[Bug c++/71516] New: ICE on invalid C++ code (invalid use of forward declared type) on x86_64-linux-gnu: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

2016-06-12 Thread su at cs dot ucdavis.edu
: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 7.0.0 20160612 (experimental) [trunk revision 237336] (GCC) $ $ g++-6.1 -c small.cpp small.cpp:8:6: error: variable ‘A B::a’ has initializer but incomplete

[Bug tree-optimization/71403] [7 Regression] wrong code (segfault) at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

2016-06-12 Thread law at redhat dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71403 --- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law --- So, to follow-up on my own comment. We start with 3 nested loops. The first backward jump threading pass threads the backedge of the outermost loop to the head of the middle loop. That essentially combine

[Bug c++/71515] New: ICE on valid C++ code on x86_64-linux-gnu: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

2016-06-12 Thread su at cs dot ucdavis.edu
/7.0.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 7.0.0 20160612 (experimental) [trunk revision 237336] (GCC) $ $ g++-4.6 -c small.cpp $ $ g

[Bug tree-optimization/71403] [7 Regression] wrong code (segfault) at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

2016-06-12 Thread law at redhat dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71403 --- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law --- But what doesn't make sense here Jan is jump threading, has had the ability to peel loop iterations forever, so if we're storing that data prior to threading and expecting it to persist accurately across jum

[Bug tree-optimization/71514] New: ICE on C11 code with atomic exchange at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu: in copy_reference_ops_from_ref, at tree-ssa-sccvn.c:879

2016-06-12 Thread su at cs dot ucdavis.edu
: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 7.0.0 20160612 (experimental) [trunk revision 237336] (GCC) $ $ gcc-trunk -O0 -std=c11 small.c $ $ gcc-trunk -O1 -std=c11

[Bug c++/71513] New: ICE on valid C++11 code (with alignas specifier) on x86_64-linux-gnu: Segmentation fault

2016-06-12 Thread su at cs dot ucdavis.edu
--enable-languages=c,c++,lto --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 7.0.0 20160612 (experimental) [trunk revision 237336] (GCC) $ $ g++-5.4 -std=c++11 -c small.cpp $ clang++-3.8 -std=c++11 -c small.cpp $ $ g++-trunk -std=c++11 -c small.cpp small.cpp: In

[Bug libstdc++/71500] regex::icase only works on first character in a range

2016-06-12 Thread mwd at md5i dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71500 --- Comment #9 from Michael Duggan --- "timshen at gcc dot gnu.org" writes: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71500 > > --- Comment #8 from Tim Shen --- > (In reply to Michael Duggan from comment #7) >> Hmm... Okay. For the sake

[Bug c/71512] New: ICE: verify_gimple failed libbacktrace could not find executable to open

2016-06-12 Thread sabrinadfs at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71512 Bug ID: 71512 Summary: ICE: verify_gimple failed libbacktrace could not find executable to open Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug c++/71511] New: ICE on valid C++11 code (with decltype) on x86_64-linux-gnu: in cxx_incomplete_type_diagnostic, at cp/typeck2.c:567

2016-06-12 Thread su at cs dot ucdavis.edu
with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 7.0.0 20160612 (experimental) [trunk revision 237336] (GCC) $ $ g++-trunk -std=c++11 -c small.cpp small.cpp:8:52: internal compiler error: in

[Bug bootstrap/71510] New: [7 Regression] Failed to bootstrap with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=intel

2016-06-12 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71510 Bug ID: 71510 Summary: [7 Regression] Failed to bootstrap with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=intel Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norma

[Bug preprocessor/71183] [7 Regression] gcc -E always gives __DATE__ and __TIME__ as Jan 1 1970 00:00:00

2016-06-12 Thread jrtc27 at jrtc27 dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71183 --- Comment #8 from James Clarke --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7) > Created attachment 38691 [details] > gcc7-pr71183.patch > > Not fundamentally flawed, just one line omitted. > Untested patch that should fix this. Apologies for

[Bug tree-optimization/71509] New: Bitfield causes load hit store with larger store than load

2016-06-12 Thread anton at samba dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71509 Bug ID: 71509 Summary: Bitfield causes load hit store with larger store than load Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug fortran/60751] Extra comma in WRITE statement not diagnosed

2016-06-12 Thread w6ws at earthlink dot net
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60751 --- Comment #25 from Walter Spector --- Thank you Dominique! Walter

