https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93293
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Schwinge ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #0)
> XFAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/dot-output.c (test for warnings, line 21)
> PASS: gcc.dg/analyzer/dot-output.c (test for excess errors)
> PASS: gcc.dg/ana
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95649
Bug ID: 95649
Summary: ICE during GIMPLE pass: cunroll
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
--- Comment #13 from Steve Kargl ---
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 04:16:53AM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
>
> --- Comment #12 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> (In reply to Bill Long fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88629
--- Comment #9 from Trupti Pardeshi
---
Hi,
Didn't understand reply given comment#8.
Please, may I know, if this bug is going to be fixed in binutils and in which
version?
Or this will be closed as Not reproduced as per comment#6.
Any heads
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398
--- Comment #46 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #45)
> (In reply to Wilco from comment #44)
> > (In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #43)
> > > To handle vectorization for this kind of code, it needs to overcome the
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95632
Jim Wilson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-06-12
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398
--- Comment #45 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #44)
> (In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #43)
> > To handle vectorization for this kind of code, it needs to overcome the hard
> > issue mentioned in comment #5: the loop has
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
--- Comment #12 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Bill Long from comment #11)
> I checked with the Intel docs and the ia64 version of the compiler (what HPC
> users use) does not support x87.
>
> Is there a gfortran compiler option
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93492
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81652
Bug 81652 depends on bug 93492, which changed state.
Bug 93492 Summary: Broken code with -fpatchable-function-entry and
-fcf-protection=full
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93492
What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93492
--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3dcea658c9e2ac84f0726e679fd7d3b14f9106f0
commit r11-1245-g3dcea658c9e2ac84f0726e679fd7d3b14f9106f0
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Mon Feb 3 10:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95252
Kito Cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
--- Comment #11 from Bill Long ---
I checked with the Intel docs and the ia64 version of the compiler (what HPC
users use) does not support x87.
Is there a gfortran compiler option to disable x87 use (i.e. REAL(10) is an
error), to match the ot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
--- Comment #10 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #9)
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 10:14:21AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >
> > IEEE-754 calls binary32, 64, 128 the basic formats (Sec. 3, p. 6):
> >
> > Five
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95638
--- Comment #5 from bin cheng ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> All I can say is that bisection shows (at least when preprocessed with g++
> 8.3.1 first) that this changed behavior in
> r10-7184-ge4e9a59105a81cdd6c1328b0a5ed9fe4cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95648
--- Comment #1 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
The following seems to be enough to use detected objdump:
--- a/config/gcc-plugin.m4
+++ b/config/gcc-plugin.m4
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ AC_DEFUN([GCC_ENABLE_PLUGINS],
;;
*)
if test x$build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95647
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=95344
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95344
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:74eb19c2499c1b9011629799e16d74f299f35b33
commit r9-8669-g74eb19c2499c1b9011629799e16d74f299f35b33
Author: Marek Polacek
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95560
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95560
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95560
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:02f6c5b711b8188c3f49a79c730911b0bd216585
commit r9-8668-g02f6c5b711b8188c3f49a79c730911b0bd216585
Author: Marek Polacek
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95648
Bug ID: 95648
Summary: gcc/configure: line 26509: objdump: command not found:
config/gcc-plugin.m4 uses 'objdump' instead of
${host}-objdump
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95647
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95647
Bug ID: 95647
Summary: operator(.eq.) and operator(==) treated differently
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95637
Jim Wilson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilson at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93467
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:11c7261128ad3ee136508703b20e45cbe04f8dd0
commit r11-1243-g11c7261128ad3ee136508703b20e45cbe04f8dd0
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95560
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.5
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95560
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:23dd42562369911a92d7da045ebe2c03b286a769
commit r10-8281-g23dd42562369911a92d7da045ebe2c03b286a769
Author: Marek Polacek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95066
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ae275b986b8cc747a5b4f389cb05a71fdee1f886
commit r10-8280-gae275b986b8cc747a5b4f389cb05a71fdee1f886
Author: Marek Polacek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95066
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94937
--- Comment #21 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:de946847b7cf88c503c6e843fc6263ef7a1911fc
commit r10-8279-gde946847b7cf88c503c6e843fc6263ef7a1911fc
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94937
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95344
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4c07da7bec0c952e4918323222c2baa85f0a29f1
commit r10-8278-g4c07da7bec0c952e4918323222c2baa85f0a29f1
