https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72833
--- Comment #13 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #11 from Bernd Edlinger ---
> Created attachment 39082
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39082&action=edit
> updated patch
>
> patch both variants of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67815
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Severity|n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71902
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6 Regression] Unneeded |[5/6/7 Regression] Unneeded
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69742
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69742
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Aug 9 06:28:57 2016
New Revision: 239271
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239271&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-08-09 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
PR fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72845
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Confirmed, it might be easy to do this now on with match.pd.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72802
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66872
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72802
--- Comment #9 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Aug 9 05:44:39 2016
New Revision: 239270
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239270&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[RS6000] PR72802 part 2, reload ICE
PR target/72802
* confi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72802
--- Comment #8 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Aug 9 05:43:29 2016
New Revision: 239269
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239269&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[RS6000] PR72802 part 1, fix constraints for lxssp/stxssp
PR target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67131
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Aug 9 04:33:42 2016
New Revision: 239267
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239267&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix empty class parameters with constexpr.
PR c++/67131
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71724
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71815
--- Comment #8 from Bill Schmidt ---
Created attachment 39085
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39085&action=edit
Patch under test
Attaching a patch that passes regstrap. I want to do a little benchmarking
before submitting i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58306
--- Comment #25 from PeteVine ---
Great news, thanks! What about backporting to 4.9? There's not going to be
another official release but manual patching could still be useful.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72836
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64955
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64955
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Mon Aug 8 22:50:47 2016
New Revision: 239260
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239260&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
c-format.c: suggest the correct format string to use (PR c/64955)
This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60526
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60526
--- Comment #17 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Mon Aug 8 22:00:37 2016
New Revision: 239259
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239259&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-08-08 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
PR for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72828
--- Comment #4 from Giuseppe Ottaviano ---
Thanks, I just wanted to clarify that this is not a regression, as far as I can
tell.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72828
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Giuseppe Ottaviano from comment #2)
> Martin, I noticed you marked this as "[5/6/7 Regression]", but to be clear
> the bug is present since at least 4.9 (the oldest version I tested).
> It's only
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58306
--- Comment #24 from Martin Liška ---
> Wonderful! What are the chances of this patch being merged with GCC 4.9.x?
Any, because 4.9 was closed last week and there's not going to be any release.
If you are interested, I can back-port patches to b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72842
--- Comment #7 from Daniel Krügler ---
(In reply to Daniel Krügler from comment #5)
> (In reply to Barry Revzin from comment #4)
> > I'll just email. Instantiating foo creates a function template with a
> > non-type template parameter of type voi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Mon Aug 8 20:46:19 2016
New Revision: 239257
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239257&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix selftest::test_lexer_string_locations_ebcdic for systems without ic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72843
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 39084
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39084&action=edit
Proposed patch
HJ, can you please test this patch?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72848
Bug ID: 72848
Summary: profiledbootstrap: internal compiler error: in
streamer_write_gcov_count_stream, at
data-streamer-out.c:366
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
--- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl ---
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 07:13:56PM +, dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
>
> --- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
> (In reply to David Malcolm from co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72846
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gerald at pfeifer dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72847
Bug ID: 72847
Summary: vector copy-assignment basic exception safety
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72846
Bug ID: 72846
Summary: [7 regression]
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
Assignee: dmalco
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52952
--- Comment #45 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Mon Aug 8 20:10:19 2016
New Revision: 239253
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239253&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Use class substring_loc in c-format.c (PR c/52952)
gcc/c-family/Chang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72814
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72814
--- Comment #2 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Mon Aug 8 19:53:44 2016
New Revision: 239252
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239252&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/72814
runtime: treat zero-sized result value as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72842
--- Comment #6 from Daniel Krügler ---
(In reply to Daniel Krügler from comment #5)
> (In reply to Barry Revzin from comment #4)
> > I'll just email. Instantiating foo creates a function template with a
> > non-type template parameter of type voi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58706
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Aug 8 19:50:29 2016
New Revision: 239251
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239251&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/58706
* parser.c: Include tree-iterator.h.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72716
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Aug 8 19:48:48 2016
New Revision: 239250
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239250&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/72716
* openmp.c (gfc_match_omp_declare_simd):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72781
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Aug 8 19:46:36 2016
New Revision: 239249
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239249&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/72781
* omp-low.c (lower_lastprivate_clauses
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68762
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Aug 8 19:45:53 2016
New Revision: 239248
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239248&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/68762
* omp-simd-clone.c: Include varasm.h.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72842
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Krügler ---
(In reply to Barry Revzin from comment #4)
> I'll just email. Instantiating foo creates a function template with a
> non-type template parameter of type void. That's not an allowed type of a
> non-type templ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72845
Bug ID: 72845
Summary: gcc crashes (ICE) when compiling program with complex
noexcept declaration
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72842
--- Comment #4 from Barry Revzin ---
I'll just email. Instantiating foo creates a function template with a
non-type template parameter of type void. That's not an allowed type of a
non-type template parameter, so I think it should be ill-formed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72837
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53431
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||TrevorJamesHickey at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72842
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler ---
Since this is not a newsgroup, let me ask differently: Can you please elaborate
what you consider as a concrete compiler defect, violating the existing
standard? I fail to see the point.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72833
--- Comment #12 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #10)
> True: the Solaris fix missed this, probably because the issue never came
> up. The Mac OS X 10.8+ has the annotation, so it's probably
> bes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72821
Dmitry G. Dyachenko changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72833
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #39079|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3)
> Created attachment 39081 [details]
> Ensure that HAVE_ICONV is usable as a conditional
Steve: this fixes the problem for me on a Linux box with iconv hacked out.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 39081
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39081&action=edit
Ensure that HAVE_ICONV is usable as a conditional
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72842
--- Comment #2 from Barry Revzin ---
This non-dependent version:
template void bar() { }
fails to compile, even if we never call bar(), even if we wanted to call it
with an empty pack.
