[Bug c++/86652] pointer to function type cannot have 'const' qualifier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86652 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- This seems like the const is applying to the function (not the function type that it is returning).

[Bug c++/86652] pointer to function type cannot have 'const' qualifier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86652 --- Comment #1 from zhonghao at pku dot org.cn --- A related code sample: class C { public: template int (*f())() const; }; int foo(C c) { return (*c.f())(); } The messages from clang++: error: pointer to function type cannot have 'const' qualif

[Bug c++/86652] New: pointer to function type cannot have 'const' qualifier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86652 Bug ID: 86652 Summary: pointer to function type cannot have 'const' qualifier Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug debug/68836] GCC can't properly emit debug info for function arguments in a back-trace when using -Og

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68836 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug other/63440] -Og does enable -fmerge-constants too

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63440 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org S

[Bug debug/82738] [meta-bug] issues with the -Og optimization level

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82738 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug other/84889] Ideas on revamping how we format diagnostics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84889 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #9 from Eric Gallag

[Bug libobjc/48626] --enable-objc-gc should be automatic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48626 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/86599] Problems building libgfortran from 7.2.0 on HP-UX 11.31/PA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86599 --- Comment #2 from The Written Word --- (In reply to The Written Word from comment #1) > I get a similar error with 8.1.0. And with 5.5.0.

[Bug tree-optimization/86650] -Warray-bounds missing inlining context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86650 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor -

[Bug target/86448] GCC 9 compiler generates slower code for spec 2006 milc on a power9 using -mcpu=power9 than using -mcpu=power8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86448 kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/86650] -Warray-bounds missing inlining context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86650 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/79501] member deduction guide not recognized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79501 eracpp at eml dot cc changed: What|Removed |Added CC||eracpp at eml dot cc --- Comment #

[Bug middle-end/78809] Inline strcmp with small constant strings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809 --- Comment #44 from Qing Zhao --- > (In reply to wilco from comment #43) will provide a simple patch for this issue.

[Bug lto/86651] New: lto-wrapper.exe: fatal error: simple_object_copy_lto_debug_sections not implemented: Invalid argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86651 Bug ID: 86651 Summary: lto-wrapper.exe: fatal error: simple_object_copy_lto_debug_sections not implemented: Invalid argument Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0

[Bug testsuite/86519] [9 Regression] New test case gcc.dg/strcmpopt_6.c fails with its introduction in r262636

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86519 --- Comment #11 from Qing Zhao --- > to reply: Comment #10 from Martin Sebor — thanks for the details. However, I do not feel comfortable for the compiler to change an undefined buggy code. I think that it’s better to let the user to correct his

[Bug other/86649] [9 regression] g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr19476-1.C fails starting with r262928

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86649 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target|powerpc64*-*-* |powerpc*-*-*, i?86-*-*,

[Bug tree-optimization/86396] fold calls to strtod() into constants where possible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86396 --- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- You can't fold atof ("3.14") with -frounding-math because the result depends on the rounding mode, or with -ftrapping-math (which is the default) because it should raise "inexact" (there ar

[Bug libstdc++/70940] pmr::resource_adaptor requires optional allocator requirements and incorrectly aligns returned pointers.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70940 --- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Mon Jul 23 19:40:28 2018 New Revision: 262935 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262935&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/70940 optimize pmr::resource_adaptor for allocators using m

[Bug tree-optimization/86650] New: -Warray-bounds missing inlining context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86650 Bug ID: 86650 Summary: -Warray-bounds missing inlining context Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimi

[Bug testsuite/86519] [9 Regression] New test case gcc.dg/strcmpopt_6.c fails with its introduction in r262636

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86519 --- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor --- The code is undefined so the return value doesn't really matter but conservatively, I think any non-zero value would work. What to do is a judgment call between letting the library call return some (possibly

[Bug other/86649] New: [9 regression] g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr19476-1.C fails starting with r262928

