https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89713
--- Comment #5 from fxue at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: fxue
Date: Thu Jun 13 04:17:42 2019
New Revision: 272234
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272234&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/89713 - Assume loop with an exit is finite
g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88838
--- Comment #6 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kugan
Date: Thu Jun 13 03:34:28 2019
New Revision: 272233
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272233&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog:
2019-06-13 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85552
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88834
--- Comment #19 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kugan
Date: Thu Jun 13 03:18:54 2019
New Revision: 272232
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272232&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog:
2019-06-13 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90703
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90865
Bug ID: 90865
Summary: ubsan causes coverage branch errors
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88395
--- Comment #11 from Nicholas Krause ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #10)
> I don't think this is a valid testcase: operator+= requires Concept, but
> checking Concept depends on operator+=. It would be good for the compiler
> to det
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87410
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Thu Jun 13 01:31:03 2019
New Revision: 272230
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272230&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/87410
* g++.dg/cpp1y/pr87410.C: New test.
Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87410
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87410
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90825
--- Comment #7 from hyc at symas dot com ---
Thanks for the quick resolution, much appreciated.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90847
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|requested alignment is not |misplaced
|an integer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90847
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90832
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90825
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90825
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Thu Jun 13 00:56:54 2019
New Revision: 272229
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272229&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90825 - endless recursion when evaluating sizeof.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90832
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Thu Jun 13 00:56:54 2019
New Revision: 272229
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272229&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90825 - endless recursion when evaluating sizeof.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90864
Bug ID: 90864
Summary: Suboptimal codegen of structs in C/C++on x86_64
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66999
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Jun 12 22:41:35 2019
New Revision: 272223
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272223&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/66999 - 'this' captured by reference.
* parser.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66999
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90832
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10 Regression] ICE in|[9 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90825
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10 Regression] g++: |[9 Regression] g++:
|i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90825
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Jun 12 22:26:54 2019
New Revision: 272221
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272221&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90825 - endless recursion when evaluating sizeof.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90832
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Jun 12 22:26:54 2019
New Revision: 272221
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272221&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90825 - endless recursion when evaluating sizeof.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90825
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88395
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90736
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90736
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Jun 12 21:12:00 2019
New Revision: 272219
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272219&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90736 - bogus error with alignof.
* constexpr.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90857
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This is definitely undefined. The range (position,last) goes from
one-past-position to one-before-last, but that's an invalid range. The iterator
one-before-last is not reachable from one-past-position.
We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90676
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Jun 12 20:43:27 2019
New Revision: 272218
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272218&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Tweak tests to avoid fallout from MEM_REF changes on targets that don't
en
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90736
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10 Regression] Bogus |[9 Regression] Bogus error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90736
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Jun 12 20:17:36 2019
New Revision: 272217
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272217&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90736 - bogus error with alignof.
* constexpr.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90744
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90744
--- Comment #10 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Wed Jun 12 20:08:38 2019
New Revision: 272214
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272214&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-06-12 Thomas Koenig
Tomáš Trnka
Backport from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90744
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Wed Jun 12 19:54:34 2019
New Revision: 272213
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272213&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-06-12 Thomas Koenig
Tomáš Trnka
Backport from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90849
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90391
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43491
--- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt ---
But hm, on further reading of
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Global-Register-Variables.html, I don't
think that the compiler is precluded from using temporary registers to hold the
global register value,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90809
--- Comment #2 from Oliver Browne ---
Submitted patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-06/msg00722.html
Fixes above issue with bugcase provided
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90816
--- Comment #2 from Oliver Browne ---
Submitted patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-06/msg00722.html
Fixes above issue with bugcase provided
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43491
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm-none-eabi |arm-none-eabi, powerpc*-*-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90002
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90002
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Wed Jun 12 18:28:32 2019
New Revision: 272201
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272201&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-06-12 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/90002
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90863
Bug ID: 90863
Summary: ICE in StatementSemanticVisitor::visit, at
d/dmd/statementsem.c:1992
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90009
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80005
Zack Weinberg changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90676
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90676
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Jun 12 17:05:35 2019
New Revision: 272199
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272199&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/90676 - default GIMPLE dumps lack information
gcc/ChangeLog
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83819
Bug 83819 depends on bug 90662, which changed state.
