https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49263
--- Comment #29 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #28)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #27)
> > (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #26)
> > > Author: olegendo
> > > Date: Mon Jan 26 23:56:05 2015
> > > New Revi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85211
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|-isystem automatically adds |Document that -isystem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78632
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dodji at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78632
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80518
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/issues/721
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86659
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86659
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Oct 8 22:47:32 2018
New Revision: 264942
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264942&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/86659
* gimple-match.h (struct gi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87330
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87330
--- Comment #6 from sameerad at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 44814
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44814&action=edit
the regrename pass does not rename the registers which are in notes, because of
which the REG_DEAD
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54613
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #44803|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87559
Bug ID: 87559
Summary: Storage duration + lambda captures: Discrepancy in
behavior between g++-7 and clang++-6.0
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87530
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83522
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #6 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87558
Bug ID: 87558
Summary: Missing _mm_storeu_si64() intrinsic
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86731
--- Comment #5 from Will Schmidt ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #4)
> Is this fixed now?
This should be fixed on trunk with Revision: 264150
Has not yet been backported to 8.
Let me find and do a follow-up comment on the thre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83522
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #3)
Crossref:
Patch fails for gfortran.dg/actual_array_substr_2.f90 for PR fortran/28118
which uses:
call bar ((a(:)(7:11)))
and likewise for PR fortran/28174's
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63155
--- Comment #42 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Mon Oct 8 18:58:59 2018
New Revision: 264941
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264941&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Use FOR_EACH_IMM_USE_FAST in gimple-ssa-backprop.c
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87557
Bug ID: 87557
Summary: New test case g++.dg/ext/pr82625.C doesn't compile
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68827
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80518
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87364
--- Comment #6 from Will Wray ---
Created attachment 44811
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44811&action=edit
Patch v2, passes check_GNU_style
Submitted to gcc-patches mailing list
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87556
Bug ID: 87556
Summary: FORM TEAM statement team-number argument interpreted
incorrectly when function
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83522
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #3)
> And prints for the case above (not affected by resolve.c patch):
> 7 | strings(:)(:) ! gives an error message on invalid
> Error: Invalid character in name at (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87517
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87517
--- Comment #3 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Oct 8 15:23:48 2018
New Revision: 264937
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264937&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Correct _mm512_mask3_fmaddsub_round_pd
Define _mm512_mask3_f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87517
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Oct 8 15:20:08 2018
New Revision: 264936
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264936&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Correct _mm512_mask3_fmaddsub_round_pd
Define _mm512_mask3_f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87554
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87553
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
[...]
>> Sorry, I've been doing too many things at once and not been paying close
>> enough attention. Besides, the g++.log file lacks the "spawn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87554
--- Comment #3 from Mikhail Kremnyov ---
FYI: 6.3.0 is able to compile the non-preprocessed source.
As for 7.x - 7.3.0 and earlier versions can't compile it due to another bug
(https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85470) and I don't have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87553
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Then
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #4)
> > --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
> [...]
> > When the executable is executed, the *.gcda file should be created. Please
> > check why
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87525
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-pc-linux-gnu |i686-pc-linux-gnu,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87517
--- Comment #1 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Oct 8 14:54:53 2018
New Revision: 264935
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264935&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Correct _mm512_mask3_fmaddsub_round_pd
Define _mm512_mask3_f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87550
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87554
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-reduction
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87551
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Bernd Edlinger ---
> Rainer, can you try this?
Looks good so far: an i386-pc-solaris2.11 build has successfully linked
libgnat-9.so, but the bootstrap is still run
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87555
Bug ID: 87555
Summary: There is no need for UNSPEC_FMADDSUB
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83999
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83999
--- Comment #11 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Mon Oct 8 14:20:40 2018
New Revision: 264931
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264931&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-10-08 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/83999
Backport from t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83522
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87274
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87553
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
[...]
> When the executable is executed, the *.gcda file should be created. Please
> check why the file is not generated.
Sorry, I've been doing t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87554
--- Comment #1 from Mikhail Kremnyov ---
Created attachment 44808
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44808&action=edit
Preprocessed source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87553
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #2)
> > --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
> > It probably looks that there's missing profile file *.gcda. Can you check
> > it's
> > generate in -fp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87554
Bug ID: 87554
Summary: internal compiler error: in record_reference, at
cgraphbuild.c:64
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55881
--- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
Some comments from a discussion with Martin and David:
%G and %K sometimes do not work with pragma
diagnostics. The reason is that the pragma diagnostics check is done
here:
https://github.com/gcc-mi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71003
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87553
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
> It probably looks that there's missing profile file *.gcda. Can you check it's
> generate in -fprofile-generate run?
