https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102867
--- Comment #3 from Alan Modra ---
Not that I'm really complaining about this, note also that the error message
referencing "filedata->section_headers + (sizetype)((long unsigned int)i * 80)"
is a little bit too much of compiler internal represe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102860
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102867
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102864
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102861
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102868
Bug ID: 102868
Summary: Missed optimization with __builtin_shuffle and zero
vector on ppc
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102844
--- Comment #24 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #23)
> Invalid is invalid. Full stop.
>
> I'll have to put it under a debugger, but I would have expected the nocopy
> block to turn into a forwarder -- why do we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101746
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> I can confirm gcc.dg/tree-prof/20050826-2.c fails even on x86_64-linux-gnu.
I think this has been fixed now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102867
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Waddress complaint in |[12 Regression] Waddress
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102867
--- Comment #1 from Alan Modra ---
Created attachment 51641
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51641&action=edit
preprocessed source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102867
Bug ID: 102867
Summary: Waddress complaint in readelf.c
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100295
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 102778 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102778
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100295
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||benni.probst at gmx dot de
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102866
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100912
--- Comment #8 from Qiu Chaofan ---
> Looks like we need two different versions of that symbol, with different
> mangled names.
Yes, I did a little hack: adding another symbol `__convert_from_v_ieee128`
(guarded under macro __LONG_DOUBLE_IEEE1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102865
Heather A changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102865
--- Comment #3 from Heather A
---
Ha, okay. I figured it out. It was totally bad on my side.
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=7cbc870c495cebc61f5d0ebb975856c207a42fab
resolved this issue.
I was going insane trying to figure out w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102866
Bug ID: 102866
Summary: Unexpected error on variadic forwarding
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102865
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Also these configure options seems odd:
--with-newlib --disable-lto
Why set CFLAGS/CPPFLAGS also?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102865
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-10-21
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102865
Bug ID: 102865
Summary: gcc-12.0 HEAD fails to compile on x86_64 Darwin:
unknown machine mode ‘HF’
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1af78e731feb9327a17c99ebaa19a4cca1125caf
commit r12-4591-g1af78e731feb9327a17c99ebaa19a4cca1125caf
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36902
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102703
--- Comment #17 from Andrew Pinski ---
Hmm, I get one regression:
+FAIL: gcc.dg/pr36902.c (test for warnings, line 47)
I filed PR 102864 and will change the testcase so we don't run into that issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102864
Bug ID: 102864
Summary: no out of bounds warning for DCE code
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102764
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102857
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
For me on x86_64 I get:
gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-7.c: dump file does not exist
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-7.c scan-tree-dump-not vrp-thread2
"Jumps threaded"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102812
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongyu Wang from comment #3)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #2)
> > Please note that the code above should compile via ix86_expand_vector_set,
> > similar to:
> >
> > --cut here--
> > ty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102863
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102863
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0fac85a24f40ef6098b756e8e8655205f4bfbf3e
commit r12-4586-g0fac85a24f40ef6098b756e8e8655205f4bfbf3e
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102863
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Target Milestone|---
int main() {
std::optional x;
x.transform([](auto& y) { f(y); return 42; });
}
: In instantiation of 'main():: [with auto:3 = const
int]':
/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20211020/include/c++/12.0.0/type_traits:2565:26:
required by substitution of 'template sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102787
--- Comment #7 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Slightly improved version of the patch of comment#6:
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/array.c b/gcc/fortran/array.c
index 6552eaf3b0c..a63a6631f59 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/array.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/array
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #72 from Christoph Reiter ---
Works nicely now. Thanks everyone!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102862
Bug ID: 102862
Summary: CLASS(*) – various issues, esp. with assumed-rank
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic, rejects-valid
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102861
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #1)
> Similarly to 102860.
>
> The referenced patch reduces the amount of threaded paths, not increase
> them. This actually looks like another pass hiccuping becau
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102860
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102703
--- Comment #16 from Andrew Pinski ---
I have a new patch in testing that replaces patch 4 and uses
simple_dce_from_worklist instead which moves of the detection of dead code to
already common code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102815
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102861
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Similarly to 102860.
The referenced patch reduces the amount of threaded paths, not increase them.
This actually looks like another pass hiccuping because it was expecting a
threaded path that is no longe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102860
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
The referenced patch reduces the amount of threaded paths, not increase them.
This actually looks like another pass hiccuping because it was expecting a
threaded path that is no longer there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102861
Bug ID: 102861
Summary: [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-16.c fails after
r12-4526
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #71 from Óscar Fuentes ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #70)
> Tentatively fixed, reopen if not.
The bootstrap works.
Thank you.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102860
Bug ID: 102860
Summary: [12 regression] libgomp.fortran/simd2.f90 ICEs after
r12-4526
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102859
Bug ID: 102859
Summary: [OpenMP] Missing testsuite coverage for Fortran task
reductions
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100753
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #2)
> Additionally missing: Fortran support.
Fortran support was implemented in
r12-4574-gd98626bf451dea6a28a42d953f7d0bd7659ad4d5
Still to do: Proper nowait support
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102844
--- Comment #23 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Invalid is invalid. Full stop.