Bug 90662 Summary: strlen of a string in a vla plus offset not folded
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90662
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90662
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90662
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Jun 12 16:33:04 2019
New Revision: 272197
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272197&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/90662 - strlen of a string in a vla plus offset not f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90862
Bug ID: 90862
Summary: OpenACC 'declare' ICE when nested inside another
construct
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90861
Bug ID: 90861
Summary: OpenACC 'declare' not cleaning up for VLAs
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90590
Matthew Beliveau changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84299
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86465
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84299
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Chris from comment #0)
> Interestingly this error occurs only with -O3, not without optimization.
That's expected, -Wmaybe-uninitialized doesn't do anything otherwise. As the
manual says:
"Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90796
Michael Matz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90851
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80272
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
*** Bug 90851 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90834
--- Comment #8 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #6)
> (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #5)
> > > --- Comment #1 from Iain Sandoe ---
> > > I don't have 10.15 or xcode 11 yet ..
> >
> > No worry:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90834
--- Comment #7 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #5)
> > --- Comment #1 from Iain Sandoe ---
> > I don't have 10.15 or xcode 11 yet ..
> > (not disagreeing that we need a way to handle this, but neithe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90834
--- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #5)
> > --- Comment #1 from Iain Sandoe ---
> > I don't have 10.15 or xcode 11 yet ..
>
> No worry: I just happened to upgrade for reasons unrelated to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90009
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Wed Jun 12 14:56:18 2019
New Revision: 272189
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272189&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[nvptx] Assert fork has at most one join in nvptx_find_par
With the test-c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90857
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90860
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90860
Bug ID: 90860
Summary: Static const variable initialized with another static
const compiles
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90834
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Iain Sandoe ---
> I don't have 10.15 or xcode 11 yet ..
No worry: I just happened to upgrade for reasons unrelated to gcc work
and gave it a whirl...
> does ...
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90009
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90009
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at redhat dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90859
Bug ID: 90859
Summary: [OMP] Mappings for VLA different depending on 'target
{ c && { ! lp64 } }'
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: opena
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90779
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 46484
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46484&action=edit
gcc10-pr90779.patch
Fix, so far tested with x86_64-linux -> nvptx-none offloading make check in
libgomp, will d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90836
--- Comment #2 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> While it could be matched in match.pd variations would be quite a lot.
> I don't see where else it fits (apart from forwprop which already does
> fancy pattern matching.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90856
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90856
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Reduced test-case:
$ cat ice.c
typedef struct {
int v;
} S1;
S1 clearS1() {}
typedef struct {
S1 s1[4];
} S2;
void
clearS2(__seg_gs S2 *p, int n) {
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
p->s1[i] = clearS1(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90856
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90855
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90837
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90837
--- Comment #4 from vfdff ---
this is an invalid issue, thanks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90844
Patrick Georgi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pgeorgi at google dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90858
Bug ID: 90858
Summary: Pointer to member is treated as non-constexpr
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90857
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90857
Bug ID: 90857
Summary: stl::forward_list::erase_after crashes if __pos ==
__last
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90811
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jun 12 09:31:26 2019
New Revision: 272181
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272181&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/90811
* cfgexpand.c (align_local_variable): Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90856
Bug ID: 90856
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed (error:
incompatible types in 'PHI' argument 1)
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90855
Bug ID: 90855
Summary: OpenMP: collapse clause rejects template argument as
parameter
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65930
--- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65930
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90838
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90838
>
> --- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> FWIW, there is another simil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32071
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhonghao at pku dot org.cn
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90850
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90851
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> Already known.
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 80272 ***
That's a FE issue. Yes, we're not doing optimal code generation but
the STV
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90852
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, Bug 49171 comment 13 is clear that the reinterpret_cast is not valid, and
Bug 49171 comment 14 intentionally changes the compiler to reject it. This is
not a recurring bug, it's not a bug at all, this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90851
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90851
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80272
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhonghao at pku dot org.cn
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80272
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Another example from Bug 90851:
struct S { S (); S (int); ~S (); int i; };
struct A { S s[10]; };
void
foo ()
{
A a = {{}};
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90850
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90849
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Reduced:
template
struct A
{
A () : A ( 1 ) { }
A (int);
};
A a;
G++ and MSVC accept the delegating constructor, Clang and EDG reject it.
It's not immediately obvious to me that this is invalid, b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90838
--- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
FWIW, there is another similar function in deepsjeng that computes a
side-effect:
int
myctz2 (unsigned long long * const b) {
unsigned long long lsb = (*b) & -(*b);
*b ^= lsb;
return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65930
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #14
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo