https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71495
--- Comment #7 from Yury V. Zaytsev ---
Excellent work! I will try the next version of g++-6 on our project again as
soon as it hits the toolchain test repository for Ubuntu. Many thanks for
taking care of it!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70722
--- Comment #11 from Nadav Har'El ---
By the way, I think I made a mistake in my comment and
-D_GLIBCXX_INCLUDE_NEXT_C_HEADERS is not actually needed. The thing is that
header files like have:
#define _GLIBCXX_INCLUDE_NEXT_C_HEADERS
#include_ne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71953
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE using sanitizers with |ICE using address
|PCH
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71953
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Looks like this might be a regression because of the other bug you filed PR
60745 which was fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70722
--- Comment #10 from Nadav Har'El ---
There is nothing "holy" about glibc, and nothing "broken" about wanting to
replace it (or, as Firefox did, only a part of it). Sure, the replacement needs
to be 100% compatible with glibc, and if it isn't, th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70106
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:29:32 2016
New Revision: 238578
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238578&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/70822 (bogus error with parenthesized SCOPE_REF)
gcc/cp/Change
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70822
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:29:32 2016
New Revision: 238578
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238578&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/70822 (bogus error with parenthesized SCOPE_REF)
gcc/cp/Change
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70822
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71718
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70824
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70781
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71121
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7 Regression] Spurious |[6 Regression] Spurious
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71896
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71117
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71092
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71511
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code
Status|A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71513
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71495
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71814
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71604
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71711
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70722
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Nadav Har'El from comment #8)
> This issue was closed as supposedly it only affects Firefox's build. It
> definitely does not - it affects any project which attempts to replace the C
> header fil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67579
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:18:06 2016
New Revision: 238577
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238577&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Improving concepts performance and diagnostics.
PR c++/67
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67565
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:18:06 2016
New Revision: 238577
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238577&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Improving concepts performance and diagnostics.
PR c++/67
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71843
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:18:06 2016
New Revision: 238577
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238577&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Improving concepts performance and diagnostics.
PR c++/67
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71513
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:15:51 2016
New Revision: 238570
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238570&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71513 - alignas on member enum in template
* pt.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71511
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:15:58 2016
New Revision: 238571
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238571&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71511 - ICE on decltype scope in declaration.
* ty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70781
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:16:30 2016
New Revision: 238576
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238576&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70781 - ICE on ill-formed lambda.
* parser.c (cp_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71896
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:16:24 2016
New Revision: 238575
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238575&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71896 - constexpr pointer-to-member comparison.
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71117
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:16:11 2016
New Revision: 238573
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238573&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71117 - core 2189 and generic lambda
* call.c (add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71495
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:16:04 2016
New Revision: 238572
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238572&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71495 - spurious note during SFINAE.
* call.c (con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71092
--- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:16:17 2016
New Revision: 238574
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238574&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71092 - ICE with array and constexpr.
* constexpr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71946
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
I suspect parser->in_function_body is not being set in lambda functions.
Most likely because statement expressions are also rejected for the same
reason:
auto test = []{ int t = ({ int t1; t1 = 0; t1; }); }
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71718
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:14:57 2016
New Revision: 238566
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238566&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71718 - infinite recursion and alias template
* pt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71604
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:15:43 2016
New Revision: 238569
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238569&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71604 - type definition in range-based for
PR c++/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71711
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:15:23 2016
New Revision: 238568
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238568&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71711 - mangle C++1z fold-expressions.
gcc/cp/
* o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54430
--- Comment #12 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:15:43 2016
New Revision: 238569
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238569&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71604 - type definition in range-based for
PR c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71814
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:15:04 2016
New Revision: 238567
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238567&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71814 - mangling sizeof... with alias templates (sP)
gcc/c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70824
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:14:51 2016
New Revision: 238565
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238565&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70824 - initializer_list in template
* init.c (con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70722
Nadav Har'El changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nyh at math dot technion.ac.il
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71946
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |---
Summary|FD_ZERO macro par
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71946
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Yep
# if __WORDSIZE == 64
# define __FD_ZERO_STOS "stosq"
# else
# define __FD_ZERO_STOS "stosl"
# endif
# define __FD_ZERO(fdsp) \
do {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70781
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:05:58 2016
New Revision: 238563
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238563&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70781 - ICE on ill-formed lambda.
* parser.c (cp_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70942
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:05:44 2016
New Revision: 238561
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238561&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70942 - generic lambda with auto&& parameter.
* g+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65168
--- Comment #16 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:05:39 2016
New Revision: 238560
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238560&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/65168 - -Waddress in unevaluated context.
gcc/c-family/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71896
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:05:51 2016
New Revision: 238562
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238562&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71896 - constexpr pointer-to-member comparison.
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67579
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:05:24 2016
New Revision: 238558
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238558&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Improving concepts performance and diagnostics.
PR c++/67
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71121
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:05:33 2016
New Revision: 238559
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238559&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71121 - -Waddress, constexpr, and PMFs.
* cp-gimpl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71843
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:05:24 2016
New Revision: 238558
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238558&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Improving concepts performance and diagnostics.
PR c++/67
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67565
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:05:24 2016
New Revision: 238558
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238558&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Improving concepts performance and diagnostics.
