https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88136
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #4)
> Author: jason
> Date: Thu Dec 6 21:17:08 2018
> New Revision: 266867
>
> URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266867&root=gcc&view=rev
> Log:
> PR c++/881
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39725
--- Comment #18 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Steven Bosscher from comment #1)
> This bug needs TLC from a MIPS person. At least a confirmation would be nice.
This bug has been in WAITING since 2010. Can it be closed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89447
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89447
--- Comment #5 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Sat Mar 9 02:10:22 2019
New Revision: 269521
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269521&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/89447
syscall, internal/syscall: adjust use of la
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89639
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89638
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89640
Bug ID: 89640
Summary: g++ chokes on lambda with __attribute__
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89639
Bug ID: 89639
Summary: FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_9.f90 -O0 (test for
excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89638
Bug ID: 89638
Summary: FAIL: gfortran.dg/integer_exponentiation_4.f90
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89637
Bug ID: 89637
Summary: FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr86523-1
cp_lto_pr86523-1_0.o-cp_lto_pr86523-1_0.o link, -O2
-fPIC -flto -g -shared
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79540
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Last reconfirmed|2017-02-16 00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89635
Lucas Werkmeister changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugzilla@lucaswerkmeist
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88235
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|9.0 |7.0
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88235
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Mar 8 22:55:20 2019
New Revision: 269517
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269517&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Relax cgraph_node::clone_of_p to also look through former clones
2019-0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89629
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think we should just use size_t for the len_aligned variable:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/hash_bytes.cc
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/hash_bytes.cc
@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85870
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Mar 8 22:30:34 2019
New Revision: 269516
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269516&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/85870
* gcc.dg/lto/pr85870_0.c: Add dg-extra-ld-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79926
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Fri Mar 8 22:27:08 2019
New Revision: 269515
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269515&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386.c: make "sorry" message more amenable to translation (PR target/79
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87734
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #10)
> You mean r267793. Yes, that's certainly what fixed the ICE.
Since it fixes a regression (ICE-on-invalid in PR 88376, ICE-on-valid here), it
should ideally be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88820
--- Comment #14 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Mar 8 21:40:28 2019
New Revision: 269514
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269514&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/88820 - ICE with CTAD and member template used in DMI.
He
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88419
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Mar 8 21:40:15 2019
New Revision: 269512
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269512&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/88419 - C++17 ICE with class template arg deduction.
Just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87921
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Mar 8 21:40:04 2019
New Revision: 269510
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269510&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/87921 - wrong error with inline static data member.
An ins
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88869
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Mar 8 21:40:21 2019
New Revision: 269513
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269513&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/88869 - C++17 ICE with CTAD and explicit specialization.
T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88690
--- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Mar 8 21:40:10 2019
New Revision: 269511
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269511&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/88690 - C++17 ICE with empty base in aggregate.
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89381
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Mar 8 21:39:58 2019
New Revision: 269509
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269509&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=87045
--- Comment #2 from Harald Anlauf ---
With trunk it appears essential to have at least -fcheck=bounds
as option, otherwise the testcase passes for me.
The dump-tree for the critical code part (with -fcheck=bounds):
p = t;
p.span = (inte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89636
Bug ID: 89636
Summary: Duplicate diagnostic when resolving ambiguity between
variable and function template using implicit typename
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63540
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63540
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Mar 8 21:22:07 2019
New Revision: 269508
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269508&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-08 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/63540
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89629
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22149
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|gcc-bugs at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59002
Bug 59002 depends on bug 22149, which changed state.
Bug 22149 Summary: func pointer non-type template parm invalid access control
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22149
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22149
--- Comment #7 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Mar 8 20:59:39 2019
New Revision: 269507
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269507&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-08 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/22149
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89576
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Mar 8 20:50:31 2019
New Revision: 269506
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269506&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=59655
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Another testcase, this time from Bug 85936:
template void f(int, a);
template void g(int, a &&e, c) {
f(0, [=] { e; });
}
void h() { g(0, h, 0); }
d.cc:1:25: error: ‘void f(int, a) [with a = g(int, a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59655
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Last reconfirmed|2018-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85936
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59655
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lebedev.ri at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59655
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||raphael.kubo.da.costa@intel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89633
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85936
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89624
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
No, it's just a different, but still conforming, interpretation of the
standard.
> For an enumeration whose underlying type is not fixed, the underlying type
> is an integral type that can represent all th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40883
Bug 40883 depends on bug 79477, which changed state.
Bug 79477 Summary: Please write code more translator-friendly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79477
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79477
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87734
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #9)
> > Would be useful to find out which commit triggered this change ...
>
> Revision r267783 (pr88376) seems to be a good suspect.
You mean r2677
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82075
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Mar 8 18:31:27 2019
New Revision: 269504
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269504&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/82075
* g++.dg/cpp1z/decomp49.C: New test.
