https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78461
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78462
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Even this works in C++14:
int a(int b, auto wish1=2, const auto wish2=test)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78462
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
That is:
#include
const std::string test="wish";//global var or const, but const gives me
headaches
int a(int b, int wish1=2, const std::string wish2=test) {
}
Works just fine in C++ and always has.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78462
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78461
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78462
Bug ID: 78462
Summary: feature request: need function default arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78461
Bug ID: 78461
Summary: [7 Regression] ICE: in operator+=, at
gimple-ssa-sprintf.c:214
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63850
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78003
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78438
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
n/m, too tired I guess, please ignore comment 5.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78438
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Why is this wrong? This isn't the same reg 94 (it is reused):
Failed to match this instruction:
(set (mem/c:QI (symbol_ref:DI ("a") [flags 0x2] )
[0 a+0 S1 A8])
(subreg:QI (ashiftrt:SI (reg:SI 93
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78313
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78460
Bug ID: 78460
Summary: [7 Regression] [SH] OOM building glibc string
tst-cmp.c
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78459
Bug ID: 78459
Summary: [7 Regression] [SH] ICE in maybe_record_trace_start
building glibc string tests
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77949
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|aldyh at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78457
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from TC ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78458
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
I still get the same ICE at r242683.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78458
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
It was r242641.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78458
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78458
Bug ID: 78458
Summary: [7 Regression] LRA ICE building libgcc for
powerpc-linux-gnuspe e500v2
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78455
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78453
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm-none-linux-gnueabihf
Target Milest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68538
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68538
--- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Mon Nov 21 23:24:13 2016
New Revision: 242682
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242682&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/68538
* config/cris/cris.md: Don't call copy_to_m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78442
--- Comment #2 from Eric Fiselier ---
I'm sorry your right. That's a garbage reproducer. Here's an actual one:
#include
#include
constexpr bool test_tuple() {
std::tuple t(42);
return std::get<0>(t) == 42;
}
static_assert(test_tuple(), "");
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78442
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=78457
Bug ID: 78457
Summary: attempt to instantiate unused template
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72835
kugan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70586
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77493
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78455
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71408
kugan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77541
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78456
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71408
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72488
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77439
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78455
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40921
kugan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77728
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77673
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77761
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77856
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68803
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Mon Nov 21 22:29:34 2016
New Revision: 242681
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242681&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: rl[wd]imi without shift/rotate (PR68803)
We didn't have pat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77766
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78255
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78428
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78447
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78436
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78438
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68568
--- Comment #6 from Harald Anlauf ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #3)
> Confirmed from 4.8 up to trunk (6.0).
I don't get an ICE with 4.6, but I do with 4.7.4.
So technically a regression.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78456
Bug ID: 78456
Summary: [6/7 Regression] 171.swim loops not interchanged,
vectorized perf loss on aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77589
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77362
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68568
--- Comment #5 from Harald Anlauf ---
The original testcase hits an assert in trans-decl.c:1704
1698 /* Associate names can use the hidden string length variable
1699 of their associated target. */
1700 if (sym->ts.type == BT_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77318
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78453
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77262
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71751
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71616
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77674
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
*** Bug 71616 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77674
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||su at cs dot ucdavis.edu
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77674
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71524
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71353
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71481
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71357
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71351
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Resolution|FI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71118
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68568
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70565
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69782
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68538
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
No, they are distinct bugs in the target files. In this BZ it's the fault of
the cris backend. In 68538, it appears to be a problem in the x86 backend.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66227
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71682
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77680
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77746
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78027
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78122
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78114
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78432
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78431
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78426
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78437
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68568
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68567
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78208
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
I think the compile-hog would also be visible with -Wduplicated-branches, but
that's not in yet (and it's unclear whether it will make its way in to GCC 7).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78425
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78425
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||5.3.0, 6.2.0, 7.0
--- Comment #2 from Mar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78453
wilco at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68538
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47877
--- Comment #3 from Jan Engelhardt ---
Hm yes, I begin to see why this was done. Template instantiations show up as
W-type symbols in `nm`, and template specializations are 'T'-type, and both
need to be visible so that the override works.
But on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78455
Bug ID: 78455
Summary: [7 Regression] ICE in operator[], at vec.h:732
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78428
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68538
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67335
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Nov 21 19:17:36 2016
New Revision: 242678
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242678&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/67335
* omp-simd-clone.c (simd_clone_adjust_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78428
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
Before r218818, struct of 12 bytes is aligned at 4 bytes without -Os
and 8 bytes with -Os. After r218818, it is always aligned at 8 bytes,
which triggers struct store memory leak:
movq%rax, b+8(%rip)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71973
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Nov 21 18:55:11 2016
New Revision: 242677
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242677&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71973
* g++.dg/torture/pr53321.C (size_t): Use __SI
1 - 100 of 215 matches
Mail list logo