[Bug bootstrap/39849] segfault for '__divtf3' during bootstrap and non-bootstrap install

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39849 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/8477] autoconf script chooses wrong value for gcc_gxx_include_path

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8477 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug bootstrap/34818] --with-gmp overrides --with-mpfr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34818 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug bootstrap/38667] gcc 4.3.2 build fails to create/link libgcc in SLES9 32-bit platform

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38667 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/82721] [7/8/9 Regression] Error message with corrupted text, sometimes ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82721 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org S

[Bug c++/84733] [8/9 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault (check_local_shadow())

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84733 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org S

[Bug c++/84611] [6/7 Regression] ICE in operator[], at vec.h:826 (local_class_index())

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84611 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org S

[Bug c++/84630] [6/7 Regression] ICE: TYPE_NAME() used on error_mark_node in tsubst_lambda_expr, at cp/pt.c:17141

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84630 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |minor

[Bug libgcc/62269] m32c-elf libgcc fails to configure- setjmp/longjmp exception check

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62269 --- Comment #2 from DJ Delorie --- Sorry for not being as responsive as I should be, but I've tried occasionally to fix the m32c-gcc issues and they just keep getting worse. I suspect m32c should be deprecated at this point, it's not one of of t

[Bug c++/85014] [6/7/8/9 Regression] internal compiler error: in lookup_base, at cp/search.c:185

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85014 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org S

[Bug c++/84730] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault (build_class_member_access_expr)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84730 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||error-recovery CC|

[Bug fortran/52622] heap-use-after-free with instrumented compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52622 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||error-recovery CC|

[Bug c++/84653] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault (prep_operand)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84653 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org S

[Bug c++/84652] internal compiler error: in cp_parser_template_id, at cp/parser.c:15860

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84652 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org S

[Bug c++/84633] internal compiler error: in lvalue_kind, at cp/tree.c:206

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84633 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org S

[Bug c++/39751] ICE in cp_lexer_new_from_tokens, at cp/parser.c:342

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39751 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||error-recovery, |

[Bug rtl-optimization/63156] web can't handle AUTOINC correctly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63156 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org S

[Bug libgcc/62269] m32c-elf libgcc fails to configure- setjmp/longjmp exception check

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62269 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||build CC|

[Bug preprocessor/44317] ,##__VA_ARGS__ comma not eaten with -std=c++0x

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44317 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org S

[Bug tree-optimization/86010] [7/8/9 Regression] redundant memset with smaller size not eliminated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86010 --- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Fri Jul 6 03:43:42 2018 New Revision: 262464 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262464&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/86010 * tree-ssa-dse.c (compute_trims)

[Bug c/77817] -Wimplicit-fallthrough: cpp directive renders FALLTHRU comment ineffective

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77817 --- Comment #18 from Anton Maklakov --- Thank you for the answer! I've got. Using the hint after #endif is not pretty good, by the logic. But this is easier.

[Bug tree-optimization/86010] [7/8/9 Regression] redundant memset with smaller size not eliminated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86010 --- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Actually, alignment considerations are really just for head trimming. When trimming the tail we can be more aggressive as residuals are usually handled reasonably efficiently.

[Bug tree-optimization/86415] strlen() not folded for substrings within constant arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86415 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor -

[Bug middle-end/77357] strlen of constant strings not folded

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77357 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor -

[Bug tree-optimization/86010] [7/8/9 Regression] redundant memset with smaller size not eliminated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86010 --- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law --- It's not an off by 1 error, but a conscious decision to not pass odd addresses into the mem* routines, which are typically doing to emit crappy code for badly aligned data. We correctly see that 7 bytes of

[Bug libstdc++/86409] std::stod fails for denormal numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86409 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/85831] types should have move constructors and move assignment operators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85831 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/85831] types should have move constructors and move assignment operators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85831 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Thu Jul 5 21:29:51 2018 New Revision: 262456 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262456&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/85831 define move constructors and operators for exceptions

[Bug target/86394] Broken -falign-functions=512 on m68k

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86394 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug libstdc++/86272] [6/7/8/9 Regression] __gnu_debug::string uses undefined __glibcxx_check_insert_range2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86272 --- Comment #8 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Thu Jul 5 20:51:27 2018 New Revision: 262455 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262455&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-07-05 François Dumont Backport from mainline

