[Bug middle-end/79521] [7 Regression] Bootstrap failure on i686-linux starting with r245436

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79521 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/79521] [7 Regression] Bootstrap failure on i686-linux starting with r245436

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79521 --- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Thu Feb 16 06:35:29 2017 New Revision: 245500 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245500&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR middle-end/79521 * ira-costs.c (scan_one_insn): Check ha

[Bug libfortran/79540] [7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_fw_d.f90 -O0 execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79540 --- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle --- Possibly due to r240018 which is fix for pr77393.

[Bug c++/79550] New: ICE in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:13474 with partial specialization of auto... template parameter pack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79550 Bug ID: 79550 Summary: ICE in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:13474 with partial specialization of auto... template parameter pack Product: gcc Version: 7.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/79549] New: ICE in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:13474 with partial specialization of auto... template parameter pack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79549 Bug ID: 79549 Summary: ICE in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:13474 with partial specialization of auto... template parameter pack Product: gcc Version: 7.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/68971] -Woverflow false alarm in code unreachable after __builtin_mul_overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68971 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909 joel at clambassador dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolu

[Bug middle-end/60488] missing uninitialized warning (address taken, VOP)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60488 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Known to fail|

[Bug c++/60068] missing diagnostic on array with negative bounds in template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60068 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid Status|UNCONF

[Bug c++/60063] [5/6/7 Regression] -Wunused-local-typedefs warning despite attribute used in a template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60063 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/68971] -Woverflow false alarm in code unreachable after __builtin_mul_overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68971 --- Comment #12 from Paul Eggert --- Ah, sorry, I am using GCC 6.3.1, whereas __builtin_mul_overflow_p is a GCC 7-ism. Somehow I got it into my head that __builtin_mul_overflow(A,B,C) should be a constant expression if A, B, are constant express

[Bug c++/79548] [5/6/7 Regression] missing -Wunused-variable on a typedef'd variable in a function template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79548 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic See Also|

[Bug c++/79548] New: missing -Wunused-variable on a typedef'd variable in a function template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79548 Bug ID: 79548 Summary: missing -Wunused-variable on a typedef'd variable in a function template Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/59220] bogus warning: packed attribute is unnecessary on an overaligned char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59220 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/44648] missing -Wunused warning on a const variable in if statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44648 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||5.3.0, 6.3.0, 7.0 --- Comment #5 from Mar

[Bug libfortran/79540] [7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_fw_d.f90 -O0 execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79540 --- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- I see failure in r240386 (20160923). r239642 and 239726 were okay. -- John David Anglin dave.ang...@bell.net

[Bug c++/40261] confusing diagnostic on ill-formed template definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40261 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2009-08-25 15:42:13 |2017-2-15 Known to fail|

[Bug libfortran/79540] [7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_fw_d.f90 -O0 execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79540 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/35503] Warning about restricted pointers?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35503 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug tree-optimization/30334] [meta-bug] Request for -Wundefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30334 Bug 30334 depends on bug 29465, which changed state. Bug 29465 Summary: warning for overlapping memcpy() https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29465 What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c/29465] warning for overlapping memcpy()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29465 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/71093] use of pseudo-destructor accepted in constant expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71093 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/79547] duplicate strlen calls with same argument not folded

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79547 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Most likely the alias analysis thinks s escapes such that f touches it. Look at the alias dump and also add -vops to the dump option.

[Bug middle-end/71315] missing strlen optimization on a POINTER_PLUS expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71315 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED See Also|

[Bug libfortran/79540] [7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_fw_d.f90 -O0 execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79540 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/79547] New: duplicate strlen calls with same argument not folded

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79547 Bug ID: 79547 Summary: duplicate strlen calls with same argument not folded Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component

[Bug c++/55004] [meta-bug] constexpr issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004 Bug 55004 depends on bug 71391, which changed state. Bug 71391 Summary: error on aggregate initialization with side-effects in a constexpr function https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71391 What|Removed

[Bug c++/71391] error on aggregate initialization with side-effects in a constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71391 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/66450] [5 Regression][C++11][constexpr] Issues when delegating implicit copy constructor in constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66450 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug c/68971] -Woverflow false alarm in code unreachable after __builtin_mul_overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68971 --- Comment #11 from Martin Sebor --- Right. Because the call to __builtin_mul_overflow in the test case is not a constant expression, the -Woverflow warning detects the overflow in the multiplication subexpression that is constant. The __built

