https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85698
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83648
--- Comment #3 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: prathamesh3492
Date: Tue May 15 06:07:48 2018
New Revision: 260250
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260250&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-05-15 Prathamesh Kulkarni
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85698
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85783
--- Comment #4 from Paul Smith ---
Well, clearly I disagree with this conclusion and feel this is a bug.
At the very least, the fact that it's impossible to disable the warning needs
to be considered a bug. The statement on the mailing list fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85756
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85683
Bug 85683 depends on bug 85756, which changed state.
Bug 85756 Summary: [9 regression] wrong code at -Os on x86-64-linux-gnu in
32-bit mode
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85756
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85787
--- Comment #1 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Working on a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85787
Bug ID: 85787
Summary: malloc_candidate_p fails to detect malloc attribute on
nested phis
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85562
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||prathamesh3492 at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85734
--- Comment #5 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fixed on trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85786
--- Comment #2 from Angus Gibson ---
Changing the declaration of e to also be 'target', and associating the pointer:
CS%v(2)%p => e
if (query_ptr(e, CS)) then
...
still causes the segfault. Perhaps I disconnected this from the orig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85734
--- Comment #4 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: prathamesh3492
Date: Tue May 15 04:44:33 2018
New Revision: 260249
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260249&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-05-15 Prathamesh Kulkarni
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85786
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
--- Comment #10 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #9)
> (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #8)
> > (In reply to vries from comment #6)
> > > posted RFC: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg0174
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85786
Bug ID: 85786
Summary: Segfault in associated intrinsic
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
--- Comment #9 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #8)
> (In reply to vries from comment #6)
> > posted RFC: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg01749.html
>
> pinged: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65604
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85785
Bug ID: 85785
Summary: missing warning on strcat overflow after strcpy
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85783
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85778
Scott E. changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sesail999 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84159
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85259
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67554
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon May 14 22:35:44 2018
New Revision: 260244
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260244&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/67554 Do not pass null pointers to memcpy
PR libstd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67554
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82966
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|ASSIG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82966
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon May 14 22:22:23 2018
New Revision: 260242
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260242&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/82966 fix swapping of node handles
PR libstdc++/829
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67554
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon May 14 22:22:27 2018
New Revision: 260243
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260243&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/67554 Do not pass null pointers to memcpy
PR libstd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81256
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85698
--- Comment #7 from Pat Haugen ---
So the problem is that we're generating a stxvw4x insn to write to memory,
which corrupts the contents due to both endian behavior and element size (since
we're dealing with halfword/uint16_t elements).
Value i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67554
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon May 14 21:51:51 2018
New Revision: 260241
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260241&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/67554 Do not pass null pointers to memcpy
PR libstd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82966
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon May 14 21:51:46 2018
New Revision: 260240
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260240&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/82966 fix swapping of node handles
PR libstdc++/829
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85783
--- Comment #2 from Paul Smith ---
> Did you try: -Wno-alloc-size-larger-than ?
Yes.
cc1plus: error: unrecognized command line option
'-Wno-alloc-size-larger-than'
> Also in your code, numberFields is a signed int and then casted to size_t.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85783
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Did you try:
-Wno-alloc-size-larger-than ?
Also in your code, numberFields is a signed int and then casted to size_t. On
LP64 targets (or rather sizeof(size_t) != sizeof(int)), then value is sign
extended.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85781
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85784
Bug ID: 85784
Summary: False positive with -Wunused-but-set-parameter
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85783
Bug ID: 85783
Summary: alloc-size-larger-than fires incorrectly with new[]
and can't be disabled
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85602
--- Comment #4 from Paul Eggert ---
Thanks, that workaround is much better for coreutils, and I installed it here:
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/commit/?id=f6cb50cc991d461f443ea3afc517c9e1e37ef496
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85780
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #1)
> HOwever, I think we then have an accepts invalid as an alternate
> return takes a label.