[Bug tree-optimization/86415] strlen() not folded for substrings within constant arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86415 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/86272] [6/7/8/9 Regression] __gnu_debug::string uses undefined __glibcxx_check_insert_range2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86272 --- Comment #7 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Thu Jul 5 20:48:02 2018 New Revision: 262454 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262454&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-07-05 François Dumont Backport from mainline

[Bug tree-optimization/86415] strlen() not folded for substrings within constant arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86415 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|TREE_STRING_LENGTH |strlen() not folded for

[Bug fortran/86416] New: [OMPVV SOLLVE] Defaultmap issues on OpenMP 4.5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86416 Bug ID: 86416 Summary: [OMPVV SOLLVE] Defaultmap issues on OpenMP 4.5 Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fo

[Bug tree-optimization/86415] New: TREE_STRING_LENGTH incorrect for constant arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86415 Bug ID: 86415 Summary: TREE_STRING_LENGTH incorrect for constant arrays Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tr

[Bug c/86414] New: AIX generates wrong

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86414 Bug ID: 86414 Summary: AIX generates wrong Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigne

[Bug fortran/83118] [7/8/9 Regression] Bad intrinsic assignment of class(*) array component of derived type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83118 --- Comment #13 from Paul Thomas --- Created attachment 44356 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44356&action=edit Fix for the new problem? Hi Rainer, Does the attachment fix the problem? Cheers Paul

[Bug fortran/86408] [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86408 --- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #11) > Thanks for the heads up Janus. Thanks for the extremely quick fix, Paul! I often wish commercial vendors would even get close to gfortran's turnaround

[Bug ipa/86395] add support of -fopt-info-inline in early inliner

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86395 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug libstdc++/58265] [lwg/2063] std::string move assignment should be noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58265 --- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Thu Jul 5 17:03:05 2018 New Revision: 262447 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262447&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/58265 add noexcept to basic_string::assign(basic_string&&)

[Bug demangler/85304] Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85304 Carlo B. changed: What|Removed |Added CC||castro8583bennett at gmx dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/83819] [meta-bug] missing strlen optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83819 Bug 83819 depends on bug 86400, which changed state. Bug 86400 Summary: set::sethttps://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86400 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/86400] set::set

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86400 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/86400] [8/9 regression] set::set

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86400 --- Comment #11 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Thu Jul 5 16:42:50 2018 New Revision: 262446 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262446&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Backport from trunk. PR tree-optimization/86400 - set::set

[Bug c/77817] -Wimplicit-fallthrough: cpp directive renders FALLTHRU comment ineffective

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77817 --- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Anton Maklakov from comment #16) > Hi, > > I have the same problem: > > > int main() { > int s = 1; > > switch (s) { > case 2: > s = 2; > #if B > brea

[Bug fortran/86408] [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86408 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/86408] [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86408 --- Comment #10 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Thu Jul 5 16:27:38 2018 New Revision: 262445 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262445&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-07-05 Paul Thomas PR fortran/86408 * resolve.c.c (

[Bug c/77817] -Wimplicit-fallthrough: cpp directive renders FALLTHRU comment ineffective

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77817 Anton Maklakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||antmak.pub at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug gcov-profile/86411] Some lines are considered as uncoverable when using __gcov_flush

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86411 Marco Castelluccio changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gcov-profile/86411] Some lines are considered as uncoverable when using __gcov_flush

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86411 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Marco Castelluccio from comment #2) > Line 14 and line 16 should be "#" (not covered), instead they are "-" > (not coverable, a line not containing any code). I don't see a problem with line

[Bug gcov-profile/86411] Some lines are considered as uncoverable when using __gcov_flush

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86411 --- Comment #2 from Marco Castelluccio --- Line 14 and line 16 should be "#" (not covered), instead they are "-" (not coverable, a line not containing any code).

[Bug c/86407] Ignore function attributes in function type declarations?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86407 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug gcov-profile/86411] Some lines are considered as uncoverable when using __gcov_flush

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86411 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I think this is working as designed. You explictly flushed the gcov buffers; therefor it is not going to be flushed again.