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86649 Bug ID: 86649 Summary: [9 regression] g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr19476-1.C fails starting with r262928 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug bootstrap/86621] [9 regression] 'alloca' bound is unknown in tree-vect-slp.c:1437:16

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86621 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c++/86648] [9 Regression] ICE on class template argument deduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86648 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/86648] New: [9 Regression] ICE on class template argument deduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86648 Bug ID: 86648 Summary: [9 Regression] ICE on class template argument deduction Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority

[Bug c/86647] New: Test on constant expression (unsigned) -1 < 0 triggers a spurious -Wtype-limits warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86647 Bug ID: 86647 Summary: Test on constant expression (unsigned) -1 < 0 triggers a spurious -Wtype-limits warning Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Sev

[Bug tree-optimization/69224] [6/7 Regression] -Warray-bounds false positive with -O3 and struct pointer parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69224 --- Comment #13 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Agreed. I don't see a lot of value in backporting this fix to the release branches. One could argue that decision means this should move to CLOSED as it's been fixed for gcc-8 and the trunk.

[Bug c++/86646] Special member function 'cannot be defaulted' if type alias is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86646 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/86591] [9 regression] gcc.target/powerpc/builtins-1.c fails starting with r261904

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86591 Carl Love changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/86591] [9 regression] gcc.target/powerpc/builtins-1.c fails starting with r261904

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86591 --- Comment #2 from Carl Love --- Author: carll Date: Mon Jul 23 16:16:41 2018 New Revision: 262934 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262934&root=gcc&view=rev Log: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: 2018-07-23 Carl Love PR 86591 *

[Bug tree-optimization/86625] funroll-loops doesn't unroll, producing >3x assembly and running 10x slower than manual complete unrolling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86625 --- Comment #7 from Chris Elrod --- (In reply to Chris Elrod from comment #6) > However, for column 23 (2944/128 = 23) with -O3 and column 25 for -O2 of the > 32 columns of A Correction: it was the 16x13 version that used stack data after loadin

[Bug libstdc++/86516] Spurious warning __builtin_memset at O3 when protected by a conditional involving empty()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86516 --- Comment #2 from Paul Gotch --- I can reproduce this at will with GCC 7.3 it does not reproduce with GCC 8 // Compile with g++ -c -Wextra -Wall -Werror -O3 test.cpp #include class Foo { public: Foo() {} virtual ~Foo() { }

[Bug tree-optimization/86644] [9 Regression] UBSAN error: tree-vect-patterns.c:225:17: runtime error: shift exponent 64 is too large for 32-bit type 'int'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86644 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirme

[Bug c/86618] tree-vect-stmts.c:3340: ubsan error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86618 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assigne

[Bug testsuite/86519] [9 Regression] New test case gcc.dg/strcmpopt_6.c fails with its introduction in r262636

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86519 --- Comment #9 from Qing Zhao --- > --- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor --- > FWIW, it would be safer and more deterministic to fold these invalid calls to > some non-zero value that it is to emit the invalid library call. could you please provide

[Bug tree-optimization/86625] funroll-loops doesn't unroll, producing >3x assembly and running 10x slower than manual complete unrolling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86625 --- Comment #6 from Chris Elrod --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > If you see spilling on the manually unrolled loop register pressure is > somehow an issue. In the matmul kernel: D = A * X where D is 16x14, A is 16xN, and X is N

[Bug target/86635] [avr] Miscompilation with __memx and libgcc float function __gtsf2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86635 --- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay --- As a work-around -fno-tree-ter appears to work.

[Bug tree-optimization/86636] [9 Regression] ICE in json::string::string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86636 --- Comment #2 from David Malcolm --- Thanks for filing this. Segfault happens here in optrecord_json_writer::location_to_json: 206 obj->set ("file", new json::string (LOCATION_FILE (loc))); due to a NULL value for LOCATION_FILE (loc).