Author: Marek Polacek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94955
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94955
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:18436d87ff85282b200579cb8da496659632ad6b
commit r10-8277-g18436d87ff85282b200579cb8da496659632ad6b
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90915
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=90915
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:53e91f867bd1c3773d37b2efb8875b8b1416a9d2
commit r10-8276-g53e91f867bd1c3773d37b2efb8875b8b1416a9d2
Author: Marek Polacek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95642
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90704
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manx-bugzilla@problemloesun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
--- Comment #9 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 10:14:21AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
>
> IEEE-754 calls binary32, 64, 128 the basic formats (Sec. 3, p. 6):
>
> Five basic formats are defined in this clause:
> Three binary form
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94749
--- Comment #6 from serpent7776 at gmail dot com ---
thanks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91640
--- Comment #8 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Tobias,
are you still planning a backport to 9-branch?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95611
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95611
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f2db0516e1ad6e1c08ed36b14920422f7699c153
commit r9-8667-gf2db0516e1ad6e1c08ed36b14920422f7699c153
Author: Harald Anlauf
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95611
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3b9a3b484f7c89bc5064bf32ecfa2b4aee218d5f
commit r10-8275-g3b9a3b484f7c89bc5064bf32ecfa2b4aee218d5f
Author: Harald Anlauf
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95611
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:393ccb72566dc004b9ab5c3b8fb6fdca6c095812
commit r11-1241-g393ccb72566dc004b9ab5c3b8fb6fdca6c095812
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137
--- Comment #27 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:800dac8fca3cf75512913e380df339fa2253ba76
commit r10-8274-g800dac8fca3cf75512913e380df339fa2253ba76
Author: Iain Sandoe
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95611
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95544
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7fd614ee818983274eb5e47cbb8ec68b20994963
commit r11-1240-g7fd614ee818983274eb5e47cbb8ec68b20994963
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95643
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
After FRE1 we have
_2 = x_9(D) == 0;
if (_2 != 0)
so we assert things for _2 and not x_9, and we lose the __builtin_unreachable
information in CCP2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95348
--- Comment #35 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Qing Zhao from comment #34)
> >
> >> Though still bigger than what ICC generated.
> >
> > Yep, but we should be only 2x bigger right now?
> Yes, around 2-3 times bigger, much better now.
Fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94749
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Fixed in master. I'll keep the bug open as I will probably backport the fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95646
Bug ID: 95646
Summary: arm-none-eabi function attribute
'cmse_nonsecure_entry' wipes register values with -Os
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94749
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b32eea9c0c25a03e77170675abc4e4bcab6d2b3b
commit r11-1238-gb32eea9c0c25a03e77170675abc4e4bcab6d2b3b
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
--- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 04:21:25PM +, longb at cray dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
>
> --- Comment #6 from Bill Long ---
> (In reply to kargl from comment #3)
> > (In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95645
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95237
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||elver at google dot com
--- Comment #16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95645
Bug ID: 95645
Summary: Linux kernel regression "during GIMPLE pass:
adjust_alignment"
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
Bug ID: 95644
Summary: IEEE_FMA is missing from the IEEE_ARITHMETIC module
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 04:12:57PM +, longb at cray dot com wrote:
>
> --- Comment #5 from Bill Long ---
> The same user also submitted a bug about IEEE_FMA not being supported. Is
> there already a bug/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92993
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95643
Bug ID: 95643
Summary: Optimizer fails to realize that a variable tested
twice in a row is the same both times
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95642
Bug ID: 95642
Summary: std::fstream ctr and open member functions fail to
compile with argument of custom type convertible to
std::filesystem::path
Product: gcc
V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
--- Comment #6 from Bill Long ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #3)
> (In reply to Bill Long from comment #0)
> > > cat test.f90
>
> > Gfortran:
> >
> > > module swap PrgEnv-intel PrgEnv-gnu
> > > gfortran test.f90
> > > ./a.out
> > se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
--- Comment #5 from Bill Long ---
The same user also submitted a bug about IEEE_FMA not being supported. Is
there already a bug/rfe for that in the gcc bugzilla?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57359
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
--- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 02:56:58PM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> IEEE-754 permits the extended double type (See 3.7 Extended and
> extendable precisions). I do not see in the Fortran standard tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95638
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I don't see anything obviously wrong with the code. Nothing seems to write to
the storage before the constructor, let alone rely on those writes being
preserved.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95641
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94335
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to kal.conley from comment #6)
For reference, this was also submitted as pr95353 and is now fixed on trunk
(GCC 11).