[Bug libstdc++/58265] [lwg/2063] std::string move assignment should be noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58265 --- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely --- Now also fixed for COW strings.

[Bug libstdc++/58265] [lwg/2063] std::string move assignment should be noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58265 --- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Thu Jul 5 15:56:06 2018 New Revision: 262443 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262443&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/58265 implement LWG 2063 for COW strings For COW strings t

[Bug fortran/86325] Error on valid code with pointer class components using -finit-derived

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86325 --- Comment #1 from Fritz Reese --- Author: foreese Date: Thu Jul 5 15:39:27 2018 New Revision: 262442 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262442&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-07-05 Fritz Reese gcc/fortran/ChangeLog: PR fortran/

[Bug fortran/83183] Out of memory with option -finit-derived

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83183 --- Comment #2 from Fritz Reese --- Author: foreese Date: Thu Jul 5 15:39:27 2018 New Revision: 262442 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262442&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-07-05 Fritz Reese gcc/fortran/ChangeLog: PR fortran/

[Bug debug/86413] New: [9 regression] gcc.dg/guality/pr48437.c fail

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86413 Bug ID: 86413 Summary: [9 regression] gcc.dg/guality/pr48437.c fail Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: debug

[Bug fortran/82009] [F08] ICE with block construct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82009 --- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle --- In the tree dump, the declaration for idxs is missing for the first subroutine. I have modified to the following example so one can see it is not symbol name conflicts. MODULE sparse_matrix_csx_benchmark_ut

[Bug fortran/86408] [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86408 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #9 from j

[Bug fortran/86408] [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86408 --- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas --- (In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #7) > A fix is regtesting as I write. > > Paul ...which is pretty much that of comment #2, except that it is applied to the result. Paul

[Bug fortran/86408] [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86408 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/86408] [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86408 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2018-07-05 00:00:00 | Known to work|8.1.0

[Bug fortran/86408] [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86408 --- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Hi Paul, thanks for your comments! (In reply to paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com from comment #4) > I see two problems with my patch for PR49630. > > (i) It was F2008, not F2003. I see :) Already

[Bug fortran/86408] [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86408 --- Comment #4 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com --- Hi Janus, I see two problems with my patch for PR49630. (i) It was F2008, not F2003. Bottom of page 535: C418 (R420 R421 R422) A type-param-value of * shall be used only • to declare

[Bug fortran/86408] [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86408 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to janus from comment #0) > Moreover the error message does not really match the quoted standard clause > F03:C418, which says: > > "A function name declared with an asterisk type-param-v

[Bug fortran/86408] [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86408 --- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to janus from comment #0) > This error is apparently bogus, primarily because 'str' is not > assumed-length, but deferred-length. The following should be enough to distinguish deferred an

[Bug target/85434] Address of stack protector guard spilled to stack on ARM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85434 --- Comment #17 from Thomas Preud'homme --- Patch has been posted for review: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-07/msg00246.html

[Bug tree-optimization/86400] [8/9 regression] set::set

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86400 --- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Thu Jul 5 14:36:09 2018 New Revision: 262438 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262438&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/86400 - set::set

[Bug c/86410] Incorrect init_array ordering

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86410 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/86412] lto1: internal compiler error: in lto_symtab_prevailing_virtual_decl, at lto/lto-symtab.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86412 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-checking Target|

[Bug lto/86412] lto1: internal compiler error: in lto_symtab_prevailing_virtual_decl, at lto/lto-symtab.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86412 --- Comment #4 from Ulya --- Just in case, here is the output of the latest crashing 'g++ -v': $ g++ -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=/home/ulya/devel/gcc-9-20180701-install/bin/g++ COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/home/ulya/devel/gcc-9-20180701-install

[Bug lto/86412] lto1: internal compiler error: in lto_symtab_prevailing_virtual_decl, at lto/lto-symtab.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86412 --- Comment #3 from Ulya --- Also, please delete the original file when you download it -- my co-workers are not happy with it being pasted here. :)