Added:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89422
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Mar 8 18:22:20 2019
New Revision: 269503
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269503&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/89422 - ICE with -g and lambda in default arg in template.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87513
--- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Mar 8 18:21:02 2019
New Revision: 269502
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269502&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/87513 - 'sorry' mangling PMF template-id.
Here build_offs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88183
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Mar 8 18:19:55 2019
New Revision: 269501
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269501&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/88183 - ICE with .* fold-expression.
build_m_component_ref
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89631
--- Comment #7 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Fixed on trunk. Will backport to GCC 8 too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89631
--- Comment #6 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Fri Mar 8 18:18:23 2019
New Revision: 269500
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269500&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix POLY_INT_CST/CONST_POLY_INT typo (PR 89631)
2019-03
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82075
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78380
--- Comment #8 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> Without bisection it's hard to identify what fix to backport. Note the
> original issue doesn't reproduce for me with a cross to
> x86_64-apple-darwin15.6.0 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70390
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The usual procedure would be to bisect when it stopped ICEing, note it here and
see if that was a real fix, if yes and the corresponding testcase of the fix is
very different from this one add the testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87734
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Would be useful to find out which commit triggered this change ...
Revision r267783 (pr88376) seems to be a good suspect.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70390
--- Comment #14 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #13)
> Actually, I cannot reproduce it on the trunk anymore as of r265575.
So can this be closed then?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89630
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jakub at redhat dot com|jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80012
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82075
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at redhat dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87734
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #5)
> The test case is now rejected with trunk, looks like a recent 9 regression:
>
> ig25@linux-p51k:/tmp> gfortran m_vstring.f90
> m_vstring.f90:24:30:
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87734
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Here is another variant, possibly illegal:
module m_vstring
implicit none
public :: vstring_length
character ( len = vstring_length() ) :: char_string
contains
pure integer function vs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89493
Matthew Malcomson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87734
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89628
Steve Ellcey changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89634
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 45927
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45927&action=edit
gcc9-pr89634.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89632
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51820
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kay.diederichs@uni-konstanz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88918
Bug 88918 depends on bug 87558, which changed state.
Bug 87558 Summary: Missing _mm_storeu_si64() intrinsic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87558
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87558
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78782
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88918
Bug 88918 depends on bug 78782, which changed state.
Bug 78782 Summary: [x86] _mm_loadu_si64 intrinsic missing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78782
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88918
Bug 88918 depends on bug 68924, which changed state.
Bug 68924 Summary: No intrinsic for x86 `MOVQ m64, %xmm` in 32bit mode.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68924
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68924
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68924
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---
_mm_loadu_si64 intrinsic can now be used in the example from #Description:
#include
#include
__m256 load_bytes_to_m256(uint8_t *p)
{
__m128i small_load = _mm_loadu_si64( (void *)p );
__m256i intvec = _mm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78782
--- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Fri Mar 8 15:53:47 2019
New Revision: 269497
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269497&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/68924
PR target/78782
PR target/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87558
--- Comment #1 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Fri Mar 8 15:53:47 2019
New Revision: 269497
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269497&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/68924
PR target/78782
PR target/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68924
--- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Fri Mar 8 15:53:47 2019
New Revision: 269497
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269497&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/68924
PR target/78782
PR target/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89635
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89635
Bug ID: 89635
Summary: More ANSI SGR codes in diagnostics?
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89634
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89634
Bug ID: 89634
Summary: gmp-ecm miscompilation on s390x with -march=zEC12 -m64
-O2
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87404
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
I can try, sure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89341
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> David: Are you planning to send for it?
I'm not sure what you mean by this, sorry.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89497
--- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Yeah, I've also found that it doesn't fail on x86_64 with r269301 even when the
optimized dump is identical to s390x. Debugging now, in the third iteration of
the outer loop the inner loop doesn't stop wher
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87553
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84328
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87553
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
> Any progress on this please?
I haven't seen this after 20181116 and the last gcc-testresults posting
showing the failure on AIX 7.2 is from 20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87404
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89633
Bug ID: 89633
Summary: Inner class cannot pass a lambda to a template
function in outer class
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89631
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89341
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
David: Are you planning to send for it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67062
--- Comment #2 from Luke Allardyce ---
--host=x86_64-w64-mingw32
--target=x86_64-w64-mingw32 or i686-w64-mingw32
I can't remember if it broke on either or both of the above targets and don't
have access to an OSX machine any more. --build was le
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89631
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87553
--- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
Any progress on this please?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85870
--- Comment #16 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Mar 8 14:04:27 2019
New Revision: 269495
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269495&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add tests for resolved PR (PR c/85870).
2019-03-08 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64135
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
One option would be to just rename the base class (possibly only the default
new_allocator one, as selecting a different allocator implementation is an
explicit choice, and so users can deal with the conseq
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85870
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89631
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89632
Bug ID: 89632
Summary: documentation bug
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89631
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
POLY_INT_CST == USE so no actual harm done I guess (besides not handling
CONST_POLY_INT).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89631
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
1 - 100 of 136 matches
Mail list logo