It isn't, however the g++ r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86172
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71003
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87553
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87553
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87553
Bug ID: 87553
Summary: [9 regression] g++.dg/tree-prof/inline_mismatch_args.C
etc. FAIL
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87551
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87538
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Oct 8 13:13:06 2018
New Revision: 264926
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264926&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/87538 fix std::not_fn exception specifications
Backport fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87538
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71792
--- Comment #3 from vadim ---
Created attachment 44807
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44807&action=edit
test case
after patch current test have to work
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87481
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
There is actually nothing weird on that, with smaller ones we terminate the
inner loop early and then stop.
With the debugging -O0 build I have around, the constexpr processing is very
slow though, so I get a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86372
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87477
Bug 87477 depends on bug 86372, which changed state.
Bug 86372 Summary: [8/9 Regression] Segfault on ASSOCIATE statement with
CHARACTER variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86372
What|Removed |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241
Bug 68241 depends on bug 86372, which changed state.
Bug 86372 Summary: [8/9 Regression] Segfault on ASSOCIATE statement with
CHARACTER variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86372
What|Removed |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86372
--- Comment #9 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Mon Oct 8 13:02:36 2018
New Revision: 264925
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264925&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-10-08 Paul Thomas
Backport from trunk
PR fortran/86
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87538
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Oct 8 12:54:41 2018
New Revision: 264924
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264924&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/87538 fix std::not_fn exception specifications
Backport fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87481
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87551
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87552
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87552
Bug ID: 87552
Summary: [9 regression] FAIL:
gcc.c-torture/compile/20010102-1.c -O3
-fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops
-ftracer -finline-functions (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87538
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87544
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #6)
> I think the standard specifies the fallback value in allocator_traits for
> allocators that do not provide max_size (we could open an issue asking for
> more free
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87538
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Oct 8 12:17:58 2018
New Revision: 264922
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264922&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/87538 Verify fix for std::experimental::not_fn
PR l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87551
Bug ID: 87551
Summary: [9 regression] libgnat-9.so fails to link on Solaris
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87538
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.4.0
Summary|Incorrect noe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87546
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87538
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Oct 8 12:07:22 2018
New Revision: 264921
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264921&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/87538 fix std::not_fn exception specifications
PR l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87525
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87525
Liu Hao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lh_mouse at 126 dot com
--- Comment #9 from Li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87546
--- Comment #3 from graham.stott77 at gmail dot com ---
'b' is never assigned a value, so surely it's undefined
Original message
From: helloqirun at gmail dot com
Date: 08/10/2018 04:51 (GMT+00:00)
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87525
--- Comment #8 from taz.007 at zoho dot com ---
I've been able to create a test case with just one file (not the same as the
first one attached).
you can lookup the build.sh to know how i've build the shared library.
Once built, you can objdump -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87546
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87525
taz.007 at zoho dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #44794|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87525
--- Comment #6 from taz.007 at zoho dot com ---
Created attachment 44805
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44805&action=edit
script to build the shared lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86372
--- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Mon Oct 8 11:17:10 2018
New Revision: 264919
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264919&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-10-08 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/86372
* trans-stmt.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87544
--- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
>static size_type
>_S_max_size(const _Tp_alloc_type& __a) _GLIBCXX_NOEXCEPT
>{
> - const size_t __diffmax =
> __gnu_cxx::__numeric_tra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87544
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> But the standard explicitly requires the
> allocator to be stupid, so I'm not sure what more libstdc++ can do here.
I think the standard specifies the fallback v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87528
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 8 Oct 2018, jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87528
>
> --- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87538
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87550
Bug ID: 87550
Summary: Intrinsics for rdpmc (__rdpmc, __builtin_ia32_rdpmc)
are interpreted as pure functions
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71792
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87528
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Can you point me to the source for which we generate the popcount call(s)?
> It might be not final value replacement but instead code-generating a niter
> analy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87547
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-linux-gnu |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84516
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2018-02-27 00:00:00 |2018-10-8
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71586
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87544
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Maybe this:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_vector.h
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_vector.h
@@ -1726,7 +1726,11 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_CONTAINER
static size_type
_S_max_size(co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87544
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
> allocator::max_size() is worse than useless
Fixed that for you.
https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-active.html#3044
https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-closed.html#197
For PR 78448 I recently changed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87431
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54005
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55735
--- Comment #7 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Ah sorry, I think I moved around the block data and then it wasn't valid
Fortran anymore. I think, both the block data and the subroutine are external
to the main program.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55735
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> In the recent trunk (r264725) does _not_ give an ICE anymore, but the code
> is vetoed as non-standard, as it is for nagfor and ifort. So, should this
> be closed now?
I still get an ICE:
pr55735.f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54005
--- Comment #29 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #27)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #24)
> > (In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #22)
> > > Or do I misread that? Are __alignof(x) and th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87548
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87151
--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #3)
> This now works with the actual trunk (r264898), and gives the anticipated
> result
> 2 3. So either it was fixed by one of Paul's other fixes, or he just didn't
>
1 - 100 of 136 matches
Mail list logo