foo in the original example is this same thing with an ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71042
--- Comment #9 from Adhemerval Zanella
---
Right, I wasn't aware of this RPM symbol handling. I see that guard pointer
can be obtained on aarch64 by:
uintptr_t get_guard_ptr (void)
{
jmp_buf jb;
uintptr_t expected, mangled;
setjmp (jb)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72833
--- Comment #10 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #9 from Bernd Edlinger ---
>> In progress. Two comments:
>>
>> * Why the fixincl.tpl change? Is this necessary with upstream autogen
>> or only due to some Ubuntu-loc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
--- Comment #1 from Steve Kargl ---
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 06:30:17PM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
>
> Bug ID: 72844
>Summary: Revision 293175 breaks gcc on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72833
--- Comment #9 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #8)
> > --- Comment #6 from Bernd Edlinger ---
> [...]
> > Completely untested patch.
> >
> > Based on the gcc-4.9 solaris patch:
> > just s/solaris/d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72843
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from H
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72844
Bug ID: 72844
Summary: Revision 293175 breaks gcc on FreeBSD
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72843
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 39080
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39080&action=edit
A testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72843
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72833
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #6 from Bernd Edlinger ---
[...]
> Completely untested patch.
>
> Based on the gcc-4.9 solaris patch:
> just s/solaris/darwin/
> and s/__NORETURN/__dead2/
>
>
> Could you t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72842
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler ---
I don't see anything wrong with that code, since the parameter pack is empty,
so there is never any attempt to declare void as non-type template parameter
type. The standard has this restriction only for a n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72843
Bug ID: 72843
Summary: [7 Regression] internal compiler error: in
lra_set_insn_recog_data, at lra.c:964
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68703
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Not really sure if this is about dependent type or not, because the following
fails too:
template
struct D {
V v;
int f1 () { return this->v[N-1]; }
int f2 () { return v[N-1]; }
};
int
main ()
{
typ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68703
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72842
Bug ID: 72842
Summary: non-type template-parameter of type void
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72833
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #39078|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71042
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72814
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71042
--- Comment #7 from Adhemerval Zanella
---
I do have a better solution to fix it, since for aarch64 glibc port, the stack
guard is a global variable (different than x86_64 where it in tcbhead
accessible through thread pointer).
We can just disa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72828
--- Comment #2 from Giuseppe Ottaviano ---
Martin, I noticed you marked this as "[5/6/7 Regression]", but to be clear the
bug is present since at least 4.9 (the oldest version I tested).
It's only the attached reduction that is sensitive to compi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58306
--- Comment #23 from Artem S. Tashkinov ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #22)
> Sure, as Nathan suggested, we'll select the proper default value according
> to -pthread argument.
Wonderful! What are the chances of this patch being merg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58306
--- Comment #22 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Artem S. Tashkinov from comment #21)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #20)
> > > Do I understand the patch correctly that it requires
> > > "-fprofile-update=atomic" option in order to el
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72833
--- Comment #6 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Created attachment 39078
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39078&action=edit
untested patch
Completely untested patch.
Based on the gcc-4.9 solaris patch:
just s/solaris/darwin/
and s/__
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72833
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
>> Could you please attach a faulty setjmp.h and a good setjmp.h
>
> I'm attaching the Mac OS X 10.7 one (i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58306
--- Comment #21 from Artem S. Tashkinov ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #20)
> > Do I understand the patch correctly that it requires
> > "-fprofile-update=atomic" option in order to eliminate this bug?
>
> Exactly, I hope I'll be abl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71083
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #39068|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72841
Bug ID: 72841
Summary: PASS->NA: 20_util/tuple/cons/66338.cc execution test
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72840
Bug ID: 72840
Summary: PASS->NA: 20_util/ratio/cons/cons_overflow_neg.cc
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71976
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46266
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72838
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72838
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Mon Aug 8 15:32:16 2016
New Revision: 239242
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239242&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR testsuite/72838 - FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-cast.C
gcc/testsuite/Ch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72839
Bug ID: 72839
Summary: MOVE_RATIO is too small for Lakemont
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72838
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72833
--- Comment #4 from Rainer Orth ---
Created attachment 39076
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39076&action=edit
Mac OS X 10.7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72833
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #2 from Bernd Edlinger ---
[...]
> I see we had previously a solaris_longjmp_noreturn
> fixinclude rule, maybe that would be a starting point.
Certainly: up to Solaris 9,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72802
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|amodra at gmail dot com|
--- Comment #7 from Alan Modra ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72838
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
Note, the same error happens in:
PASS->NA: g++.dg/warn/overflow-warn-3.C -std=gnu++11 const (test for errors,
line 67)
PASS->FAIL: g++.dg/warn/overflow-warn-3.C -std=gnu++11 (test for excess
errors)
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72838
Bug ID: 72838
Summary: FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-cast.C
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58706
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58306
--- Comment #20 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Artem S. Tashkinov from comment #19)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #18)
> > Ok, problem is that various value profilers are not updated atomically,
> > fixed in:
> > https://gcc.gnu.or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58306
--- Comment #19 from Artem S. Tashkinov ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #18)
> Ok, problem is that various value profilers are not updated atomically,
> fixed in:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-08/msg00600.html
Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72817
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67097
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Gilles Gouaillardet from comment #6)
> as a side note, would you be interested in me providing a patch so
> gcov-tool merge
> can merge n directories (currently, we are limited to n=2) ?
>
> i wo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72837
Bug ID: 72837
Summary: -Wundef is not being ignored with pragma
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
1 - 100 of 146 matches
Mail list logo
