[Bug tree-optimization/101793] Incorrect -Wmaybe-uninitialized on an unreachable use at -O1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101793 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 101770, which changed state. Bug 101770 Summary: -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm with only locals in GNU diffutils https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101770 What|Removed |Ad

[Bug tree-optimization/101770] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm with only locals in GNU diffutils

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101770 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/96629] spurious maybe uninitialized variable warning with difficult control-flow analysis

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96629 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 f

[Bug tree-optimization/91470] [10/11/12 Regression] bogus uninitialized warning in trans-intrinsic.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91470 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10/11/12/13 Regression]|[10/11/12 Regression] bogus

[Bug tree-optimization/88897] [10/11/12 Regression] Bogus maybe-uninitialized warning on class field (missed CSE)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88897 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org Summa

[Bug middle-end/85563] [10/11/12/13 regression] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm regression with __builtin_unreachable and GCC 8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85563 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #22

[Bug tree-optimization/85301] bitfield check causes maybe-uninitialized warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85301 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 85301, which changed state. Bug 85301 Summary: bitfield check causes maybe-uninitialized warning https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85301 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug tree-optimization/19794] [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19794 Bug 19794 depends on bug 84078, which changed state. Bug 84078 Summary: false positive for -Wmaybe-uninitialized with __asm__ https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84078 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug middle-end/84078] false positive for -Wmaybe-uninitialized with __asm__

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84078 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 84078, which changed state. Bug 84078 Summary: false positive for -Wmaybe-uninitialized with __asm__ https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84078 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug middle-end/57832] compiling sha-256 code (xz 5.0.5) generates false warnings when using -march=native on Atom CPU

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57832 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |13.0

[Bug tree-optimization/80635] [10 regression] std::optional and bogus -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #70

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 80548, which changed state. Bug 80548 Summary: -Wmaybe-uninitialized false positive when an assignment is added https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80548 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug tree-optimization/80548] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false positive when an assignment is added

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80548 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/78993] [10/11 Regression] False positive from -Wmaybe-uninitialized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78993 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #12

[Bug target/107713] Wrong implementation atomic_exchange on LoongArch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107713 --- Comment #10 from chenglulu --- (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #9) > Fixed for gcc-12 too. Thanks! ^v^

[Bug tree-optimization/67196] [10/11/12 Regression] loop-induced false positive from -Wmaybe-uninitialized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67196 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org Summa

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 57832, which changed state. Bug 57832 Summary: compiling sha-256 code (xz 5.0.5) generates false warnings when using -march=native on Atom CPU https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57832 What|Remove

[Bug middle-end/57832] compiling sha-256 code (xz 5.0.5) generates false warnings when using -march=native on Atom CPU

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57832 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/40635] [12/13 Regression] bogus name and location in 'may be used uninitialized' warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40635 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #25

[Bug target/81495] Building Ada on Linux m68k natively fails with obscure linker errors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81495 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug testsuite/83454] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/cswtch-4.c and cswtch-5.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83454 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC|

[Bug target/87010] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/20180712-1.c -O1 (test for excess errors)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87010 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/91625] FAIL: gcc.dg/strlenopt-68.c execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91625 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug other/104044] Useless empty statements (across projects)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104044 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org Sta

[Bug other/104044] Useless empty statements (across projects)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104044 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6d82e0fea5f988e829912aaa70a9964a81ad4e5e commit r13-4173-g6d82e0fea5f988e829912aaa70a9964a81ad4e5e Author: Jeff Law Date: Sat Nov 19

[Bug libgcc/61152] Missing GCC Runtime Library Exception in some files that are included in libgcc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61152 --- Comment #14 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #13) > More importantly, we should _not_ be adding the runtime exception to files > in GCC proper. That exception is for the runtime. The fact that files in > libgc

[Bug libgcc/61152] Missing GCC Runtime Library Exception in some files that are included in libgcc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61152 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/107753] gfortran returns NaN in complex divisions (x+x*I)/(x+x*I) and (x+x*I)/(x-x*I)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107753 --- Comment #12 from Steve Kargl --- On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 08:14:01PM +, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107753 > > --- Comment #11 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- > (In reply to Weslley

[Bug driver/90443] when collect2/lto-wrapper/gcc-nm/gcc-ld fails to find a program, it does not say which program is being found

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90443 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug driver/91244] gcc-ar prepends --plugin option thus triggers binutils getopt_long bug 13256

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91244 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug driver/90902] collect2 does not propagate gcc -wrapper far enough to wrap ld

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90902 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|pinskia at gcc do

[Bug tree-optimization/80588] GCC can't simplify static inline function with xor/xnor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80588 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug driver/77576] gcc-ar doesn't work if all options are read from file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77576 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/107765] New: missing (int)-(unsigned)int_val to just -int_val if int_val is known not to contain INT_MIN

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107765 Bug ID: 107765 Summary: missing (int)-(unsigned)int_val to just -int_val if int_val is known not to contain INT_MIN Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/58195] Missed optimization opportunity when returning a conditional

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58195 --- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski --- Note the loop one looks like: if (input_4(D) != 0) goto ; [89.00%] else goto ; [11.00%] [local count: 105119324]: _1 = (unsigned int) input_4(D); _3 = -_1; value_2 = (int) _3; [local

[Bug tree-optimization/38209] branch optimisation generates worse code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38209 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.0 Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug fortran/107659] C procedure with no global scope is seen as global

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107659 --- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- I was trying a fix that regressed on binding_label_tests_34.f90, but looking into that it appears that this test is not correct, as well as the comment at the top of it. The fix for pr94737 was l

[Bug analyzer/107582] - -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value false positive with while loop in pthread_cleanup_push

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107582 --- Comment #10 from dimitri at ouroboros dot rocks --- thanks for the analysis and the fix!

