https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569
--- Comment #5 from Inbal Levi ---
Stumbled across another rule which might be relevant here is:
[basic.align/1]
[...] An object type imposes an alignment requirement on every object of that
type; stricter alignment can be requested using the a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95031
Bug ID: 95031
Summary: GCC 10 Analyzer and fatal error: Terminated signal
terminated program cc1plus
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95012
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95024
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95030
Bug ID: 95030
Summary: Conflicting report about VIA eden's AVX capabilities
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95029
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
> PacketFragmenting frag(MaxPacketSize(MAX_PACKET_SIZE), PhySize(PHY_SIZE));
I was going to say this defines a function, frag which takes MaxPacketSize and
PhySize as arguments and returns PacketFragmenting
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26428
Geof Donaralma changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |MOVED
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95029
--- Comment #2 from Maximilian Matthe ---
Unfortunately, this seems to be a hard-to-spot case of the most vexing parse
(just tried with clang, whose warning pointed me into that direction).
https://www.fluentcpp.com/2018/01/30/most-vexing-parse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95029
--- Comment #1 from Maximilian Matthe ---
Created attachment 48495
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48495&action=edit
The corresponding .ii-file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95029
Bug ID: 95029
Summary: Compile error when using constant variable instead of
literal
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88745
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88745
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Ian Lance Taylor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dea40c941a4d443d1b748bafb8a74f02c360e810
commit r11-251-gdea40c941a4d443d1b748bafb8a74f02c360e810
Author: Ian Lance Taylor
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94851
--- Comment #5 from Hugo Gualandi ---
Hi, I came across a similar problem and I think I might have found a smaller
test case. gcc complains about a NULL pointer dereference in the p->next
despite the loop condition testing that p is not NULL.
Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94851
--- Comment #4 from Hugo Gualandi ---
Created attachment 48493
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48493&action=edit
Another test case (-O2)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94851
Hugo Gualandi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hugo_musso_gualandi@hotmail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95028
Bug ID: 95028
Summary: ICE in g++ (Arch Linux 9.3.0-1) 9.3.0 with captured
OMP reduce clause in lambda
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95027
Harald van Dijk changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95027
Bug ID: 95027
Summary: -fdiagnostics-urls generates wrong URLs
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95024
--- Comment #2 from Alejandro Colomar ---
If I use
#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wconversion"
I will loose the warning. I still want the warning, but not the error.
That's what I have right now as a workaround, but it's not what I want.
__
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95026
Bug ID: 95026
Summary: "leak of FILE" false positive [CWE-775]
[-Wanalyzer-file-leak]
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95025
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.1.0
Version|10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95025
Bug ID: 95025
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in execute_sm_exit at
gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c:2224 since
r11-161-g283cb9ea6293e813
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80711
--- Comment #10 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> (In reply to David Binderman from comment #8)
> > My opinion is that a first approximation at implementation in gcc would
> > merely look for C++ member func
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95024
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94770
--- Comment #14 from Bence Szabó ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> Completely untested WIP patch:
Results with ead1c27a530 + this patch:
The same tests fail as in the original description, t032 and t059 crash/pass
the same way a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95024
Bug ID: 95024
Summary: No way to pass "-Wno-error=..." with #pragma GCC
diagnostic
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93499
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80711
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #8)
> My opinion is that a first approximation at implementation in gcc would
> merely look for C++ member functions that are return statements only.
> More fancy t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95008
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95023
Bug ID: 95023
Summary: Offloading AMD GCN wiki cannot be followed
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: targ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95008
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8415ced06ed9690dfbce8b8b5f2f4f98f15598b6
commit r11-236-g8415ced06ed9690dfbce8b8b5f2f4f98f15598b6
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Sat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66439
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
TNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Build from SHA a33649e6:
john@carbon:~/ws/gcc/build$ ~/gcc-a33649e6/bin/g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 11.0.0 20200509 (experimental)
Copyright © 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not eve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86826
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78446
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
Targ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
Bug ID: 95021
Summary: [10/11 Regression] Bogus -Wclobbered warning
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: mid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Koenig ---
Just checked aarch64, and that also isn't affected:
tkoenig@gcc116:~/gcc-bin/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/libgfortran$ objdump
--disassemble in_pack_i4.o | wc -l
95
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95020
Bug ID: 95020
Summary: requires expression always evaluates to true in the
definition of template lambda defined within template
function
Product: gcc
Version: 10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95003
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lewissbaker.opensource@gmai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95017
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95013
--- Comment #2 from Iain Sandoe ---
please would you identify the platform(s) and configuration conditions?
I don't see these on at least
x86_64-linux-gnu, powerpc64-linux-gnu (m32, m64)
or on Darwin15, 18, 19 (m32, m64)
at r11-196
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11 Regression] Excessive |[10/11 Regression]
|un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95013
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
For 9.3.0, I get
$ objdump --disassemble in_pack_i4.o | wc -l
123
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig ---
9.3.0 is also not affected.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80711
--- Comment #8 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #7)
> struct indirect_cmp {
> static int counter;
> bool operator()(const X* l, const X* r) {
> ++counter;
> return *l < *r;
> }
> };
>
> int indirec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Summary|Excessive unroll
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80711
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> Also useful would be to warn for members that don't access any state at all:
>
> struct indirect_cmp {
> bool operator()(const X* l, const X* r) { return *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94983
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95019
Bug ID: 95019
Summary: Optimizer produces suboptimal code related to
-ftree-ivopts
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig ---
Created attachment 48490
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48490&action=edit
-fdump-tree-optimized dumpj
Finally, the -fdump-tree-optimized dump.
Unrolling already appears to happen in th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig ---
Created attachment 48489
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48489&action=edit
Preprocessed source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
Bug ID: 95018
Summary: Excessive unrolling for Fortran library array handling
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95005
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-05-09
Assignee|unassigned
55 matches
Mail list logo