PR c++/67
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71941
thakkinen at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71946
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Looks like x86 has a special select.h in glibc :).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71946
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Works for me on aarch64-linux-gnu with:
GNU C++14 (GCC) version 7.0.0 20160717 (experimental)
(aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Maybe provide a preprocessed source which fails.
For me it expands to:
# 6 "t.c" 3 4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71463
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Milian Wolff from comment #8)
> As an interested bystander, may I ask: If the attribute is part of the type,
> shouldn't it then be transferred via decltype() and then also used in the
> template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71954
Bug ID: 71954
Summary: template partial specialization for constexpr error
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71463
--- Comment #8 from Milian Wolff ---
As an interested bystander, may I ask: If the attribute is part of the type,
shouldn't it then be transferred via decltype() and then also used in the
template to trigger the warning there? To me, the example
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71953
Bug ID: 71953
Summary: ICE using sanitizers with PCH
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71896
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70781
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71117
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vittorio.romeo at outlook dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70942
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70845
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70972
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tuwwcn at gmail dot com
--- Comment #9 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 70942, which changed state.
Bug 70942 Summary: [6/7 Regression] [c++14] Incorrect deduction of generic
lambda `auto&&` parameter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70942
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71121
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71952
Bug ID: 71952
Summary: [Coarray, F2008] Rejects valid coarray access with
array partref
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71876
--- Comment #11 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #10)
> No opinion on the "x" prefix. I think that was already in place when that
> code was updated to support qsetjmp and savectx in the early 90s. I've
> never s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37475
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Oops, I meant 382 is NAD
http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-closed.html#382
I'm not sure what (if anything) we need to do here though, someone needs to
re-analyze.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145
--- Comment #23 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Boris Kolpackov from comment #21)
> Speaking of possible fixes, I had this crazy idea, not sure if it is
> technically possible though: what if libstdc++ throws some custom exception
> that de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71876
--- Comment #10 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
No opinion on the "x" prefix. I think that was already in place when that code
was updated to support qsetjmp and savectx in the early 90s. I've never seen
the "x" versions in practice.
ANd yes, you're r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #7 from Timo Teräs ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> (In reply to Timo Teräs from comment #5)
> > Not easily. It's musl, and using iterate phdr. Same build script works on
> > x86, x86_64 and armhf. It's only aarch64 m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71876
--- Comment #9 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #8)
> Light searching doesn't find anything useful for setjmp_syscall.
>
> savectx however still shows up in a variety of solaris searches. In fact,
> you can find
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70339
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Jul 20 18:42:11 2016
New Revision: 238538
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238538&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C++ FE: handle misspelled identifiers and typenames
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71858
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Jul 20 18:42:11 2016
New Revision: 238538
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238538&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C++ FE: handle misspelled identifiers and typenames
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Timo Teräs from comment #5)
> Not easily. It's musl, and using iterate phdr. Same build script works on
> x86, x86_64 and armhf. It's only aarch64 misbehaving like this with omit
> frame pointer.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62096
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71876
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #8 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #5 from Timo Teräs ---
Not easily. It's musl, and using iterate phdr. Same build script works on x86,
x86_64 and armhf. It's only aarch64 misbehaving like this with omit frame
pointer. Any other suggestions what to try/how to debug fu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you try this on a glibc instead musl?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #3 from Timo Teräs ---
$ cat a.cpp <
int foo()
{
throw "Foo!";
}
int main ()
{
try {
foo();
}catch (const char* msg) {
std::cerr << msg << std::endl;
}
return 0;
}
EOF
$ gdb a
GNU gdb (GDB) 7.11.1
Copyrig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Do you have an example? Because I ran with omit frame pointer all the time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Unwind code in lib gcc does uses the dwarf2 unwinding tables. So omit frame
pointer should not change anything.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
Bug ID: 71951
Summary: libgcc_s built with -fomit-frame-pointer on aarch64 is
broken
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145
Shital Shah changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sytelus at gmail dot com
--- Comment #22 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71950
Bug ID: 71950
Summary: std::ios_base::failure.what() returns irrelevant error
message
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69004
--- Comment #16 from PeteVine ---
I've just read 4.9.4 is to be released soon - any chance of landing a fix for
this issue?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71949
Bug ID: 71949
Summary: ATOMIC_FLAG_INIT definition in stdatomic.h
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71947
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71839
Anton Shterenlikht changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69866
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|5.3.0 |7.0
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Preu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71513
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71688
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71937
--- Comment #11 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
The excessive memory usage only happens when compiling without optimizations.
Using -O1 it stays below 2 GB, but takes minutes to finish.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
Rich Felker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bugdal at aerifal dot cx
--- Comment #4 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56688
--- Comment #7 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
I checked that GCC 7 compiler still does not vectorize loops in thin6d function
which is the only hottest function in 200.sixtrack benchmark.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65698
--- Comment #3 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
I see that this bug was no considered for a while.
Here is my additional comment.
First of all, this test was extracted from bzip2 benchmark, mainGTU function.
The problem is that (1) tree optimizer collect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50060
--- Comment #11 from Paul A. Bristow ---
Thanks for all this, which looks helpful, but I am not able to use unreleased
compiler versions, so meanwhile I am working to use a workaround (to allow me
to see what other pitfalls lie ahead for the novi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50060
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71909
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71909
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jul 20 14:32:46 2016
New Revision: 238527
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238527&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71909
* parser.c (cp_parser_save_member_function_bo
1 - 100 of 149 matches
Mail list logo