[Bug c/106560] [12/13 Regression] ICE after conflicting types of redeclaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106560 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.3 Summary|ICE after confl

[Bug c/107405] [13 Regression] enum change causing Linux kernel to fail to build due to Linux depending on old behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107405 --- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek --- It is a pedwarn (pedantic warning, with -pedantic-errors a hard error).

[Bug middle-end/107661] [13 Regression] lambdas get merged incorrectly in tempaltes, cause llvm-12 miscompilation since r13-3358-ge0403e95689af7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107661 --- Comment #12 from Sergei Trofimovich --- Testing the following: --- a/gcc/ipa-cp.cc +++ b/gcc/ipa-cp.cc @@ -5869,37 +5869,37 @@ cgraph_edge_brings_all_scalars_for_node (struct cgraph_edge *cs, /* Determine whether CS also brings all aggrega

[Bug c++/107764] -Wreturn-type and -Wuninitialized documentation could link to a FAQ about enum and switches

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107764 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- It also does not help that clang and GCC disagree on how the C++ enums work either.

[Bug fortran/107753] gfortran returns NaN in complex divisions (x+x*I)/(x+x*I) and (x+x*I)/(x-x*I)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107753 --- Comment #11 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Weslley da Silva Pereira from comment #7) > More data for the discussion: > 1. In a Ubuntu 18.04.5 LTS, using GNU Fortran 7.5.0, I tested optimization > flags `-O` but still reproduc

[Bug middle-end/107661] [13 Regression] lambdas get merged incorrectly in tempaltes, cause llvm-12 miscompilation since r13-3358-ge0403e95689af7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107661 --- Comment #11 from Sergei Trofimovich --- I think I found the bug: r13-3358-ge0403e95689af7 cgraph_edge_brings_all_agg_vals_for_node() accidentally changed behaviour of the predicate: - before the change: ipa-cp triggers when constrop contain

[Bug c++/107763] -Wreturn-type false-positive with fully-covered switch over enum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107763 --- Comment #5 from Roman Lebedev --- Thank you. Forwarded to https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/59085

[Bug c++/107763] -Wreturn-type false-positive with fully-covered switch over enum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107763 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Roman Lebedev from comment #2)> > Is this situation different in C++? looks like i set the component wrong. > Is this implementation-defined behavior, > or are you saying that clang is wrong he

[Bug c++/91950] -Wreturn-type false positive due to CWG 1766

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91950 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4) > (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #2) > > I think this is actually a dup of another bug that asked the same thing, but > > I forget its number... > > The

[Bug c++/107764] New: -Wreturn-type and -Wuninitialized documentation could link to a FAQ about enum and switches

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107764 Bug ID: 107764 Summary: -Wreturn-type and -Wuninitialized documentation could link to a FAQ about enum and switches Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/107763] -Wreturn-type false-positive with fully-covered switch over enum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107763 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- No, it is not different in C++. See PR 91950 for that.

[Bug c++/107763] -Wreturn-type false-positive with fully-covered switch over enum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107763 Roman Lebedev changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |c++ --- Comment #2 from Roman Lebedev

[Bug c/107763] -Wreturn-type false-positive with fully-covered switch over enum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107763 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/107763] New: -Wreturn-type false-positive with fully-covered switch over enum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107763 Bug ID: 107763 Summary: -Wreturn-type false-positive with fully-covered switch over enum Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/107753] gfortran returns NaN in complex divisions (x+x*I)/(x+x*I) and (x+x*I)/(x-x*I)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107753 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 --- Comment #10 from kargl

[Bug rtl-optimization/107762] [13 Regression] Recent change causing regressions on s390-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107762 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/107743] expmed: extract_bit_field_1: maybe-uninitialized warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107743 --- Comment #2 from Bernhard Reutner-Fischer --- --disable-werror --enable-checking=yes --enable-debug --enable-multilib --disable-libstdcxx-pch --enable-bootstrap

[Bug rtl-optimization/107762] New: [13 Regression] Recent change causing regressions on s390-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107762 Bug ID: 107762 Summary: [13 Regression] Recent change causing regressions on s390-linux-gnu Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/14840] fold tree_code_type[CST] and tree_code_length[CST] in GCC itself

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14840 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |13.0 Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/14840] fold tree_code_type[CST] and tree_code_length[CST] in GCC itself

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14840 --- Comment #16 from CVS Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5c021f17e7d09a0eae2d6fb875c9a5484bd4e043 commit r13-4170-g5c021f17e7d09a0eae2d6fb875c9a5484bd4e043 Author: Andrew Pinski Date: Fr