[Bug target/86635] [avr] Miscompilation with __memx and libgcc float function __gtsf2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86635 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code --- Comment #2 from Georg-

[Bug c/85704] [8/9 Regression] cc1 run out of memory when it compile

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85704 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug tree-optimization/86625] funroll-loops doesn't unroll, producing >3x assembly and running 10x slower than manual complete unrolling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86625 --- Comment #5 from Chris Elrod --- Created attachment 44424 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44424&action=edit Smaller avx512 kernel that still spills into the stack This generated 18 total `vmovapd` (I think there'd ideally

[Bug tree-optimization/86625] funroll-loops doesn't unroll, producing >3x assembly and running 10x slower than manual complete unrolling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86625 --- Comment #4 from Chris Elrod --- Created attachment 44423 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44423&action=edit 8x16 * 16x6 kernel for avx2. Here is a scaled down version to reproduce most of the the problem for avx2-capable

[Bug c++/86619] Missed optimization opportunity with array aliasing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86619 --- Comment #4 from Michael Veksler --- It is interesting to check the impact on numerical C++ benchmarks. Fortran has a conceptual restrict on all its parameter arrays, since aliasing is not allowed. void f(int * __restrict__ v1, int * __rest

[Bug middle-end/78809] Inline strcmp with small constant strings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809 --- Comment #43 from Wilco --- (In reply to qinzhao from comment #42) > just checked in the patch for fixing the unsigned char issue as: > https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=262907 That looks it is using unsigned char accesse

[Bug c++/86646] New: Special member function 'cannot be defaulted' if type alias is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86646 Bug ID: 86646 Summary: Special member function 'cannot be defaulted' if type alias is used Product: gcc Version: 7.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/86617] [6/7/8/9 Regression] Volatile qualifier is ignored sometimes for unsigned char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86617 --- Comment #8 from Bernd Edlinger --- Author: edlinger Date: Mon Jul 23 13:23:51 2018 New Revision: 262933 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262933&root=gcc&view=rev Log: gcc: 2018-07-23 Bernd Edlinger PR c/86617 * genmat

[Bug target/86635] [avr] Miscompilation with __memx and libgcc float function __gtsf2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86635 --- Comment #1 from Senthil Kumar Selvaraj --- Created attachment 44422 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44422&action=edit pr86635.patch Looks like ud_dce removes the insn that sets reg:SF r22 because the insn says r22 is clo

[Bug middle-end/86645] [9 Regression] UBSAN error: tree-cfg.c:7874:26: runtime error: load of value 4293224825, which is not a valid value for type 'dump_flag'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86645 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/86645] New: [9 Regression] UBSAN error: tree-cfg.c:7874:26: runtime error: load of value 4293224825, which is not a valid value for type 'dump_flag'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86645 Bug ID: 86645 Summary: [9 Regression] UBSAN error: tree-cfg.c:7874:26: runtime error: load of value 4293224825, which is not a valid value for type 'dump_flag' Product: gcc

[Bug bootstrap/86630] gcc/graphite.c build failure on AIX 5.2 and 5.3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86630 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/86644] [9 Regression] UBSAN error: tree-vect-patterns.c:225:17: runtime error: shift exponent 64 is too large for 32-bit type 'int'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86644 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0

[Bug c++/86642] Spurious return type warning with enable_if

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86642 --- Comment #4 from Steinar H. Gunderson --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3) > (In reply to Steinar H. Gunderson from comment #0) > > Same issue with 4.9, so no regression. Clang has the same issue. > > That should have been your f

[Bug c++/66159] bogus warning for alias-declaration using elaborated-type-specifier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66159 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||eric at efcs dot ca --- Comment #5 fro

[Bug c++/77923] GCC emits "declares nothing" diagnostic on meaningful declarations.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77923 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/86642] Spurious return type warning with enable_if

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86642 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Steinar H. Gunderson from comment #0) > Same issue with 4.9, so no regression. Clang has the same issue. That should have been your first clue that the problem is at your end, not in both comp