[Bug lto/86412] lto1: internal compiler error: in lto_symtab_prevailing_virtual_decl, at lto/lto-symtab.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86412 --- Comment #2 from Ulya --- Sorry, forgot to paste the last line in the minimal file: template class a; template class b; class c { virtual bool d(); }; template class e : c { public: template e(f); }; void g() { (e>>(g)); }

[Bug lto/86412] lto1: internal compiler error: in lto_symtab_prevailing_virtual_decl, at lto/lto-symtab.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86412 --- Comment #1 from Ulya --- Created attachment 44355 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44355&action=edit original reproducer

[Bug lto/86412] New: lto1: internal compiler error: in lto_symtab_prevailing_virtual_decl, at lto/lto-symtab.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86412 Bug ID: 86412 Summary: lto1: internal compiler error: in lto_symtab_prevailing_virtual_decl, at lto/lto-symtab.c Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0 Status: U

[Bug c/86410] Incorrect init_array ordering

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86410 --- Comment #1 from Ismael Ripoll --- The issue has been tested in gcc-4 gcc-5 and gcc-7 It seems that all versions are affected.

[Bug gcov-profile/86411] New: Some lines are considered as uncoverable when using __gcov_flush

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86411 Bug ID: 86411 Summary: Some lines are considered as uncoverable when using __gcov_flush Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/86410] New: Incorrect init_array ordering

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86410 Bug ID: 86410 Summary: Incorrect init_array ordering Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assig

[Bug libstdc++/86409] std::stod fails for denormal numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86409 --- Comment #1 from Ruslan --- I was testing this on Kubuntu 14.04 x86_64 with g++ 8.1.0-5ubuntu1~14.04.

[Bug libstdc++/86409] New: std::stod fails for denormal numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86409 Bug ID: 86409 Summary: std::stod fails for denormal numbers Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++

[Bug other/86153] [9 regression] test case g++.dg/pr83239.C fails starting with r261585

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86153 Andrey Guskov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andrey.y.guskov at intel dot com --- Co

[Bug target/84711] AArch32 big-endian fails when taking subreg of a vector mode to a scalar mode.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84711 --- Comment #13 from Tamar Christina --- Author: tnfchris Date: Thu Jul 5 10:37:36 2018 New Revision: 262436 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262436&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Fix can_change_mode_class for big-endian on Arm gcc/ PR ta

[Bug target/84711] AArch32 big-endian fails when taking subreg of a vector mode to a scalar mode.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84711 --- Comment #12 from Tamar Christina --- Author: tnfchris Date: Thu Jul 5 10:35:00 2018 New Revision: 262435 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262435&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Correct subreg no-op handling for big-endian vec_select. gcc/

[Bug sanitizer/84250] Symbol collision when using both Address and Undefined Behavior sanitizers (-fsanitize=address,undefined)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84250 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Jul 5 09:47:05 2018 New Revision: 262433 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262433&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Revert 2018-07-04 Maxim Ostapenko PR sanitizer

[Bug c/86407] Ignore function attributes in function type declarations?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86407 --- Comment #2 from Zebediah Figura --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > Not possible without creating a sub-option for the warning I guess. But if > the attribute is a semantic one then it should be a type attribute rather > than

[Bug fortran/86408] [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86408 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Target Milestone|---

[Bug c/86407] Ignore function attributes in function type declarations?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86407 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Target|

[Bug sanitizer/86406] [8/9 Regression][UBSAN] -fcompare-debug failure with -fsanitize=undefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86406 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.2

[Bug testsuite/86405] UNRESOLVED bb-slp-over-widen-1.c and -2.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86405 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug gcov-profile/86404] UNRESOLVED/UNSUPPORTED gcov test results due to Permission error mapping pages

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86404 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- I think these are known and I've seen those even with -j6 on older kernels.

[Bug fortran/86408] [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86408 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid

[Bug fortran/86408] New: [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86408 Bug ID: 86408 Summary: [9 Regression] bogus error: ABSTRACT INTERFACE must not have an assumed character length result (F2003: C418) Product: gcc Version: 9.0

[Bug tree-optimization/86400] [8/9 regression] set::set

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86400 --- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 5 Jul 2018, msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86400 > > Martin Sebor changed: > >What|Removed |Added >