[Bug libstdc++/107649] New std::complex specializations are never used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107649 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:945e86ddaa6cc7251d7bb57be8bb65f182cd3a0c commit r13-4167-g945e86ddaa6cc7251d7bb57be8bb65f182cd3a0c Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug c/107405] [13 Regression] enum change causing Linux kernel to fail to build due to Linux depending on old behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107405 --- Comment #15 from Maciej W. Rozycki --- If in older C standard versions such enums are invalid, then I think this should be a hard error rather than a silent ABI change for the code produced. Not all code out there will have sanity checks su

[Bug target/107713] Wrong implementation atomic_exchange on LoongArch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107713 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.3 Version|13.0

[Bug target/107713] Wrong implementation atomic_exchange on LoongArch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107713 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug target/107713] Wrong implementation atomic_exchange on LoongArch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107713 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Xi Ruoyao : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2adcbcc69a1d5d9554042f09ec35e72bf39fb56f commit r12-8918-g2adcbcc69a1d5d9554042f09ec35e72bf39fb56f Author: Jinyang He Date:

[Bug c++/98859] pedantic error on use of __VA_OPT__ before C++20 is unnecessary and counterproductive

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98859 Will Wray changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wjwray at gmail dot com --- Comment #3 from

[Bug libstdc++/107761] New: Implement C++23

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107761 Bug ID: 107761 Summary: Implement C++23 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee

[Bug libstdc++/107760] New: Implement C++23

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107760 Bug ID: 107760 Summary: Implement C++23 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee

[Bug libstdc++/107759] New: Implement C++23

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107759 Bug ID: 107759 Summary: Implement C++23 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee

[Bug libstdc++/107758] New: Implement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107758 Bug ID: 107758 Summary: Implement Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unas

[Bug preprocessor/107691] [10/11/12/13 Regression] libcpp configure fails on empty expansion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107691 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Bernhard Reutner-Fischer : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5a6c698ea31f587151a2fa4a982c8cc43bd9cc45 commit r13-4165-g5a6c698ea31f587151a2fa4a982c8cc43bd9cc45 Author: Bernhard Reut

[Bug target/106462] LRA on mips64el: unable to reload (subreg:SI (reg:DI)) constrained by "f"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106462 --- Comment #4 from Yang Yujie --- (In reply to Yang Yujie from comment #3) > (In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #2) > > I built mips64el-linux-gnuabi64 but using -mabi=64 -msingle-float for it > > gives > > > > cc1: error: unsupported

[Bug target/106462] LRA on mips64el: unable to reload (subreg:SI (reg:DI)) constrained by "f"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106462 --- Comment #3 from Yang Yujie --- (In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #2) > I built mips64el-linux-gnuabi64 but using -mabi=64 -msingle-float for it > gives > > cc1: error: unsupported combination: -mgp64 -mno-odd-spreg > > Did I miss

[Bug c++/98940] Implement C++23 language features

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98940 Bug 98940 depends on bug 107684, which changed state. Bug 107684 Summary: [C++23] P2589 - static operator[] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107684 What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c++/107684] [C++23] P2589 - static operator[]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107684 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug c++/106654] [C++23] P1774 - Portable assumptions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106654 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/98940] Implement C++23 language features

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98940 Bug 98940 depends on bug 106654, which changed state. Bug 106654 Summary: [C++23] P1774 - Portable assumptions https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106654 What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/98940] Implement C++23 language features

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98940 Bug 98940 depends on bug 106652, which changed state. Bug 106652 Summary: [C++23] P1467 - Extended floating-point types and standard names https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106652 What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/106652] [C++23] P1467 - Extended floating-point types and standard names

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106652 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug libstdc++/106749] Implement C++23 library features

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106749 Bug 106749 depends on bug 106652, which changed state. Bug 106652 Summary: [C++23] P1467 - Extended floating-point types and standard names https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106652 What|Removed |Add

[Bug c++/107685] [C++23] P2647 - Permitting static constexpr variables in constexpr functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107685 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Resolu

[Bug c++/98940] Implement C++23 language features

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98940 Bug 98940 depends on bug 107685, which changed state. Bug 107685 Summary: [C++23] P2647 - Permitting static constexpr variables in constexpr functions https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107685 What|Removed

[Bug target/107628] ICE: SIGSEGV in commutative_operand_precedence (rtlanal.cc:3770) with -fsignaling-nans

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107628 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/107628] ICE: SIGSEGV in commutative_operand_precedence (rtlanal.cc:3770) with -fsignaling-nans

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107628 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b1115dbfea4d6df51d608cece7416d658d2e2822 commit r13-4162-gb1115dbfea4d6df51d608cece7416d658d2e2822 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date: S

[Bug c/107756] Change in sizeof(enum) with -std=gnu11 breaks Linux kernel code compilation (PR c/36113 change regression)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107756 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/107405] [13 Regression] enum change causing Linux kernel to fail to build due to Linux depending on old behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107405 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||macro at orcam dot me.uk --- Comment #1