[Bug libstdc++/79522] std::regex_match always returns false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79522 Jim Michaels changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|INVALID

[Bug c++/55004] [meta-bug] constexpr issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004 Bug 55004 depends on bug 71459, which changed state. Bug 71459 Summary: ICE writing to a string-initialized local array in a constexpr function https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71459 What|Removed |A

[Bug c++/71459] ICE writing to a string-initialized local array in a constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71459 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/68971] -Woverflow false alarm in code unreachable after __builtin_mul_overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68971 --- Comment #10 from Paul Eggert --- Unfortunately, the patch for Bug#68120 does not seem to have addressed the problem here. For example, although the following code uses the new feature enabled by that patch: int f (void) { return (__bui

[Bug c++/71537] GCC rejects consetxpr boolean conversions and comparisons on the result of pointer arithmetic.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71537 --- Comment #21 from Martin Sebor --- *** Bug 71457 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug c++/71457] valid pointer plus conversion to bool rejected in constexpr context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71457 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/55004] [meta-bug] constexpr issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004 Bug 55004 depends on bug 71457, which changed state. Bug 71457 Summary: valid pointer plus conversion to bool rejected in constexpr context https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71457 What|Removed |Added

[Bug c/71479] error on __builtin_add_overflow with bool or enum pointer as last argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71479 --- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor --- Wrong dupe id. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 66938 ***

[Bug c/66938] using bool as destination in overflow checkers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66938 --- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor --- *** Bug 71479 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug c/71479] error on __builtin_add_overflow with bool or enum pointer as last argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71479 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|rejects-valid |diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/66943] GCC warns of Unknown Pragma for OpenMP, even though it support it.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66943 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #9

[Bug c/66938] using bool as destination in overflow checkers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66938 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/79546] Strange error: missed loop optimization, the loop counter may overflow [-Werror=unsafe-loop-optimizations]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79546 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- >-Werror=unsafe-loop-optimizations That is not enabled by default even with -Werror -W -Wall. But "missed loop optimization, the loop counter may overflow" is basically saying if i was an signed integer, th

[Bug c++/69564] [5/6/7 Regression] lto and/or C++ make scimark2 LU slower

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69564 --- Comment #30 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Looking at the dumps, the tests for whether or not to use the vectorized loop are considerably more complex with LTO with memory references as well when compared to the non-LTO version. It's almost as-if t

[Bug c/68971] -Woverflow false alarm in code unreachable after __builtin_mul_overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68971 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/79479] -Woverflow false alarm in unreachable expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79479 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/4210] should not warning with dead code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4210 --- Comment #26 from Martin Sebor --- *** Bug 79479 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug target/79545] gcc[5/6]: RS6000, xvcvuxdsp and xvcvsxdsp RTL defines have wrong type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79545 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Target|

[Bug target/79545] gcc[5/6]: RS6000, xvcvuxdsp and xvcvsxdsp RTL defines have wrong type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79545 Carl Love changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/79546] New: Strange error: missed loop optimization, the loop counter may overflow [-Werror=unsafe-loop-optimizations]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79546 Bug ID: 79546 Summary: Strange error: missed loop optimization, the loop counter may overflow [-Werror=unsafe-loop-optimizations] Product: gcc Version: unknown

[Bug target/79545] New: gcc[5/6]: RS6000, xvcvuxdsp and xvcvsxdsp RTL defines have wrong type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79545 Bug ID: 79545 Summary: gcc[5/6]: RS6000, xvcvuxdsp and xvcvsxdsp RTL defines have wrong type Product: gcc Version: 6.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/4210] should not warning with dead code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4210 --- Comment #25 from Paul Eggert --- I'd like this bug to be changed from SUSPENDED to CONFIRMED, given that it's continuing to be a problem (e.g., bug#79479). Also, I'd like to suggest what I hope is a simple fix. In 2006 Joseph wrote "skip_eval

[Bug c++/78572] [6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: in output_constructor_regular_field, at varasm.c:4968

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78572 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug c/79479] -Woverflow false alarm in unreachable expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79479 --- Comment #14 from Paul Eggert --- Thanks, please feel free to mark this as a duplicate of Bug#4210. I plan to follow up there.