[Bug bootstrap/86630] gcc/graphite.c build failure on AIX 5.2 and 5.3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86630 --- Comment #3 from The Written Word --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > GCC assumes that inttypes.h contains PRIx64 It does. gcc/system.h has: /* Define this so that inttypes.h defines the PRI?64 macros even when compiling wi

[Bug libstdc++/86513] ostringstream default constructor missing from libstdc++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86513 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/86643] [9 Regression] basic_ostringstream usage leads to:undefined reference to `std::__cxx11::basic_stringstream

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86643 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/85704] [8/9 Regression] cc1 run out of memory when it compile

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85704 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection,| |needs-reduction

[Bug tree-optimization/86644] New: [9 Regression] UBSAN error: tree-vect-patterns.c:225:17: runtime error: shift exponent 64 is too large for 32-bit type 'int'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86644 Bug ID: 86644 Summary: [9 Regression] UBSAN error: tree-vect-patterns.c:225:17: runtime error: shift exponent 64 is too large for 32-bit type 'int' Product: gcc V

[Bug tree-optimization/86628] Missed simplification of division

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86628 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 23 Jul 2018, glisse at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86628 > > --- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse --- > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)

[Bug c/86618] tree-vect-stmts.c:3340: ubsan error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86618 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/86642] Spurious return type warning with enable_if

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86642 Steinar H. Gunderson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/86643] [9 Regression] basic_ostringstream usage leads to:undefined reference to `std::__cxx11::basic_stringstream

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86643 --- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus --- Culprit is r262474 - "P0935R0 Eradicating unnecessarily explicit default constructors" Looking closer at the example, it doesn't use std::basic_ostringstream as advertised but: std::ostringstream buf2("t

[Bug c++/86619] Missed optimization opportunity with array aliasing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86619 --- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 23 Jul 2018, mickey.veksler at gmail dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86619 > > --- Comment #2 from Michael Veksler --- > >> type-based alias analysis doesn'

[Bug c/85704] [8/9 Regression] cc1 run out of memory when it compile

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85704 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug target/82092] [8/9 regression] gcc fails to link genmodes on darwin (cfiStartsArray[i] != cfiStartsArray[i-1])

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82092 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zfefm at gmx dot de --- Comment #17 from

[Bug other/86639] building gcc from source fails with Mac OS 10.9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86639 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/86642] Spurious return type warning with enable_if

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86642 W E Brown changed: What|Removed |Added CC||webrown.cpp at gmail dot com --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/86605] Suboptimal code for pointer arithmetic with 'this'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86605 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | CC|

[Bug middle-end/86627] [6/7/8/9 Regression] Signed 128-bit division by 2 no longer expanded to RTL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86627 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug target/86547] s390x: Maximum number of LRA assignment passes is achieved (30) when compiling a small inline assembler snippet

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86547 --- Comment #2 from Ilya Leoshkevich --- I dug a bit deeper and found that this used to compile without errors on gcc-4_8_5-release. Bisect points to s390-specific commit 7b1bda1c, which first appeared in gcc-4_9_0-release: 2013-06-06 Vlad

[Bug tree-optimization/86628] Missed simplification of division

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86628 --- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4) > Yeah, generally we can't associate because (x*y)*z may not overflow because > x == 0 but x*(y*z) may because y*z overflows. We can do it - in the wrapping case (

[Bug c++/86619] Missed optimization opportunity with array aliasing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86619 --- Comment #2 from Michael Veksler --- >> type-based alias analysis doesn't distinguish between int[2] and int[3]. Is it just the way GCC implements type-based alias analysis, or is it defined that way in the C and C++ standards? I suspect

[Bug c++/86643] [9 Regression] basic_ostringstream usage leads to:undefined reference to `std::__cxx11::basic_stringstream

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86643 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0

[Bug c++/86643] New: [9 Regression] basic_ostringstream usage leads to:undefined reference to `std::__cxx11::basic_stringstream

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86643 Bug ID: 86643 Summary: [9 Regression] basic_ostringstream usage leads to:undefined reference to `std::__cxx11::basic_stringstream Product: gcc Version: 9.0

[Bug debug/86638] Og guality failures without -ftree-sra

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86638 --- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > Hmm, it sounds like DCE/DSE should insert > > # DEBUG x$a => x$a_11 > > kind debug stmts. IIRC SRA does more than that, adding DECL_DEBUG_EXPRs > with magic. >

[Bug c/86617] [6/7/8/9 Regression] Volatile qualifier is ignored sometimes for unsigned char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86617 --- Comment #7 from Bernd Edlinger --- Yes. Sure.

