https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80887
--- Comment #9 from Marc Glisse ---
C testcase that ICEs (when the patch is installed):
int pos;
void f(){
++pos;
unsigned u=(unsigned)pos-1;
int a = pos;
unsigned t1=a-1;
unsigned t2=(unsigned)a-2;
}
where again, during FRE1, gimple_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80944
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #0)
> struct S { char *s; unsigned n; };
>
> void f (struct S *s)
> {
> __builtin_memset (s->s, 0, s->n);
> __builtin_free (s->s);
> __builtin_memset (s, 0, sizeof
/usr/local/bin/autoconf
AUTOHEADER=/usr/local/bin/autoheader AUTORECONF=/usr/local/bin/autoreconf
AUTOM4TE=/usr/local/bin/autom4te AUTOSCAN=/usr/local/bin/autoscan
AUTOUPDATE=/usr/local/bin/autoupdate IFNAMES=/usr/local/bin/ifnames
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.0 20170601 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80948
Paul Hua changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paul.hua.gm at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51628
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62315
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80948
Bug ID: 80948
Summary: [8 regression] test case gcc.dg/torture/pr68017.c
fails with ICE starting with r248771
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80947
Bug ID: 80947
Summary: Different visibility for the lambda and its capture
list members with -fvisibility=hidden
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037
--- Comment #20 from Martin Sebor ---
It would be useful to have the ability to trigger a warning when an object of a
type with an explicitly specified alignment (even if the alignment matches its
own native one) is defined in a way that would ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80934
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80933
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80945
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig ---
Really strange - the tree dumps look OK at first glance.
D.3543 = (sizetype) NON_LVALUE_EXPR <.ca>;
and later on
parm.3.dtype = ((integer(kind=8)) SAVE_EXPR << 6) + 49;
parm.3.dim[0].lbo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80943
--- Comment #1 from Barry Revzin ---
Sorry, it's a bug, but not for the reasons I cited. Both T t(s) and T t{s}
should consider constructors - which should find T(S const& ) and T(T&& ) by
way of the conversion function. But the former is an exac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80921
--- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou ---
> That's not strictly true; while they may not be essential, import libraries
> are, by no means, obsolete. The search order, for the Windows linker[1], is:
>
> libfoo.dll.a
> foo.dll.a
> libfoo.a
> foo.dl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80946
Bug ID: 80946
Summary: [8 regression] test cases gfortran.dg/vect/vect-2.f90
and gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90 fail starting with
r247544
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80945
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80945
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig ---
1. write also fails (no surprise there)
2. ca is OK, ca(1:3) is not.
$ cat u.f90
program main
implicit none
integer:: i
integer, parameter:: N = 10
character(len=:), dimension(:),allocatable:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69502
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51628
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
See A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80618
--- Comment #9 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Segher's revision fixed the ICEs but the 4 other test case failures were due to
this (r247544) revision.
gcc.dg/vect/vect-50.c
gcc.dg/vect/vect-44.c
gfortran.dg/vect/vect-2.f90
gfortran.dg/vect/ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69953
--- Comment #31 from DB ---
Uh, sorry. I mean when compiling my own application against glibmm and gtkmm,
using LTO on my app (only).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69953
DB changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||db0451 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #30 from DB --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80945
Bug ID: 80945
Summary: Invalid code with allocatable character array in
READ/WRITE statement
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80921
--- Comment #13 from Keith Marshall ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #7)
> > With that in place, a clean configure and build does now produce:
> >
> > gcc/ada/rts/libgnarl-6.dll
> > gcc/ada/rts/libgnat-6.dll
> >
> > but there are no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037
--- Comment #19 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #18)
> This seems like a useful enhancement. H.J., what is the status of the
> patch? Do you have plans to submit it?