[Bug tree-optimization/79345] [6/7 Regression] passing yet-uninitialized member as argument to base class constructor should warn (-Wunitialized)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79345 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c++ |tree-optimization --- Comment #4 from Ja

[Bug c++/69564] [5/6/7 Regression] lto and/or C++ make scimark2 LU slower

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69564 --- Comment #29 from Jeffrey A. Law --- So to bring this BZ back to the core questions (the scope seems to have widened through the year since this originally reported). Namely are the use of LTO or C++ making things slower, particularly for sci

[Bug target/79544] vec_sra (unsigned long long,foo) generating vsrd instead of vsrad

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79544 --- Comment #1 from Bill Schmidt --- Note that this is indeed wrong because the semantics of vec_sra are to duplicate the sign bit even for unsigned inputs.

[Bug target/79544] vec_sra (unsigned long long,foo) generating vsrd instead of vsrad

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79544 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Version|unknown

[Bug target/79544] New: vec_sra (unsigned long long,foo) generating vsrd instead of vsrad

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79544 Bug ID: 79544 Summary: vec_sra (unsigned long long,foo) generating vsrd instead of vsrad Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/78127] [5/6/7 Regression] AArch64 internal compiler error: in lra_eliminate, at lra-eliminations.c:1440

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78127 Vladimir Makarov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comme

[Bug c++/79363] [6 Regression] ICE with NSDMI and array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79363 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[6/7 Regression] ICE with |[6 Regression] ICE with

[Bug c++/79050] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE: tree code 'template_type_parm' is not supported in LTO streams

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79050 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug c++/79464] [7 Regression] ICE in ipa_modify_formal_ parameters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79464 --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Wed Feb 15 20:29:08 2017 New Revision: 245495 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245495&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/79464 - ICE in IPA with omitted constructor parms

[Bug c++/79464] [7 Regression] ICE in ipa_modify_formal_ parameters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79464 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/79363] [6/7 Regression] ICE with NSDMI and array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79363 --- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Wed Feb 15 20:28:32 2017 New Revision: 245494 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245494&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/79363 - ICE with NSDMI and array gcc/cp/ChangeLog: PR c++

[Bug middle-end/32003] Undocumented -fdump-tree options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32003 --- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Wed Feb 15 20:13:11 2017 New Revision: 245493 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245493&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2017-02-15 Martin Sebor PR middle-end/32003 * doc/inv

[Bug c/79479] -Woverflow false alarm in unreachable expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79479 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #13 from Martin Sebor

[Bug other/79543] New: Inappropriate "ld --version" checking

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79543 Bug ID: 79543 Summary: Inappropriate "ld --version" checking Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: other

[Bug ada/79542] New: [7.0 regression] GNAT bug box

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79542 Bug ID: 79542 Summary: [7.0 regression] GNAT bug box Product: gcc Version: 7.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ada Assig

[Bug ada/79542] [7.0 regression] GNAT bug box

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79542 --- Comment #1 from Maxim Reznik --- Created attachment 40755 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40755&action=edit package spec

[Bug rtl-optimization/79541] New: lra reads uninitialized memory (with invalid input)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79541 Bug ID: 79541 Summary: lra reads uninitialized memory (with invalid input) Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug middle-end/79537] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:12009

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79537 --- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek --- This void fn1 () { L: goto *&&L; } doesn't ICE because we handle the goto here 11406 case GOTO_EXPR: 11407 /* If the target is not LABEL, then it is a computed jump 11408 an

[Bug libfortran/79540] [7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_fw_d.f90 -O0 execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79540 --- Comment #1 from John David Anglin --- Removed comment: # ./fmt_fw_d.exe print '(f2.1)',100.00 ! => : no digits Program aborted. Backtrace:

[Bug libfortran/79540] New: [7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_fw_d.f90 -O0 execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79540 Bug ID: 79540 Summary: [7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_fw_d.f90 -O0 execution test Product: gcc Version: 7.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/79114] [6 Regression] std::throw_with_nested("string literal") is rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79114 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Wed Feb 15 19:10:43 2017 New Revision: 245492 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245492&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/79114 use dg-require-atomic-builtins for new test P