[Bug c++/71463] "ignoring attributes on template argument" in -O1 and above

2016-06-12 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71463 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- __warn_unused_result__ is only used when Fortified is used. Which is not the default unless you are using a distro compiler. #if defined _FORTIFY_SOURCE && _FORTIFY_SOURCE > 0 \ && __GNUC_PREREQ (4, 1)

[Bug c++/71508] New: Huge memory usage on compiling with many types

2016-06-12 Thread olarupaulstelian97+bugzilla at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71508 Bug ID: 71508 Summary: Huge memory usage on compiling with many types Product: gcc Version: 6.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c+

[Bug c++/71507] Unending compilation/google's protobuf (protstream_objectsource_test.cc)

2016-06-12 Thread dave at treblig dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71507 --- Comment #4 from Dr. David Alan Gilbert --- Ah thanks.

[Bug c++/71507] Unending compilation/google's protobuf (protstream_objectsource_test.cc)

2016-06-12 Thread trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71507 --- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- More precisely: It was fixed by Jakub's r237151.

[Bug c++/71507] Unending compilation/google's protobuf (protstream_objectsource_test.cc)

2016-06-12 Thread trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71507 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/71507] Unending compilation/google's protobuf (protstream_objectsource_test.cc)

2016-06-12 Thread dave at treblig dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71507 --- Comment #1 from Dr. David Alan Gilbert --- Created attachment 38692 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38692&action=edit compressed, preprocessed c++

[Bug c++/71507] New: Unending compilation/google's protobuf (protstream_objectsource_test.cc)

2016-06-12 Thread dave at treblig dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71507 Bug ID: 71507 Summary: Unending compilation/google's protobuf (protstream_objectsource_test.cc) Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug fortran/60751] Extra comma in WRITE statement not diagnosed

2016-06-12 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60751 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/60751] Extra comma in WRITE statement not diagnosed

2016-06-12 Thread dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60751 --- Comment #23 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: dominiq Date: Sun Jun 12 18:25:25 2016 New Revision: 237340 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237340&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2016-06-12 Dominique d'Humieres PR fortran/6075

[Bug preprocessor/71183] [7 Regression] gcc -E always gives __DATE__ and __TIME__ as Jan 1 1970 00:00:00

2016-06-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71183 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 38691 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38691&action=edit gcc7-pr71183.patch Not fundamentally flawed, just one line omitted. Untested patch that should fix this.

[Bug target/71241] [x86] Missing built-in functions for float128 NaNs

2016-06-12 Thread uros at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71241 --- Comment #2 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Sun Jun 12 17:22:16 2016 New Revision: 237338 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237338&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/71241 * config/i386/i386.i386-builtin-ty

[Bug preprocessor/71183] [7 Regression] gcc -E always gives __DATE__ and __TIME__ as Jan 1 1970 00:00:00

2016-06-12 Thread jrtc27 at jrtc27 dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71183 --- Comment #6 from James Clarke --- This approach is still fundamentally flawed; SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is still not honoured when preprocessing: $ echo 'int main() { puts(__DATE__); }' | SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH=86400 gcc -x c - : In function ‘main’: :1:1

[Bug fortran/69659] [6/7 Regression] ICE on using option -frepack-arrays, in gfc_conv_descriptor_data_get

2016-06-12 Thread vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69659 vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|--

[Bug fortran/71068] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE in check_data_variable(): Bad expression

2016-06-12 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71068 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/60751] Extra comma in WRITE statement not diagnosed

2016-06-12 Thread dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60751 --- Comment #22 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: dominiq Date: Sun Jun 12 14:04:08 2016 New Revision: 237337 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237337&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2016-06-12 Dominique d'Humieres PR fortran/6075

[Bug target/66591] [SH] ICE: in get_reload_reg, at lra-constraints.c:633 with -mlra

2016-06-12 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66591 --- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo --- I have started working on the R0 issue... An R0-pre-allocating pass might potentially break down again when reload/LRA tries to emit mem access insns, which have an R0 constraint. Although the pre-allocating wo

[Bug c/71506] New: ICE with libvpx with -floop-interchange: isl_constraint.c:627: expecting integer value

2016-06-12 Thread andysem at mail dot ru
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71506 Bug ID: 71506 Summary: ICE with libvpx with -floop-interchange: isl_constraint.c:627: expecting integer value Product: gcc Version: 5.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Se