Whoops, I may have misread the standard. The label applies to
the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85780
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85756
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon May 14 20:17:19 2018
New Revision: 260239
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260239&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/85756
* gnat.dg/opt70.adb: New test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85602
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
I agree that's not an improvement. Would something like this be better? (at
least until utmp_ent is marked nonstring and GCC taught to suppress the
diagnostic)
size_t utmpsize = sizeof UT_ID (utmp_ent);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85698
--- Comment #6 from Pat Haugen ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> I can see what the patch does to this testcase on x86_64 - it enables BB
> vectorization of the first two loops after runrolling. I don't see anything
> suspicious
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85779
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85782
Bug ID: 85782
Summary: acc loops with continue statements ICE in c++
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85602
--- Comment #2 from Paul Eggert ---
Thanks for looking into it. For what it's worth, the practical effect of this
new warning was that I changed that part of coreutils to not use strncat,
causing 3 lines of code to grow to 8 lines. See the end of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85781
--- Comment #1 from G. Steinmetz ---
Some variants that are actually compiling :
$ cat z2.f90
subroutine s(x) bind(c)
use iso_c_binding, only: c_char
character(kind=c_char), value :: x
print *, x(1:0)
end
$ cat z3.f90
subroutine s(x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85781
Bug ID: 85781
Summary: ICE in gfc_build_array_ref, at fortran/trans.c:393
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85780
Bug ID: 85780
Summary: ICE in resolve_fl_procedure, at
fortran/resolve.c:12504
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85779
--- Comment #1 from G. Steinmetz ---
Related :
$ cat z3.f90
class(t) function f()
type f
end type
end
$ gfortran-9-20180513 -c z3.f90
f951: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
0xb9f4bf crash_signal
../../gcc/toplev.c:325
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85779
Bug ID: 85779
Summary: ICE in gfc_typename, at fortran/misc.c:156
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81256
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon May 14 18:57:45 2018
New Revision: 260236
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260236&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/81256 fix exception handling in basic_filebuf::close
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85778
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
It depends on if glibc is adding the nonnull attribute to stat or is it GCC.
Also what does the C (and POSIX) standard says about a null pointer being
passed as the string to stat.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85602
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85778
Bug ID: 85778
Summary: unexpected results with -O2, wrong code?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85768
François Dumont changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85759
--- Comment #12 from Jan ---
And yes I use a gentoo system. But I'm using the gcc patches from clear linux
but this bug doesn't seem relate to that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85759
--- Comment #11 from Jan ---
I can reproduce it with vanilla gcc 8.1.0 no patches applied.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85739
ensadc at mailnesia dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ensadc at mailnesia dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85769
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71098
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85756
--- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon May 14 15:53:58 2018
New Revision: 260231
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260231&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/85756
* config/i386/i386.md: Disallow no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67554
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon May 14 15:35:06 2018
New Revision: 260229
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260229&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/67554 Do not pass null pointers to memcpy
PR libstd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85656
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
[...]
> According to log file alias support is mission on solaris. Thus following
> patch
> should fix that by skipping the test:
>
> diff --git a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85777
--- Comment #1 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
I've cleaned up the testcase:
int d;
int h(void);
void e(void)
{
int f[2];
int g = 0;
if (d)
g++;
if (d == 1)
f[g++] = 2;
(void) (f[0] || (g && h()));
}
Now:
cventin% gcc-snapshot -Werr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85777
Bug ID: 85777
Summary: [7/8 Regression] -fsanitize=undefined makes a
-Wmaybe-uninitialized warning disappear
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82966
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon May 14 14:27:54 2018
New Revision: 260226
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260226&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/82966 fix swapping of node handles
PR libstdc++/829
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85776
Bug ID: 85776
Summary: ICE when compiling `boost::thread` with `-std=c++11`
on mingw-w64
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85775
Bug ID: 85775
Summary: False positive with -Wparentheses
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85731
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85774
Bug ID: 85774
Summary: Incorrect stack-use-after-scope caused by missing
cleanup of shadow bytes
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85184
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85319
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82966
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82452
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81522
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Possibly related to PR 82172 (which was due to a binutils bug) but that
apparently only occurs when using LTO.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81263
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81256
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72830
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71301
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71098
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69191
--- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Chip Salzenberg from comment #16)
> Still happening in 7.2
What is?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67011
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67554
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62119
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
PR 63314 points out the same problem exists in mask_array and indirect_array.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63314
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62119
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||helloworld922 at hotmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62196
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85773
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85773
Bug ID: 85773
Summary: Embedded nulls in filesystem::path cause problems
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85772
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85772
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Also review it for noexcept, so that for example the copy constructor is
noexcept when using the COW base:
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/rc_string_base.h
b/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/rc_string_base.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85771
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This should be completely unsurprising, obviously std::variant is different to
a union. The type safety and other features come at a cost, and 2s isn't
insane.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85772
Bug ID: 85772
Summary: __gnu_cxx::__versa_string doesn't support C++11
allocators
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62119
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85771
Bug ID: 85771
Summary: `std::variant<...>` insanely slow to compile compared
to `union` (256 types)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84118
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-260223-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
gcc version 9.0.0 20180514 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85769
--- Comment #2 from Tamar Christina ---
It's not r250673, That was committed 2017-07-28 and a GCC built 2017-08-17
does the correct thing for non-Armv8.2-a. It promotes the fp16 values to 32
bits does the operations and converts them back to fp16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83891
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
