https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80233
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80259
Bug ID: 80259
Summary: [5/6/7 Regression] ICE deleting friend function
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80230
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80258
--- Comment #6 from Tor Myklebust ---
Created attachment 41085
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41085&action=edit
Program referenced in comment 4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80258
--- Comment #5 from Tor Myklebust ---
Created attachment 41084
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41084&action=edit
Program referenced in comment 4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80258
--- Comment #4 from Tor Myklebust ---
I suppose the program attached doesn't demonstrate that.
I ran:
info gcc 'C ext' 'thread'
I read the following text:
When the address-of operator is applied to a thread-local variable, it is
evalu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80247
--- Comment #8 from Sumit ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #7)
> (In reply to Sumit from comment #6)
> > Actually, once I have -std=c++11 included in CPPFLAGS, I am able to get rid
> > of nullptr problem.
> >
> > But still in th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80258
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Why do you think this is a bug? swapcontext is not TLS aware at all and was
not designed to be.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80258
--- Comment #2 from Tor Myklebust ---
For completeness, this issue was raised as Stackoverflow question 43081742 by
user merlin2011.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60818
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||7.0
--- Comment #17 from Arseny Solokha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80258
--- Comment #1 from Tor Myklebust ---
Created attachment 41083
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41083&action=edit
A program that breaks with -O3 -fPIC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80258
Bug ID: 80258
Summary: On x86_64 with -fPIC, accesses to TLS can see the
wrong thread's TLS
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80243
--- Comment #8 from Jim Michaels ---
you are right, that code does work, my example needed debugging.
so if I can return a struct here, why not in my other code, unless gcc is
confused somehow?
alas, I cannot supply source or .ii files because th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80257
Bug ID: 80257
Summary: Cygwin test fail: pointer_check_1.f90 output test
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80256
--- Comment #1 from nightstrike ---
Created attachment 41081
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41081&action=edit
Assembler output
Attaching the assembler output that dejagnu is trying to scan. As mentioned in
the first post,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80256
Bug ID: 80256
Summary: Cygwin bind_c_array_params_2.f90 test fails for
scan-assembler-times
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80230
--- Comment #6 from Jim Michaels ---
here is another incorrect type spouted out:
atoi64.cpp:1101:389: error: request for member 'v' in 'vecstruct[i]', which is
of non-class type 'size_t {aka long long unsigned int}'
vecstruct[i].v
mBaseVal is st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80230
Jim Michaels changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80243
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80243
--- Comment #6 from Jim Michaels ---
atoi64.cpp:1974:1: error: expected 'while' before 'ATOLDRESULT'
ATOLDRESULT atold_(S str,bool oldCOctalEnabled=false,bool
groupCharEnabled=true,C groupChar=',',VS dimensionArr={""},bool
skipNonScientific=true
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80243
Jim Michaels changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79730
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79730
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Mar 29 23:40:36 2017
New Revision: 246578
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246578&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/79730
* c-decl.c (finish_decl): Check VAR_P.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69517
--- Comment #17 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
The bug here is in G++ accepting a VLA initializer with more elements than
there is room for in the VLA, and then trashing the stack at runtime with the
extra ele
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72757
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80123
--- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Mar 29 23:15:51 2017
New Revision: 246577
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246577&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-03-29 Michael Meissner
Back port from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71294
--- Comment #19 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Mar 29 23:15:51 2017
New Revision: 246577
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246577&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-03-29 Michael Meissner
Back port from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80006
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
--- Comment #5 from Martin Seb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80108
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Hi Kelvin,
405 does not have VSX (or even VMX). The instructions enabled by
-mpower9-minmax require VSX. The following behaviours all make
sense, for -mcpu=405 -mpower9-minmax:
1) Ignore the latter o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78670
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Mar 29 21:37:45 2017
New Revision: 246576
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246576&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-03-29 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran/78670
* io
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78002
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou ---
So the proper thing to do might be to restore Pmode as in the first version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg01988.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80251
--- Comment #1 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
I'm sorry for the inconvenience! I didn't see that is_aggregate was just a
recent addition to the standard [1]. I just wanted to see if I can check at
compile time if my data struc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80117
Bug 80117 depends on bug 80146, which changed state.
Bug 80146 Summary: [7 regression] ICE in copy_to_mode_reg, at explow.c:612
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80146
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67205
Bug 67205 depends on bug 80146, which changed state.
Bug 80146 Summary: [7 regression] ICE in copy_to_mode_reg, at explow.c:612
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80146
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80146
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68686
--- Comment #4 from Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd at verizon dot net> ---
Created attachment 41079
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41079&action=edit
Correct sign of negative arg tgammaq.
Basically,
return (x > 0.0Q || (int)(-x) &
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79993
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
I think it would be preferable to make VLA initialization work the way it was
supposed to. A patch to handle it properly exists (bug 69517) and I plan
(hope) to dust it off for GCC 8 and submit it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80233
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Wed Mar 29 20:53:59 2017
New Revision: 246575
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246575&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
combine: Fix PR80233
If combine has added an unconditional trap the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79993
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> Created attachment 41072 [details]
> gcc7-pr79993.patch
>
> So, one option is to revert to the 4.8 and earlier behavior, disallow any
> VLA initialization (like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80108
--- Comment #7 from kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I'll pursue the recommendations offered by Michael and Bill.
