Wed Mar 30 03:57:30 2016
New Revision: 234545
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234545&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/63890
* config/i386/i386.h (ACCUMULATE_OUTGOING_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70446
--- Comment #4 from ivanbili at gmail dot com ---
The bug does NOT happen on my other computer with the following version of gcc:
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/5.3.0/lto-wrapper
Ta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70403
--- Comment #8 from Hadula, Tomasz ---
When I compile with devirtualization disabled (i.e. with -fno-devirtualize) the
null pointer check is where it was supposed to be.
Any clue why?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36159
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70441
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70052
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70446
--- Comment #3 from ivanbili at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 38125
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38125&action=edit
Correct code that compiles with clang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70420
--- Comment #3 from Seth Junot ---
The preprocessed *.i file is attached. It was located at
[builddir]/x86_64-apple-darwin15.3.0/libquadmath/rem_pio2q.i
There was second file at x86_64-apple-darwin15.3.0/i386/libquadmath/rem_pio2q.i
From the o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70420
--- Comment #2 from Seth Junot ---
Created attachment 38124
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38124&action=edit
Preprocessed file during libquadmath compilation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59124
--- Comment #39 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Domani Hannes from comment #37)
> With the new patch there is still a warning with this example:
> === 8< ===
> int f(void);
>
> int test(void)
> {
> int baz[4];
> i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70446
--- Comment #2 from ivanbili at gmail dot com ---
If looks like commenting
#include // std::sort
out makes the compiler not crash.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59124
--- Comment #38 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Wed Mar 30 00:55:00 2016
New Revision: 234544
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234544&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/59124 (bogus -Warray-bounds warning)
gcc/ChangeLog
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70446
--- Comment #1 from ivanbili at gmail dot com ---
Also happens if I fix the errors. I.e. replace
vector[i].ratio = (float)values[i]/weights[i];
vector[i].weight = weights[i];
with:
helper[i].ratio = (float)values[i]/weights[i];
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70446
Bug ID: 70446
Summary: g++: internal compiler error: Killed (program
cc1plus), probably related to vectors
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70052
--- Comment #8 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Wed Mar 30 00:36:36 2016
New Revision: 234543
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234543&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[RS6000] PR70052, ICE compiling _Decimal128 test case
gcc/
PR targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359
--- Comment #14 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #13)
> The change to the assignment of p_22 is made by forwprop1.
>
> It does create a situation where p_2 is live outside the loop and hides the
> CSE opp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70445
Bug ID: 70445
Summary: Incorrect C++ member alignment
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70444
Bug ID: 70444
Summary: Optimizer removes expression template
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70436
--- Comment #10 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
I'd consider it a bug that the existing -Wparentheses warning for
ambiguous "else" doesn't warn in this case. As with the existing warning,
that warning is only appropriate when there is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70428
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
I don't think -fdebug-prefix-map is meant to cover this case; you're meant
to use it with paths in the form in which they appear in debug info, which
means passing such an option with the p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70283
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70442
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70443
Bug ID: 70443
Summary: gccjit fails to build with in-tree dependencies
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: jit
efix=/home/absozero/trunk/root-gcc
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20160329 (experimental) [trunk revision 234517] (GCC)
$ gcc-trunk -m32 -O2 abc.c
abc.c: In function ‘fn1’:
abc.c:11:1: error: unrecognizable insn:
}
^
(insn 17 16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70289
--- Comment #4 from cesar at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 38122
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38122&action=edit
c test case
This test cases is failing for a couple of reasons. First, the reduction
variable doesn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70441
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
C++ does not support dynamic allocation of over-aligned types (usually SIMD
vectors, but also __float128 on x86 for instance). C++17 will partially support
it (operator new), but still not fix the std::vector c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70441
Bug ID: 70441
Summary: vector<__float128> crashes on two push_back calls with
-mavx
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70283
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Tue Mar 29 19:37:55 2016
New Revision: 234532
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234532&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/70283
* ipa-devirt.c (methods_equal_p): New functi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70405
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70429
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed for 6+ so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70422
--- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Created attachment 38121
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38121&action=edit
patch on top of the original patch
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9)
> Presumably the C++ FE s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59124
--- Comment #37 from Domani Hannes ---
With the new patch there is still a warning with this example:
=== 8< ===
int f(void);
int test(void)
{
int baz[4];
int q = 0;
int d, i, j, sum;
for (i = 0; i < 2; i++)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70429
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 29 18:49:00 2016
New Revision: 234531
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234531&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/70429
* combine.c (simplify_shift_cons
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70353
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6 regression] ICE on |[5 regression] ICE on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70353
--- Comment #17 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Mar 29 18:40:02 2016
New Revision: 234530
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234530&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70353
gcc/
* tree-inline.c (remap_decls): Don't a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68475
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70436
--- Comment #9 from Bernd Schmidt ---
I suspect what broke it was git revision 0375a27521885.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69487
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.9.3, 5.3.0, 6.0
--- Comment #4 from Mar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16994
Bug 16994 depends on bug 70440, which changed state.