I'll have to put it under a debugger, but I would have expected the nocopy
block to turn into a forwarder -- why do we end up putting statements in here?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99244
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99244
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This seems to be fixed on trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99244
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||niancw29 at 163 dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102858
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102842
--- Comment #9 from tt_1 ---
So, I did a little bit of research. pr92807 has indeed been backported to the
gcc-10 branch and is included in the gcc-10.3.0 release - it touches
gcc/config/i386/i386.c and adds a testcase.
There is another fixup
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102820
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102858
Bug ID: 102858
Summary: ICE when compiling to "thread.gcm"
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102325
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102323
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102339
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #3 from Gaius Mulley ---
> apologies if this is the wrong way to mention a status change. (Is this
> done on bugzilla? I've looked and cannot see how to change its statu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102847
--- Comment #3 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I reran my bisects on two different systems and both resolved to
g:793d2549b173a0a2da6dd20ffc27acb9fd2de73e, r12-4501
as when the builds started failing. r12-4500 worked on both systems.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102325
--- Comment #3 from Gaius Mulley ---
"rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" writes:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102325
>
> Richard Biener changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
> -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102339
--- Comment #2 from Gaius Mulley ---
"ro at gcc dot gnu.org" writes:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102339
>
> Bug ID: 102339
>Summary: gm2 testsuite leaves many files behind
>Product: gcc
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344
--- Comment #3 from Gaius Mulley ---
"ro at gcc dot gnu.org" writes:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344
>
> Bug ID: 102344
>Summary: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod FAILs
>Product: gcc
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102857
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102838
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Does the committed patch fix the issue on Solaris?
I'll see after tonight's bootstrap. The original one attached to the PR
fixed only a few o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102838
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Does the committed patch fix the issue on Solaris?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98005
--- Comment #7 from Patrick Palka ---
Looks like after r12-4517 the test now compiles successfully on m68k according
to
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2021-October/729689.html
Though the test presumably still fails on the 11 br
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91118
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102374
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |WONTFIX
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102844
--- Comment #22 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #20)
> (In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #18)
> > (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #17)
> > > On Wed, 20 Oct 2021, aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102375
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102375
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
BTW, if we want to use strip_whitespaces, it should use ISBLANK or ISSPACE
instead of using == ' ' or == '\t' etc. comparisons.
But I really find it not a good idea to support "\t\t+sve\t\t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100966
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102857
Bug ID: 102857
Summary: [12 regression] r12-4526 caused regressions on
vect/bb-slp-16.c and ssa-dom-thread-7.c
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100966
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Wilco Dijkstra :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:16ce822ed14e6635ee2ffcba394bba8e934bc6dd
commit r12-4567-g16ce822ed14e6635ee2ffcba394bba8e934bc6dd
Author: Wilco Dijkstra
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102841
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|libgomp.oacc-c++/../libgomp |[12 regression]
|.oacc-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102856
Bug ID: 102856
Summary: [nvptx] Misaligned accesses with cheap vectorization
enabled
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102842
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to tt_1 from comment #7)
> hey, thanks for the messages. I just finished to compile firefox with
> patched cross-gcc-10.3.0, the ice is fixed with the patch from
> https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102853
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102853
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ac5e46563817f4f1bd786be1d21b85d18e61bc0c
commit r12-4558-gac5e46563817f4f1bd786be1d21b85d18e61bc0c
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102854
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
For the non-template case (with int / IndexType reversed, (ups!)):
finish_omp_for's vec *orig_inits is an empty vector
but for the template, it isn't (it contains '0' and 'i'); thus, the following
check is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102842
--- Comment #7 from tt_1 ---
hey, thanks for the messages. I just finished to compile firefox with patched
cross-gcc-10.3.0, the ice is fixed with the patch from
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;h=74dc179a6da33cd00f6d4a93fbb97dc84f61
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100757
--- Comment #15 from Christophe Lyon ---
Hi, yes this is close to completion.
The patch series was approved last week by Richard Sandiford:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-October/581778.html
but I have found a bug with more vali
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102855
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-10-20
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102844
--- Comment #21 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #12)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #10)
> > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9)
> > > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #8)
> > > > Using x86
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102853
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 20 Oct 2021, rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102853
>
> --- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
> ---
> Maybe it's much of a m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102842
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102842
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
And reduced test-case looks like this:
struct Plane {
using T = float;
T *Row();
};
using ImageF = Plane;
long long Mirror_x;
struct EnsurePaddingInPlaceRowByRow {
void Process() {
switch (strategy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64888
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102375
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
You can also use string literal concatenation:
target("foo," "bar," "baz") which is identical to target("foo,bar,baz")
Although target("foo", "bar", "baz") seems easier to read anyway.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102853
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Maybe it's much of a muchness, but would it work instead to bail
out for wrapping types at the top of split_constant_offset_1
and remove the check for trapping from the CASE_CONVERT code?
It s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100757
vvinayag at arm dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vvinayag at arm dot com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102853
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Target|ppc64-linu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102855
Bug ID: 102855
Summary: #pragma GCC unroll n should support n being a template
parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102375
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And note we already do support target ("+sve", "+sve2"), so there is not much
point in allowing whitespace inside of the string literals.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102844
--- Comment #20 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #18)
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #17)
> > On Wed, 20 Oct 2021, aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > > Silly question, why is the SSA form invali
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102844
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102844
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102854
Bug ID: 102854
Summary: [OpenMP] Bogus "initializer expression refers to
iteration variable" when using templates
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
1 - 100 of 138 matches
Mail list logo