I was not sure if there were enough interests. I nee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80944
Bug ID: 80944
Summary: redundant memcpy/memset with non-constant size not
eliminated
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80943
Bug ID: 80943
Summary: Conversion function selected in list-initialization in
C++1z mode
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80803
--- Comment #24 from Bill Schmidt ---
Sadly, no. This continues to be a problem on r248791.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80933
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
There is so much special handling of all these built-ins in so many places that
makes keeping them all in sync with one another tricky business. I think it
would help if more of the salient properties of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80803
--- Comment #23 from Bill Schmidt ---
Testing now...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80942
Bug ID: 80942
Summary: -Woverlength-strings should no longer be implied by
-Wpedantic
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80925
--- Comment #8 from Bill Schmidt ---
The cost modeling doesn't explain failures on P6 and P7, I guess. For P8 we
consider unaligned loads to be the same cost as aligned loads (this is a small
lie because of boundary-crossing costs, but these are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80941
Bug ID: 80941
Summary: Broken bookmarks on GCC internals PDF available online
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66313
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80933
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
No we don't - we expand it as it were memset. But yes, we should canonicalize
it so as well (the call to bzero is shorter with -Os, but I guess that doesn't
really matter).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80930
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||memory-hog
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57891
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||akrzemi1 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70500
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80940
Bug ID: 80940
Summary: Private inheritance from std::ostream - compilation
error for custom operator <<
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80803
--- Comment #22 from Martin Jambor ---
So, PR 80898 is now fixed. Can you please check if this is perhaps a
duplicate? It may as well be.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80898
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80898
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Thu Jun 1 12:14:29 2017
New Revision: 248790
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248790&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 80898] Propagate grp_write from disqualified SRA candidates
2017-06
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65043
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80691
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
N.B. Bug 78244 is similar, and not restricted to C++17.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80737
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80812
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80812
--- Comment #4 from ville at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ville
Date: Thu Jun 1 11:09:41 2017
New Revision: 248788
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248788&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/80812
cp/
PR c++/80812
* method.c (constructible_expr):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80921
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80921
--- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Thu Jun 1 10:52:29 2017
New Revision: 248787
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248787&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ada/80921
* configure.ac (default_gnatlib_target):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80921
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Thu Jun 1 10:51:50 2017
New Revision: 248786
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248786&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ada/80921
* configure.ac (default_gnatlib_target):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80921
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Thu Jun 1 10:51:15 2017
New Revision: 248785
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248785&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ada/80921
* configure.ac (default_gnatlib_target):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80921
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Looking in the build log, (i.e. output from 'make 2>&1 | tee build.log'), I
> now see the commands which create these DLLs; in both cases, they invoke:
>
> mingw32-gcc -shared -shared-libgcc ...
>
> which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80921
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
> With that in place, a clean configure and build does now produce:
>
> gcc/ada/rts/libgnarl-6.dll
> gcc/ada/rts/libgnat-6.dll
>
> but there are no accompanying import libraries, (as there are for other
> D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80896
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Jun 1 10:20:27 2017
New Revision: 248784
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248784&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2017-06-01 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/80896
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80896
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80932
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77420
--- Comment #11 from Rolf Sander ---
OK. Thanks for the explanations!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77420
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> The status says "RESOLVED FIXED", what does this mean?
It means that the gfortran maintainer has done his job.
> When will the bug fix be applied?
On the trees after the dates and revisions in co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80759
--- Comment #21 from Daniel Santos ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #20)
> > failures, but if you call dg-runtest, you are using gcc's hack-daptation of
> > parallelization. However, your patch doesn't remove *my* hack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80931
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77420
--- Comment #9 from Rolf Sander ---
The status says "RESOLVED FIXED", what does this mean? When will the bug fix be
applied? I'm using Linux Mint 18, and so far there was no new version in the
update manager :-(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80921
--- Comment #6 from Keith Marshall ---
(In reply to Keith Marshall from comment #5)
> ... a clean configure and build does now produce:
>
> gcc/ada/rts/libgnarl-6.dll
> gcc/ada/rts/libgnat-6.dll
>
> but there are no accompanying import librarie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80925
--- Comment #7 from rdapp at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
I could reproduce the fails on a power8 machine now.
Looking at the vect-28.c FAIL now - the loop to be vectorized is:
for (i = 0; i < N; i++)
{
ia[i+off] = 5;
}
It still ge
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66313
--- Comment #22 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jun 1 08:05:24 2017
New Revision: 248771
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248771&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-06-01 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/66313
* fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80939
Bug ID: 80939
Summary: Various helper function templates in
incorrectly marked constexpr
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
66 matches
Mail list logo