Aside: as I read the existing implementation, I believe the more "consistent"
behavior would be to behave as suggested in my original "
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79234
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10138
Bug 10138 depends on bug 33086, which changed state.
Bug 33086 Summary: warn for read-only uninitialized variables passed as
arguments
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33086
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10138
--- Comment #27 from Martin Sebor ---
*** Bug 33086 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33086
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80046
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80177
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80108
--- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt ---
For stage 4, fixing this particular error combination (along with what Mike
suggests) should be enough. There is a vast array of ridiculous option
combinations that should no doubt be rejected, but let's not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80108
--- Comment #5 from Michael Meissner ---
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:14:38PM +, kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80108
>
> kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80108
--- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt ---
(In reply to kelvin from comment #2)
> I'm seeking consensus on the "right thing to do". Should I make sure that
> -mpower9-minmax turns on whatever additional target options are necessary in
> order to make t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80255
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80255
Bug ID: 80255
Summary: Segfault from accessing class(*) component in an array
of any-type-wrappers
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80254
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80254
--- Comment #10 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Wed Mar 29 17:30:58 2017
New Revision: 246573
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246573&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-03-28 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/80254
* gfortra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80108
--- Comment #3 from kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kelvin
Date: Wed Mar 29 17:23:58 2017
New Revision: 246572
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246572&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Use this branch for work on PR 80108.
Added:
branches/i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80254
--- Comment #9 from nightstrike ---
Ok, your new _2a test just for mingw works like a champ:
# of expected passes12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80254
--- Comment #8 from nightstrike ---
(In reply to nightstrike from comment #7)
> (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #6)
> > Created attachment 41077 [details]
> > Patch for failing test case
> >
> > The patch works for me on linux (i.e. the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80108
kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80254
--- Comment #7 from nightstrike ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #6)
> Created attachment 41077 [details]
> Patch for failing test case
>
> The patch works for me on linux (i.e. the test is still
> execuated, and doesn't fail). The _
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80253
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Looks like expand_FALLTHROUGH_r should be using case_label_p.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80253
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80254
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig ---
Created attachment 41077
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41077&action=edit
Patch for failing test case
The patch works for me on linux (i.e. the test is still
execuated, and doesn't fail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80254
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
Created attachment 41076
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41076&action=edit
Proposed test case for mingw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80254
--- Comment #4 from nightstrike ---
(In reply to nightstrike from comment #3)
> The cygwin default line ending style is UNIX like.
This test currently passes on cygwin as-is.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80238
--- Comment #2 from Mike ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> That's the sized-deallocation function which was new in GCC 5.
>
> How did you configure gcc?
>
> What is your existing compiler that you're using to build it?
My inf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66447
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31557
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31557
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80234
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 41075
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41075&action=edit
gcc7-pr80234.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80254
--- Comment #3 from nightstrike ---
The cygwin default line ending style is UNIX like.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69578
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
It is a dup of all the uninit PRs caused by CCP turning PHI into X
(X=10 here).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32826
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80254
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80250
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80250
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69578
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79534
--- Comment #6 from Brian Rzycki ---
James, my apologies if it wasn't clear enough what the compile options were.
The test platform in this case is a Juno A57 running Ubuntu.
I actually never turned off -mcpu=cortex-a57 during my testing. I'll k
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80254
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80254
Bug ID: 80254
Summary: Windows test failure: dec_io_2.f90
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80146
--- Comment #8 from Andreas Schwab ---
Author: schwab
Date: Wed Mar 29 14:18:07 2017
New Revision: 246570
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246570&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ada/80146
* calls.c (prepare_call_address): Convert f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80197
--- Comment #7 from Alexander Monakov ---
No, with fixed-up inlining -ftracer sees reasonable edge probabilities. The
reason tracer makes things worse here, is that it clones the path leading to a
50%/50% conditional branch (and correctly stops a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80165
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ville.voutilainen at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78002
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78002
Jiong Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sch...@linux-m68k.org
--- Comment #4 from J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80234
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to tim from comment #0)
> The code snippet is about as minimal as I can get it and still reproduce the
> error. If I make the destructor non-virtual or get rid of the definition of
> foo::name_str,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80252
Jiong Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80253
Bug ID: 80253
Summary: Optimization silences __attribute__((fallthrough))
warning
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79487
Dominik Vogt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79981
Dominik Vogt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79993
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 41072
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41072&action=edit
gcc7-pr79993.patch
So, one option is to revert to the 4.8 and earlier behavior, disallow any VLA
initialization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80252
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80158
--- Comment #20 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Mar 29 12:56:26 2017
New Revision: 246567
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246567&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-03-29 Bill Schmidt
PR tree-optimization/80158
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80252
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80252
Bug ID: 80252
Summary: ICE in plus_constant, at explow.c:88 with
-fstack-check -mabi=ilp32
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78881
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80239
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80251
Bug ID: 80251
Summary: Is the is_aggregate meta function missing?
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80233
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
But only at runtime, it is fine if it is never executed. So I think it is
still ice-on-valid-code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80233
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80233
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
How about this patch instead?
--- a/gcc/combine.c
+++ b/gcc/combine.c
@@ -1250,7 +1250,8 @@ combine_instructions (rtx_insn *f, unsigned int nregs)
continue;
while (last_combined_i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80247
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 138 matches
Mail list logo