Bug 70440 Summary: SEGV initializing a VLA with a smaller string
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70440
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69487
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70440
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70440
Bug ID: 70440
Summary: SEGV initializing a VLA with a smaller string
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70436
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
Sum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70439
Bug ID: 70439
Summary: Incorrect DRAP check in ix86_expand_epilogue
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70405
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 29 17:33:52 2016
New Revision: 234529
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234529&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/70405
* ssa-iterators.h (num_imm_uses
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70438
--- Comment #2 from Mike Herrick ---
I think that's fine -- a note in the documentation to that effect (describing
what an "opaque" vector type is and what operations are allowed on it) should
suffice.
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70438
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
The result of a comparison is an "opaque" vector type, which can be converted
much more freely than a regular vector type, in case the guessed return type
doesn't exactly match the user's choice (it quickly dec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70235
--- Comment #24 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Dominiq, I have tested as much as I can with several variations of values of
the float and all looks good. I am ready to approve your patch when you are.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70397
--- Comment #5 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Waiting one week for any new regressions introduced by this patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70397
--- Comment #4 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vehre
Date: Tue Mar 29 16:54:24 2016
New Revision: 234528
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234528&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
2016-03-29 Andre Vehreschild
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68695
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69890
--- Comment #4 from Ilya Enkovich ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #3)
> --- ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/chkp-strlen-1.c 2016-01-20
> 19:08:43.0 +0100
> +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/chkp-strlen-1.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68695
--- Comment #25 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Tue Mar 29 16:20:39 2016
New Revision: 234527
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234527&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-29 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/68695
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359
--- Comment #13 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
The change to the assignment of p_22 is made by forwprop1.
It does create a situation where p_2 is live outside the loop and hides the CSE
opportunity, which may be the cause of the more significant differ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70438
Bug ID: 70438
Summary: result type of vector operations
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69890
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> The problem is that some string functions are defined as inline functions
> using *_chk function variants. object_sizes pass transforms *_chk call
> into original function call in a regular case but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69391
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70355
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Tue Mar 29 15:19:00 2016
New Revision: 234524
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234524&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/70355
* lower-subreg.c (simplify_subreg_concatn): Rejec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70437
Bug ID: 70437
Summary: [6 Regression] Instantiation loop with pair and
is_constructible
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70355
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Summary|[5/6 Regressi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70416
--- Comment #18 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #17)
>
> I'm now testing this patch on sh-elf...
The GCC testsuite results look OK. However, CSiBE shows
sum: 3342539 -> 3351695+9156 / +0.273924 %
which is not so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70436
--- Comment #7 from Patrick Palka ---
BTW according to a working implementation of this -Wdangling-else warning (not
the above broken one I prematurely posted), the only suspicious use of dangling
else (i.e. a use in which the indentation is off*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55914
Jaak Ristioja changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jaak at ristioja dot ee
--- Comment #9 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68724
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69890
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64177
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |UNCONFIRMED
Assignee|tschwin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64177
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Tue Mar 29 14:39:33 2016
New Revision: 234523
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234523&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR testsuite/64177] Audit Cilk Plus tests for CILK_NWORKERS=1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64177
--- Comment #2 from iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Actually, only 3 tests require 2+ workers (they fail with export
CILK_NWORKERS=1):
FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawning_arg.c
FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/steal_check.c
FAIL: g++.dg/cilk-pl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64177
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70434
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70436
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka ---
Turns out the prototype is pretty broken :P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67591
--- Comment #2 from Jiong Wang ---
*** Bug 69256 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69256
Jiong Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67728
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70434
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69614
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70434
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.4
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69875
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69875
--- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Tue Mar 29 13:32:37 2016
New Revision: 234522
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234522&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM][4.9 Backport] PR target/69875 Fix atomic_loaddi expa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70436
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Thanks. I could take care of the C FE side ;). But let's strike this in the
next stage1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70434
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69875
--- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Tue Mar 29 13:28:34 2016
New Revision: 234521
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234521&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM][5 Backport] PR target/69875 Fix atomic_loaddi expans
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70436
--- Comment #4 from Patrick Palka ---
Here's a prototype that seems to do the job. Whenever we see an unbraced if,
increment the counter. Whenever we see a compound statement, reset the
counter. Whenever we see an else, warn if counter > 1 and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70436
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70436
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70422
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Presumably the C++ FE should have set DECL_IGNORED_P on the fname decl.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70436
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note clang warns here:
pr70405-3.c:11:3: warning: add explicit braces to avoid dangling else
[-Wdangling-else]
else
^
and it warns regardless of the indentation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70436
Bug ID: 70436
Summary: -Wmisleading-indentation missing warning
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70397
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #3 from ve
1 - 100 of 140 matches
Mail list logo