The test case in comment #0 still triggers a warning.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95641
Bug ID: 95641
Summary: Bogus error message in the class base specifier
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95635
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||86318
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95578
--- Comment #5 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you for the quick response and quick fix :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95091
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95091
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:abfe42c1fb66a534290bd0a808c2d90842ee848b
commit r9-8665-gabfe42c1fb66a534290bd0a808c2d90842ee848b
Author: Harald Anlauf
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95091
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:77137fbd464b20e2422c887d1e46fa5f1c38dc9e
commit r9-8666-g77137fbd464b20e2422c887d1e46fa5f1c38dc9e
Author: Harald Anlauf
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94022
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95331
Bug 95331 depends on bug 85868, which changed state.
Bug 85868 Summary: Subarray of a pointer array associated with a pointer dummy
argument
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85868
What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85868
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95348
--- Comment #34 from Qing Zhao ---
>
>> Though still bigger than what ICC generated.
>
> Yep, but we should be only 2x bigger right now?
Yes, around 2-3 times bigger, much better now.
>
> Can you please test the parallel merging script? I can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52351
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95331
Bug 95331 depends on bug 52351, which changed state.
Bug 52351 Summary: Wrong bounds when passing an array section to an intent-in
pointer dummy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52351
What|Removed |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95331
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95091
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bf6199ecc9c2dc9f6b5eca3d18ff48b374a8feb9
commit r10-8272-gbf6199ecc9c2dc9f6b5eca3d18ff48b374a8feb9
Author: Harald Anlauf
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95091
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:605e9b1a9b3250537a7269eba7e9c316b0f00d29
commit r10-8273-g605e9b1a9b3250537a7269eba7e9c316b0f00d29
Author: Harald Anlauf
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95503
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:87af4f40453a9c84363bde5d9a58466de7fbee2e
commit r11-1236-g87af4f40453a9c84363bde5d9a58466de7fbee2e
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95639
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95609
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
--- Comment #1 from Bill Long ---
The main problem here is that selected_real_kind and ieee_selected_real_kind
have different specifications. The ieee_selected_real_kind requires a KIND
value corresponding to an IEEE floating format, whereas sele
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95639
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
Bug ID: 95640
Summary: gfortran ieee_selected_real_kind returns 10
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95331
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Kथà¤nig :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2ee70f5d161edd99a7af97d166b251bcf83cd91b
commit r11-1235-g2ee70f5d161edd99a7af97d166b251bcf83cd91b
Author: José Rui Faustino de S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95639
Bug ID: 95639
Summary: wrong error location
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: una
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95627
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:444035eafa2fbabbb1261f258bfd41e8051aab34
commit r11-1231-g444035eafa2fbabbb1261f258bfd41e8051aab34
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95627
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Snake Trap
catches all snakes, rodents and crowling insects (including poisonous snakes)
20,000 LBP per unit (up to 5 traps with installation) - suitable for Homes
16,000 LBP per unit (up to 20 traps with installation and weekly visit) -
suitable for Bakeries, Pastries, Retaurants or Hotels
1 - 100 of 138 matches
Mail list logo