[Bug c/79518] __builtin_assume_aligned should mark argument as aligned

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79518 --- Comment #4 from Evan Nemerson --- I agree that GCC's implementation makes more sense, but unfortunately it makes it hard to write portable code. I'm not suggesting the current behavior be abandoned, only that __builtin_assume_aligned be enha

[Bug middle-end/79537] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:12009

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79537 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- I wonder if something like this would be appropriate: --- a/gcc/gimplify.c +++ b/gcc/gimplify.c @@ -12003,6 +12003,10 @@ gimplify_expr (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p, g

[Bug middle-end/79537] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:12009

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79537 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- gimplify_expr has code to handle taking the address of a label: 11610 case LABEL_DECL: 11611 /* We get here when taking the address of a label. We mark 11612 the label as "forc

[Bug libstdc++/79539] __polynomial mode lookahead still has an exponential behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79539 Tim Shen changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |timshen at gcc dot gnu.org --- Commen

[Bug libstdc++/79539] New: __polynomial mode lookahead still has an exponential behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79539 Bug ID: 79539 Summary: __polynomial mode lookahead still has an exponential behavior Product: gcc Version: 7.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/79114] [6 Regression] std::throw_with_nested("string literal") is rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79114 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- Ah yes, because throw_with_nested still depends on atomics in gcc-6-branch, and so we need a dg-require- in the test (but only on the branch). I'll add that.

[Bug middle-end/79537] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:12009

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79537 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- Even r104500 ICEs so an ancient issue.

[Bug middle-end/79537] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:12009

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79537 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/78452] -Wformat-length=2 wrong length in %s directive with an array argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78452 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/79535] [6/7 Regression] ICE in verify_ctor_sanity, at cp/constexpr.c:2636

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79535 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code Status|U

[Bug middle-end/79536] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE in fold_binary_loc, at fold-const.c:9060

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79536 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Component|c

[Bug c/79536] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE in fold_binary_loc, at fold-const.c:9060

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79536 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/79538] New: missing -Wformat-overflow with %s and global array arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79538 Bug ID: 79538 Summary: missing -Wformat-overflow with %s and global array arguments Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pri

[Bug c/79528] DFP double rounding bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79528 --- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Wed, 15 Feb 2017, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > It seems besides conversion from integer to decimal{32,64} also all the > arithmetics e.g. in real_arithmetics are performed in _Decima

[Bug c++/79288] [7 Regression] TLS model wrong for static data members since r241137

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79288 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/79301] With -Werror=pedantic outside C++17 mode, __has_cpp_attribute(fallthrough) is nonzero but [[fallthrough]] fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79301 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/79534] tree-ifcombine aarch64 regression with trunk@245151

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79534 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- r245151

[Bug tree-optimization/79534] tree-ifcombine aarch64 regression with trunk@245151

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79534 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- R245151

[Bug c/79537] New: ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:12009

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79537 Bug ID: 79537 Summary: ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:12009 Product: gcc Version: 7.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug c/79536] New: ICE in fold_binary_loc, at fold-const.c:9060

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79536 Bug ID: 79536 Summary: ICE in fold_binary_loc, at fold-const.c:9060 Product: gcc Version: 7.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug c++/79535] New: ICE in verify_ctor_sanity, at cp/constexpr.c:2636

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79535 Bug ID: 79535 Summary: ICE in verify_ctor_sanity, at cp/constexpr.c:2636 Product: gcc Version: 7.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/79472] [8 Regression] x86-64: Switch table generation fails if default case has different code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79472 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-

[Bug tree-optimization/79347] [7 regression] vect_do_peeling is messing up profile

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79347 --- Comment #9 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Pat Haugen from comment #7) > See pr77536 for similar issue. Not sure if that should be marked as dup of > this one or left open as a more general bug on what should be done to > specif

[Bug tree-optimization/79534] New: tree-ifcombine aarch64 regression with trunk@245151

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79534 Bug ID: 79534 Summary: tree-ifcombine aarch64 regression with trunk@245151 Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug sanitizer/79341] Many Asan tests fail on s390

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79341 --- Comment #74 from Dominik Vogt --- With the pending patches/fixes, the *san testsuites are clean on s390x biarch and s390. :-)

  1   2   3   >