https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93017
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 8 Jan 2020, dave.anglin at bell dot net wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93017
>
> --- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
> On 2020-01-08 9:38 a.m., rgue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92124
--- Comment #5 from François Dumont ---
Author: fdumont
Date: Thu Jan 9 05:40:08 2020
New Revision: 280028
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=280028&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/92124 fix incorrect unordered container move assignment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87695
--- Comment #17 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 91703 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91703
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93204
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87695
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tim at westashton dot org.uk
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93143
--- Comment #7 from bin cheng ---
(In reply to bin cheng from comment #6)
> (In reply to bin cheng from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
> > > *** Bug 92926 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
> >
> > I sent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90374
--- Comment #27 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Hi Thomas, stating the obvious, I do not find it straight forwaed to interpret
the standards because there are nooks and crannies and corner cases. At least
now I have the basic pieces in place. I will try
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93202
--- Comment #7 from Jim Wilson ---
(In reply to Luís Marques from comment #3)
> Jim Wilson: I'm not using it, I was only working on the LLVM implementation.
> Could you please clarify if following modifiers are also internal only?
>
> 'C' Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93202
Andrew Waterman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew at sifive dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93202
--- Comment #5 from Jim Wilson ---
Jakub's patch looks OK to me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93017
--- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2020-01-08 9:38 a.m., rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> What ISL version are you using?
dave@mx3210:~$ dpkg -l '*isl*'
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88323
Bug 88323 depends on bug 91369, which changed state.
Bug 91369 Summary: Implement P0784R7: constexpr new
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91369
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91369
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 91369, which changed state.
Bug 91369 Summary: Implement P0784R7: constexpr new
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91369
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91377
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87163
--- Comment #5 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> Yep, I can still reproduce it with the current master in a cross compiler.
Ok, thanks. I'll see if I can recreate it with a cross since I cannot get it
to fail w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93201
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||81091
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93201
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Jan 8 21:51:38 2020
New Revision: 280021
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=280021&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libstdc++: Fix error handling in filesystem::remove_all (PR93201)
When r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93201
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Jan 8 21:48:23 2020
New Revision: 280020
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=280020&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libstdc++: Fix error handling in filesystem::remove_all (PR93201)
When r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93207
Bug ID: 93207
Summary: [concepts] Variadic concepts refuse no compile when
function definition is not inline
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93205
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93027
--- Comment #1 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Thank you for the report. I've started working on it. As changes in
constraint processing needs a lot of testing, I think the patch will be read on
Friday or on the next week.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93206
Bug ID: 93206
Summary: non-delegitimized UNSPEC generated for C program on
PowerPc with current mainline GCC tree
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92552
--- Comment #8 from Tony E Lewis ---
I see on Godbolt that my similar-looking ICE is also fixed now.
Thanks very much.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93204
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92938
--- Comment #10 from jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> (In reply to jcmvbkbc from comment #7)
> >It's the reference from .text* to .init*
> > which is not present in the source but is generated by gcc th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87163
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92938
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to jcmvbkbc from comment #7)
> It is not in .init*, but that's ok: the reference from .init to .text is
> present in the original source. It's the reference from .text* to .init*
> which is not pres
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91369
--- Comment #32 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Jan 8 20:31:20 2020
New Revision: 280018
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=280018&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/91369 - constexpr destructor and member initializer.
Prev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81806
--- Comment #13 from Raihat Zaman Neloy ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #12)
> Created attachment 47615 [details]
> patch optimizing pb_ds tree split, RFC
>
> I made up a patch but I doubt if this is really useful in competitive
> progra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93205
--- Comment #1 from Nicholas Ormrod ---
(This bug was discovered when some empty-istream test code OOMed)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93205
Bug ID: 93205
Summary: std::discrete_distribution's operator>> causes OOM
Product: gcc
Version: 7.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81806
--- Comment #12 from Xi Ruoyao ---
Created attachment 47615
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47615&action=edit
patch optimizing pb_ds tree split, RFC
I made up a patch but I doubt if this is really useful in competitive
progr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93204
Bug ID: 93204
Summary: arduino failure to verify
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93203
Bug ID: 93203
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in decide_about_value, at
ipa-cp.c:5448 since r278893
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93203
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87163
--- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner ---
Martin, can you please check whether you still see this ICE?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92938
--- Comment #8 from jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to jcmvbkbc from comment #7)
> or it doesn't take a reference to a variable in .init*.
That is, it doesn't have a direct reference to a variable in .init* in its
body.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92938
--- Comment #7 from jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> (In reply to jcmvbkbc from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> > > I DON'T think it is a GCC issue. The code is broken.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93202
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 47614
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47614&action=edit
gcc10-pr93202.patch
Untested fix for the ICE (and a typo I found too), fixes it in the
cross-compiler, don't ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93202
--- Comment #3 from Luís Marques ---
Jim Wilson: I'm not using it, I was only working on the LLVM implementation.
