https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32497
--- Comment #17 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Valeriy E. Ushakov from comment #16)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #15)
> > (In reply to Valeriy E. Ushakov from comment #11)
> > > Created attachment 44668 [details]
> > > Diff agai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67062
--- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Luke Allardyce from comment #0)
> When cross building GCC for windows on OS X the -no-pie flag is being passed
> to the native linker for some of the build tools (e.g. genhooks) which
> breaks th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89617
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89617
Bug ID: 89617
Summary: memmove used even after runtime guard against overlap
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89347
Maninder Singh changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79111
Paul Pluzhnikov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79111
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89616
Bug ID: 89616
Summary: Parameter names can be redeclared in outermost block
of a function definition
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89227
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89227
--- Comment #4 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Thu Mar 7 00:53:41 2019
New Revision: 269449
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269449&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/89227
* go-gcc.cc (Gcc_backend::function): Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89615
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2019-03-06 7:26 p.m., redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> OK, so then maybe something like this:
>
> --- a/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/codecvt_specializations.h
> +++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89585
Harald van Dijk changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #45910|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89615
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Oh, but it's not failing because of the -finput-charset=ascii option, just
because it includes , and one of the extension ehaders includes
.
OK, so then maybe something like this:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/inclu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89615
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88322
Bug 88322 depends on bug 88996, which changed state.
Bug 88996 Summary: Implement P0439R0 - Make std::memory_order a scoped
enumeration.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88996
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88996
emsr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71203
--- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
program p
integer :: i
integer, parameter :: x(2) = 0
! integer, parameter :: y(*) = [(x(i:i), i=1,2)]
print *, shape([(x(i:i), i=1,2)])
end
prints 2 at run time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71203
--- Comment #15 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Gerhard Steinmetz from comment #1)
> $ cat z4.f90
> program p
>integer :: i
>integer, parameter :: x(2) = 0
>integer, parameter :: y(*) = [(x(i:i), i=1,2)]
> end
>
The patch
Index
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89606
--- Comment #1 from Yichao Yu ---
Compiled a GCC 9 snapshot for pr89607 and the issue is still present.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71203
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71203
--- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> The integer parts in comment#1 need further debugging.
> If somebody finds a related PR, this one might be closed as duplicate.
With the following patch
--- ../_clean/gcc/fortran/decl.c201
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29040
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29040
--- Comment #10 from Paolo Carlini ---
Created attachment 45911
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45911&action=edit
Draft
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88406
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
> I don't seem to have access to a SPARC Solaris 10 box.
You do ;-) Just log into s10-sparc.gcc at my site. Last Friday's gcc
builds are sti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88406
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
I don't seem to have access to a SPARC Solaris 10 box.
It seems like Solaris 10 is ignoring the address argument passed to mmap. Does
Solaris have an equivalent of strace that will show system calls?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89460
--- Comment #4 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2019-03-06 4:30 p.m., dave.anglin at bell dot net wrote:
> Could it be because I started trying to build with iconv support?
Nope, the fails were there before I made the build change.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89538
--- Comment #10 from Taewook Oh ---
Thanks, and sorry for the confusion. I'll find the exact version that causes
this issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71203
--- Comment #12 from Harald Anlauf ---
The issues related to zero-length strings and zero-size arrays are fixed
on trunk and 8-branch. Backport to 7-branch would require additional
efforts, and as this PR is not about a regression, not done.
Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89460
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2019-03-06 4:20 p.m., redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> That's odd, because the code didn't change.
Could it be because I started trying to build with iconv support?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87148
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||9.0
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89460
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That's odd, because the code didn't change.
I'll fix the sockatmark problem soonish though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71706
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #10 from Dominiqu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71203
--- Comment #11 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: anlauf
Date: Wed Mar 6 21:16:00 2019
New Revision: 269445
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269445&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-06 Harald Anlauf
Backport from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71203
--- Comment #10 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: anlauf
Date: Wed Mar 6 21:06:35 2019
New Revision: 269444
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269444&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-06 Harald Anlauf
PR fortran/71203
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88820
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88820
--- Comment #11 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #10)
> I'm looking at the testcase in comment 7, but it seems unlikely to be
> related to the original testcase since that one is said to compile as C++17.
Never mind
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88820
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71706
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71706
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87566
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89607
--- Comment #8 from Yichao Yu ---
I see. I don't imagine this to cause a major local speed up though I assume it
should at least not be slower? That's also why I mentioned that this should at
least be done for `-Os`.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89607
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Yichao Yu from comment #6)
> > For aarch64, there was talk about adding stp for q registers.
>
> What do you mean? I was initially unsure about it too but I assume it
> already exist since clang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89381
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] Implicit |[7/8 Regression] Implicit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89607
--- Comment #6 from Yichao Yu ---
> For aarch64, there was talk about adding stp for q registers.
What do you mean? I was initially unsure about it too but I assume it already
exist since clang (and now GCC 9) emits it and the arm arch reference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72714
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83700
Bug 83700 depends on bug 72714, which changed state.
Bug 72714 Summary: [7/8 Regression] [Coarray] ICE in gfc_array_init_size, at
fortran/trans-array.c:5235
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72714
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72714
--- Comment #12 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Wed Mar 6 20:28:22 2019
New Revision: 269441
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269441&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-06 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/72714
Backport
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89381
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Mar 6 20:28:47 2019
New Revision: 269442
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269442&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/89381 - implicit copy and using-declaration.
