https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80415
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79935
Andris Pavenis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andris.pavenis at iki dot fi
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80415
Bug ID: 80415
Summary: [7 Regression] bogus "invalid initialization of
reference" error
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67540
--- Comment #9 from Vittorio Zecca ---
This test case is wrong.
It dereferences thrice a NULL pointer str4.
Unfortunately -fcheck=pointer does not detect this one.
Just added to the CC list the test case author.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68372
--- Comment #2 from wilhelm.me...@hs-kl.de ---
This ICE exists still in gcc-7.0.1-20170412.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
--- Comment #30 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I didn't close it because I wanted to see updated benchmark numbers. Either
I'll grab the benchmark, or if somebody else posts the latest numbers, we can
close it or keep open depending on that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51513
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc- |https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80099
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
The problem is rs6000_expand_vector_extract did not check for SFmode being
allowed in the Altivec (upper) registers, but the insn implementing the
variable extract had it as a condition.
In looking at the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77728
--- Comment #15 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #13)
> IMHO TYPE_DECL shouldn't even _have_ DECL_ALIGN ...
Agreed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79062
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
All of warn_format, warn_format_overflow, and warn_format_trunc are, in fact,
zero in gimple-ssa-sprintf.c when -flto is set.
At least one problem is the dependency of -Wformat-{overflow,truncation} in
c-comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80098
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #41180|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80099
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57955
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74563
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78116
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80403
--- Comment #8 from Dmitry Babokin ---
Three errors in one test case. GCC r246882.
> cat f.cpp
extern const long long int var_7;
extern unsigned long int var_59;
int foo() {
int a = (0 - 40U <= (0 == 8)) << !var_59 << (0 < var_7) == 0;
int b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80343
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79508
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79566
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79640
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79519
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #29 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P4
--- Comment #30 from Jeffrey A. Law
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
--- Comment #19 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to janus from comment #16)
> This seems to be sufficient to fix the runtime error on the reduced test
> case in comment #13:
>
>
> Index: gcc/fortran/class.c
> ===
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80408
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80413
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80403
--- Comment #7 from Dmitry Babokin ---
80404 and 80405 seemed similar, but different to me, so I decided to report
them separately. Anyway, after the latest fixes I still see 2 compile crashes.
I'm reducing them and will report here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80407
Дилян Палаузов changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79929
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P4 |P3
Component|fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
--- Comment #18 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #17)
> (In reply to janus from comment #16)
> > This seems to be sufficient to fix the runtime error on the reduced test
> > case in comment #13:
>
> And it also do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80414
Bug ID: 80414
Summary: [UBSAN] segfault with -fsanitize=undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: saniti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77563
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80150
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78282
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77563
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 12 19:23:30 2017
New Revision: 246893
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246893&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/77563 - missing ambiguous conversion error.
* call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80150
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 12 19:23:37 2017
New Revision: 246894
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246894&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/80150 - ICE with overloaded variadic deduction.
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79519
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 12 19:23:23 2017
New Revision: 246892
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246892&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/79519 - ICE with deleted template friend.
* decl.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79640
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 12 19:23:15 2017
New Revision: 246891
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246891&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/79640 - infinite recursion with generic lambda.
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79607
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 12 19:22:56 2017
New Revision: 246888
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246888&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/79607 - ICE with T{} initializer
* decl.c (type_de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80043
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 12 19:23:09 2017
New Revision: 246890
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246890&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/80043 - ICE with -fpermissive
* typeck.c (convert_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78282
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 12 19:23:02 2017
New Revision: 246889
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246889&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/78282 - auto template and pack expansion
* pt.c (f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79566
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 12 19:22:50 2017
New Revision: 246887
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246887&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/79566 - elaborated-type-specifier in range for
* p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79580
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 12 19:22:44 2017
New Revision: 246886
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246886&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/79580 - ICE with compound literal
* parser.c (cp_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79508
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 12 19:22:38 2017
New Revision: 246885
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246885&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/79508 - lookup error with member template
* parser
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79050
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 12 19:22:32 2017
New Revision: 246884
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246884&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/79050 - ICE with undeduced auto and LTO
* decl.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79461
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 12 19:22:25 2017
New Revision: 246883
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246883&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/79461 - ICE with lambda in constexpr constructor
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67505
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The patch in PR 80361 comment 16 fixes the error.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
--- Comment #17 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #16)
> This seems to be sufficient to fix the runtime error on the reduced test
> case in comment #13:
And it also does the trick for PR 67505 ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
--- Comment #16 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This seems to be sufficient to fix the runtime error on the reduced test case
in comment #13:
Index: gcc/fortran/class.c
===
--- gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80403
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
--- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 12 18:09:47 2017
New Revision: 246882
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246882&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/79390
* optabs.c (emit_conditional_m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80405
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 12 18:08:29 2017
New Revision: 246881
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246881&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/80403
PR sanitizer/80404
PR sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80403
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 12 18:08:29 2017
New Revision: 246881
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246881&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/80403
PR sanitizer/80404
PR sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80404
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 12 18:08:29 2017
New Revision: 246881
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246881&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/80403
PR sanitizer/80404
PR sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80413
Bug ID: 80413
Summary: sanitizer detects undefined behaviour in gcov-io.c
using -ftest-coverage
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79062
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
The following allows the format string to be recognized even with LTO. The
sprintf pass runs and seems to work correctly, but warnings from it for some
reason do not appear on output. It's as if they were di
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79929
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Likely caused by revision r243419. Note that I don't get the warning with the C
code in comment 4.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78994
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=79929
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
Thanks for the C test case. In it, the warning is a false positive caused by
GCC's failure to eliminate the excessive memset at -O1. The call is emitted by
the ccp1 pass at all optimization levels. At -O2,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59910
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79929
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig ---
Here's equivlalent C code:
$ cat bug.c
#include
#include
char * foo(char *c, int len)
{
char *p, *n;
n = malloc(len + 5);
p = c + 5;
memmove (c, n, p-c);
if (p < c)
memset (n + 5, 32, c-p);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80131
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=80198
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
Target Mileston
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80399
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=59910
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> A patch to fix the problem exposed by code in comment #1
> has been committed to trunk. Same patch does not fix
> 5-branch. Closing as fixed.
It does for me provided the patch is applied at the pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80163
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80409
--- Comment #2 from Pascal Cuoq ---
> it should work even with standard c
Quoting from 7.6.1.1:2
… the behavior is undefined, except for the following cases:
* …
* one type is pointer to void and the other is a pointer to a character type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80163
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 12 13:57:45 2017
New Revision: 246876
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246876&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/80163
* expr.c : For EXPAND_INITIALIZER determine SIG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79590
--- Comment #2 from Vittorio Romeo ---
This is still present. Here are some more examples:
int main()
{
[](auto x) noexcept(noexcept(x)) { } (0);
}
:3:40: internal compiler error: in nothrow_spec_p, at cp/except.c:1159
[](auto x) noe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80376
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80359
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80315
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80359
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Apr 12 13:47:26 2017
New Revision: 246875
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246875&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-12 Richard Biener
Jeff Law
PR tree-optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80315
--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Apr 12 13:45:27 2017
New Revision: 246874
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246874&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-12 Bill Schmidt
Backport from mainline
2017-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80376
--- Comment #8 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Apr 12 13:45:27 2017
New Revision: 246874
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246874&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-12 Bill Schmidt
Backport from mainline
2017-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80357
--- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The pressure becomes quite negative here... that isn't supposed to
happen as far as I can see. Allowing all negative pressures in the
asserts makes everything compile fine, but there really shouldn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80315
--- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Apr 12 13:37:30 2017
New Revision: 246873
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246873&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-12 Bill Schmidt
Backport from mainline
2017-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80376
--- Comment #7 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Apr 12 13:37:30 2017
New Revision: 246873
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246873&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-12 Bill Schmidt
Backport from mainline
2017-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80321
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note this breaks profiledbootstrap with Ada on various targets.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80359
--- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
That's exactly what I tested yesterday. It bootstraps and regression tests
successfully. So no need to wait on the testrun.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69279
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80359
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|law at redh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77698
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77728
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
For the base class alignment vs. alignment of base class members, I think
testcases could be e.g. like:
struct B { char a __attribute__((aligned (8))); };
struct A : public B {};
A
foo (int x, A y)
{
retu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80357
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
--- Comment #27 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 12 Apr 2017, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
>
> --- Comment #26 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Created attachment 41189
> --> https://g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
--- Comment #26 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 41189
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41189&action=edit
gcc7-pr79390-ecm.patch
Untested fix for the -O3 -ffast-math -march=haswell case.
The difference between -fno-f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77343
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80409
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I don't see why this needs to be documented as it should work even with
standard c. That is for an example %p in printf takes a void* but nobody casts
it to void* when passing to printf.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71672
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80412
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80412
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
Priority|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80357
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80412
Bug ID: 80412
Summary: [c++17] crash with class template deduction guide and
inheritance
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
--- Comment #25 from Richard Biener ---
So the original report is fixed (-O3 -march-native). But adding -ffast-math
still ends up regressing.
At this point it's probably appropriate to re-target to GCC 8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80411
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77728
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 12 Apr 2017, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77728
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77728
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80082
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