[Bug c/86617] [6/7/8/9 Regression] Volatile qualifier is ignored sometimes for unsigned char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86617 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 23 Jul 2018, bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86617 > > --- Comment #5 from Bernd Edlinger --- > (In reply to Richard Biener from co

[Bug middle-end/86640] [8/9 regression] ICE in combine

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86640 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/86625] funroll-loops doesn't unroll, producing >3x assembly and running 10x slower than manual complete unrolling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86625 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/77923] GCC emits "declares nothing" diagnostic on meaningful declarations.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77923 --- Comment #1 from Eric Fiselier --- Ping. I keep hitting this more and more. GCC seems to be warning because the declaration includes the CXX scope specifier "::foo". Removing the "::" seems to work. However, removing the "::" causes the code

[Bug c++/86642] New: Spurious return type warning with enable_if

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86642 Bug ID: 86642 Summary: Spurious return type warning with enable_if Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/86641] New: Regression: non-ODR used auto class data members fail to deduce.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86641 Bug ID: 86641 Summary: Regression: non-ODR used auto class data members fail to deduce. Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/86640] [8/9 regression] ICE in combine

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86640 Ramana Radhakrishnan changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Tar

[Bug middle-end/86640] New: [8/9 regression] ICE in combine

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86640 Bug ID: 86640 Summary: [8/9 regression] ICE in combine Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end

[Bug c/86617] [6/7/8/9 Regression] Volatile qualifier is ignored sometimes for unsigned char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86617 --- Comment #5 from Bernd Edlinger --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > but I guess that doesn't work because the counting is missing. OTOH > two same SAVE_EXPRs () are not operand_equal_p but SAVE_EXPRs have > TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS se

[Bug middle-end/86627] [6/7/8/9 Regression] Signed 128-bit division by 2 no longer expanded to RTL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86627 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug c++/86620] __attribute__((no inline)) gives incorrect warning with overloaded functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86620 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/86622] [9 Regression] incorrect strlen of array of array plus variable offset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86622 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0

[Bug c/86617] [6/7/8/9 Regression] Volatile qualifier is ignored sometimes for unsigned char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86617 --- Comment #4 from Bernd Edlinger --- this comment in match.pd made me look at operand_equal_p: /* Simplify x - x. This is unsafe for certain floats even in non-IEEE formats. In IEEE, it is unsafe because it does wrong for NaNs. Also n

[Bug debug/86638] Og guality failures without -ftree-sra

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86638 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/86626] ICE in get_array_charlen at gcc/fortran/trans-array.c:6870

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86626 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Summ

[Bug tree-optimization/86632] Incorrect value copied into output array with -O3 ftree-loop-vectorize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86632 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/82108] [7 Regression] Wrong vectorized code generated for x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82108 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ketan.surender at gmail dot com --- Com

[Bug other/86639] New: building gcc from source fails with Mac OS 10.9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86639 Bug ID: 86639 Summary: building gcc from source fails with Mac OS 10.9 Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: o

[Bug tree-optimization/86632] Incorrect value copied into output array with -O3 ftree-loop-vectorize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86632 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/86631] [9 Regression] missing -Walloc-size-larger-than on ILP32 hosts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86631 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0

[Bug bootstrap/86630] gcc/graphite.c build failure on AIX 5.2 and 5.3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86630 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- GCC assumes that inttypes.h contains PRIx64

[Bug tree-optimization/86628] Missed simplification of division

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86628 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

  1   2   >