Here the used
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89460
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin ---
We also now have the following error in the test:
/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include/experimental/internet:194:
error: call of overloaded '_S_ntoh(const in_addr_t&)' is ambig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89613
--- Comment #2 from Jeff Muizelaar ---
The generated asm is:
500: 31 c0 xor%eax,%eax
502: e8 29 01 00 00 callq 630
507: 89 c2 mov%eax,%edx
509: 31 c0 xor%eax
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89607
--- Comment #5 from Yichao Yu ---
I just compiled the 9-20190303 snapshot and this is indeed seems to be fixed.
Should this be closed now or after GCC 9 is released?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29040
--- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini ---
Hi Jon and first, sorry for the long wait: in my opinion when we assign a bug
to ourselves it should be matter of 1-2 weeks maximum before an actual patch
materializes on the mailing list. I'll dig up my note
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89615
Bug ID: 89615
Summary: FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++1998/charset.cc (test for
excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89612
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88820
--- Comment #9 from Hana Dusíková ---
You can have template deduction placeholder there in C++20.
https://wg21.link/p0732r2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72714
--- Comment #11 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Wed Mar 6 20:12:06 2019
New Revision: 269440
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269440&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-06 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/72714
Backport
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89607
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
For aarch64, there was talk about adding stp for q registers.
Also it does not help the current set of aarch64 processors that much to add
stp support for q registers.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89607
--- Comment #3 from Yichao Yu ---
Done pr89614
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89614
Bug ID: 89614
Summary: Missing optimization for store of multiple registers
on arm
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89607
--- Comment #2 from Yichao Yu ---
Sure. I'll do that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89613
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This might be the same as PR 63572.
The point here is that the function is pure/const so it is detected as that and
then the original code is converted into a() * 2 instead so only one call is
done at all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89607
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think this should be filed as two seperate issues. For aarch64, this might
have been fixed already for 9.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89613
Bug ID: 89613
Summary: ICF disambuigation doesn't work
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89612
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
...which started crashing with r209907:
DR 1351
Represent the unevaluated exception specification of an implicitly
declared or deleted function with a simple placeholder,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89611
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89612
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
And a better testcase, and actually valid:
template
struct C {
template
friend int foo() noexcept(N);
};
template
int foo() noexcept(N);
C c;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89604
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to christopher békési from comment #3)
> How come that it was decided to make the char on ARM unsigned whereas on x86
> platforms it's signed by default?
I don't know, you are going to have to ask
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89604
--- Comment #3 from christopher békési ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> In C, plain char can either be signed or unsigned; this is unlike int.
>
> Which of signed char or unsigned char has the same range, representation,
> and b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89381
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89585
--- Comment #24 from Harald van Dijk ---
Created attachment 45910
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45910&action=edit
gcc-8-pr89585-warn.patch
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #21)
> Created attachment 45904 [details]
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89612
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #2)
> Reduced (invalid):
>
> template bool b;
>
> template
> struct C {
> template friend int foo() noexcept(b<1>);
> };
>
> template int foo() noexcept(b<1>)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87148
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 6 18:46:32 2019
New Revision: 269434
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269434&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/87148
* init.c (build_value_init_noctor): Ignore fl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89550
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89585
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #45903|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89612
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Reduced (invalid):
template bool b;
template
struct C {
template friend int foo() noexcept(b<1>);
};
template int foo() noexcept(b<1>);
auto a = C();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89576
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9 Regression] constexpr |[8 Regression] constexpr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89576
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Mar 6 18:39:24 2019
New Revision: 269433
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269433&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/89576 - if constexpr of lambda capture.
Now that we're doi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89611
--- Comment #1 from xavier at cremaschi dot fr ---
I forgot that default inheritance is private. My bad. This is NOT a bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89602
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89612
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89612
Bug ID: 89612
Summary: internal compiler error: in push_access_scope, at
cp/pt.c:237
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88820
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|mpolacek at gcc d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89611
Bug ID: 89611
Summary: Compilation ok with 'class', but ko with 'struct'
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66089
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89610
Bug ID: 89610
Summary: Move-assigning a pmr container sometimes copies the
elements instead of moving them
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82768
Arthur O'Dwyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78511
Arthur O'Dwyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89601
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89603
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Your code is not standard-conforming. Do this: ...
You can also use -fdec, but it's better to fix the code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89609
Bug ID: 89609
Summary: bug box caused by access to function as a record
component via a limited with
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89605
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89605
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The code *does* compile, but GCC outputs duplicate symbols, so it doesn't
assemble (or link).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89608
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89592
--- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor ---
The standard is clear that flexible array members are not copied but ignored:
In most situations, the flexible array member is ignored. In particular, the
size of the structure is as if the flexible array me
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89598
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #5)
> This time for sure.
Indeed: r269411 did fix the build against mpfr 2.4.2 for my test config.
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86655
emsr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29040
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2006-09-12 20:59:08 |2019-3-6
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29842
Bug 29842 depends on bug 29843, which changed state.
Bug 29843 Summary: [meta-bug] C++98 standard conformance issues
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29843
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29843
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88845
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
URL|
1 - 100 of 164 matches
Mail list logo