Could you please clarify if following modifiers are also internal only?
'C' Print the integer branch condition for comparison OP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93202
--- Comment #2 from Jim Wilson ---
%h is used for the gcc internal implementation of emitting auipc. I'm
skeptical that it is useful for asms. Stripping the HIGH rtx is an internal
implementation detail, and does not apply to asms, as you can't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93200
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64697
jon.turney at dronecode dot org.uk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jon.turney at droneco
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93146
--- Comment #2 from David Edelsohn ---
One option is to force
flag_extern_tls_init=0
as default for AIX, e.g., -fno-extern-tls-init.
That works around the linking issue, but it assumes the limited semantics /
assertion of that option always ar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91040
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90393
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
*** Bug 91040 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93201
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Jan 8 16:44:45 2020
New Revision: 280014
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=280014&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libstdc++: Fix error handling in filesystem::remove_all (PR93201)
When r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93202
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93202
Bug ID: 93202
Summary: [RISCV] ICE when using inline asm 'h' constraint
modifier
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93200
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93124
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93170
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93193
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93039
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On January 8, 2020 4:34:40 PM GMT+01:00, "amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93039
>
>--- Comment #3 from Alexander Monakov ---
>> The question is f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93174
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93187
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92906
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91369
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93187
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jan 8 15:59:20 2020
New Revision: 280012
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=280012&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/93187
* config/i386/i386.md (*stack_protect_set_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93174
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jan 8 15:58:20 2020
New Revision: 280011
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=280011&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/93174
* config/i386/i386.md (addcarry_0): Use no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93002
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The originally reported issue is fixed.
Though, the following testcase shows we could do better:
void foo (void);
void bar (unsigned);
unsigned f1 (unsigned x) { if (--x == -1U) foo (); return x; }
unsigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88355
--- Comment #3 from Emmanuel Le Trong ---
This bug has disappeared, both tests above compile with version 10.0.0
20200108.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93039
--- Comment #3 from Alexander Monakov ---
> The question is for which CPUs is it actually faster to use SSE?
In the context of chains where the source and the destination need to be SSE
registers, pretty much all CPUs? Inter-unit moves typically
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #2 from Matt Emmerton ---
This appears to have packaging complications by vendors as well :(
On powerpc-ibm-aix7.1.0.0 this doesn't get installed.
On ppc64le-redhat-linux it does.
However, both of these cases would benefit from some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89096
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93039
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93037
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93033
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93019
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
I think this is known for the driver and we're too lazy to fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93017
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93014
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93199
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Jan 8 14:30:44 2020
New Revision: 280006
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=280006&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2020-01-08 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/93199
* tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93182
--- Comment #5 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Author: gjl
Date: Wed Jan 8 14:28:56 2020
New Revision: 280005
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=280005&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/93182
* doc/invoke.texi (AVR Options) <-nodevic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91369
--- Comment #30 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Toni Neubert from comment #28)
> I have another test case which fails. (Maybe more..., I am sorry).
No need to be sorry, your input is very valuable.
Anyway, for the #c28 testcase (using
struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93010
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93007
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93002
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Fixed on trunk?
countdown_i_used:
.LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
movl$999, %eax
.p2align 4,,10
.p2align 3
.L2:
movl%eax, sink(%rip)
subl$1, %eax
jn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92997
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Jan 8 14:07:55 2020
New Revision: 280003
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=280003&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2020-01-08 Richard Biener
PR testsuite/92997
* gcc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92997
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92997
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64*-linux-gnu arm|powerpc64*-linux-gnu arm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92989
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
Summary|The mips-mti-li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93143
--- Comment #6 from bin cheng ---
(In reply to bin cheng from comment #5)
> (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
> > *** Bug 92926 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
>
> I sent a patch fixing this a
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93185
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 47613
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47613&action=edit
Github git reference
I like what Github does. You can paste a git hash in a text, it's later
shortened and one c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92979
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Ideally bswap would be less ad-hoc but work as a propagator with a lattice of
symbolic values.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93143
--- Comment #5 from bin cheng ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
> *** Bug 92926 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I sent a patch fixing this a
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-12/msg00920.html
The only question
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92963
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92957
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||49774
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93143
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92926
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92956
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |10.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93193
--- Comment #2 from Igor S Gerasimov ---
Is it possible to add warnings if /* is in commented line?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93201
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This shows the bug on trunk, which only affects the quality of error reporting
when an error occurs:
#include
#include
using std::filesystem::path;
using std::filesystem::perms;
int main(int argc, char
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92955
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92906
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92945
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93134
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||slyfox at inbox dot ru
--- Comment #9 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92938
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to jcmvbkbc from comment #5)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> > I DON'T think it is a GCC issue. The code is broken.
>
> Even if I remove all attributes from this function I see thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92936
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
In full generality it would require inspecting all possible program paths
(and then decide which ones are "impossible" to take). We're not doing that.
Still we should have n = [3, 5] and yes, no info for p
1 - 100 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
