https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113301
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113297
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
another option might be to punt for _BitInt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113296
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|SPEC 2006 434.zeusmp|[14 Regression] SPEC 2006
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113303
Bug ID: 113303
Summary: One can assign to const reference in a template
partial specialization
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113247
--- Comment #6 from JuzheZhong ---
I have tried generic-ooo:
https://compiler-explorer.com/z/44dcePczz
There are still a few vectorized codes in the last couple lines of assembler:
vsetivlizero,4,e32,m1,ta,ma
addwa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113302
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
This should also optimize to that:
```
int j(int x)
{
int t = x == -1;
int t1 = x == 1;
return t | -t1;
}
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113302
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/llvm/llv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113302
Bug ID: 113302
Summary: `x == 1 ? 1 : (x == -1 ? -1 : 0)` should be optimized
to `((unsigned)t) + 1 <= 2 ? 0`
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Ke
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113301
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.4
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113301
Bug ID: 113301
Summary: [12/13/14 Regression] Missed optimization: (1/(x+1))/2
=> 0 since gcc-12
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113100
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113156
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 57021
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57021&action=edit
Patch which seems to fix it
I cannot test this patch fully but this seems to fix it.
Signed-off-by: Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111480
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|testsuite |target
Keywords|testsuite-fail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112751
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112606
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113156
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||11.1.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113156
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-01-10
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111480
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6660904c3f5872262f466b5cbbd48fb11e9fe966
commit r14-7091-g6660904c3f5872262f466b5cbbd48fb11e9fe966
Author: Kewen Lin
Date: Tue Jan 9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112751
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:57792c33042d17605a6b6ad9027f5e6d5199eb26
commit r14-7092-g57792c33042d17605a6b6ad9027f5e6d5199eb26
Author: Kewen Lin
Date: Tue Jan 9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112606
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cf5f6a048e376ab0d2f7bc283c158605e1166061
commit r14-7090-gcf5f6a048e376ab0d2f7bc283c158605e1166061
Author: Kewen Lin
Date: Tue Jan 9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113156
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 57020
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57020&action=edit
preprocessed source
Exact command line:
```
/home/apinski/src/upstream-full-cross/gcc/objdir-avrr/./gcc/xgcc
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113100
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cb62101787555b7b32607b431fdfe6fcc8f3830f
commit r14-7089-gcb62101787555b7b32607b431fdfe6fcc8f3830f
Author: Kewen Lin
Date: Tue Jan 9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113104
Feng Xue changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113300
--- Comment #4 from Jason Liam ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> There is a C++ defect report in this area even ...
Looks like that gcc and clang are non-compliant here as per this discussion in
CWG issue list: https://github.co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113300
Jason Liam changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|GCC rejects valid program |GCC rejects valid program
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113300
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|GCC rejects valid program |GCC rejects valid program
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113300
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
There is a C++ defect report in this area even ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113300
Bug ID: 113300
Summary: GCC rejects valid program involving explicit and non
explicit default constructors
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99178
--- Comment #5 from Tom Tromey ---
(In reply to David Blaikie from comment #4)
I don't remember filing this bug. At the time maybe I thought it
would be worthwhile to have "end to end" .debug_names generation,
that is, to try to have the index
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99178
David Blaikie changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dblaikie at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113247
--- Comment #5 from JuzheZhong ---
(In reply to Robin Dapp from comment #4)
> The other option is to assert that all tune models have at least a vector
> cost model rather than NULL... But not falling back to the builtin costs
> still makes sen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113289
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note the improved diagnostic for the error message is PR 90798 (and PR 82094).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113294
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note this might be a front-end issue ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113272
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Ok, this behavior is interesting:
```
int g = 0;
int g1 = 0;
template
struct A {
void f() { g++; }
};
template < const auto * a>
struct A{
void f(){ g1++; }
};
int x = 0;
const int x1 = 0;
int main()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110512
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Actually, if we don't care about upstream any more, we can improve the
pre-C++20 version too:
template
using __are_random_access_iterators
= std::__or_>...>;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113299
Bug ID: 113299
Summary: [C++23] Implement P2408R5, Ranges iterators as inputs
to non-Ranges algorithms
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113298
--- Comment #2 from H. Peter Anvin ---
You're not wrong per se. Arguably the problem (and many others) would be better
solved by allowing user-specified conversations that are not member functions.
In that case one could do:
// Set the properti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110512
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The proposed change will compile very slowly, something like this would be
better:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/execution_impl.h
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/execution_impl.h
@@ -19,13 +19,24 @@ nam
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113298
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113265
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113265
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||8.1.0
Summary|[Regression] M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113258
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113144
--- Comment #15 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #13)
> The testcase below segfaults when compiled with master configured with
> release checking. However, it is very likely affected by this bug (it
> fails with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113010
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|13.3|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113010
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113010
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Greg McGary from comment #3)
> This fixes it, though I would like second look from someone more familiar
> with the combiner:
I almost sure this is still an issue with WORD_REGISTER_OPERATIONS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110343
--- Comment #6 from Ed Smith-Rowland ---
Created attachment 57019
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57019&action=edit
Add a flag to only allow new chars in c++26.
Here s a patch that adds and checks a flag in libcpp and also
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #23 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:07d09f0af100a9873982fba663800d87bfd73585
commit r14-7077-g07d09f0af100a9873982fba663800d87bfd73585
Author: waffl3x
Date: Sun Jan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #24 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bfad006b88ec26e91b7edf9cf9ad4aaf9b8a9727
commit r14-7078-gbfad006b88ec26e91b7edf9cf9ad4aaf9b8a9727
Author: waffl3x
Date: Sun Jan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #22 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f8bf6a69e260a5f1aa0dbf89a6e4bcdf1a24af5d
commit r14-7076-gf8bf6a69e260a5f1aa0dbf89a6e4bcdf1a24af5d
Author: waffl3x
Date: Sun Jan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #20 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f9fbf93dc82525a0f54a2293b7ec92d65776bf19
commit r14-7074-gf9fbf93dc82525a0f54a2293b7ec92d65776bf19
Author: waffl3x
Date: Sun Jan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #21 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fbc980d85149409ce62c22f48d3693113803929e
commit r14-7075-gfbc980d85149409ce62c22f48d3693113803929e
Author: waffl3x
Date: Sun Jan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113010
Greg McGary changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112477
François Dumont changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot
gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112886
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112989
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> I narrored down to 2 commits which introduced this:
> r14-6177-g724a873b145d20 works
> r14-6179-gc1c267dfcdccd5 fails
I am 99% sure it was introduced by r14-617
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113298
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to H. Peter Anvin from comment #0)
> Having individual -W options for the various -fpermissive events would allow
> the programmer to pick what extensions to allow unconditionally, which to
> war
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113298
Bug ID: 113298
Summary: RFE: allow suppressing warnings for void * conversions
with -fpermissive
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112989
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
I narrored down to 2 commits which introduced this:
r14-6177-g724a873b145d20 works
r14-6179-gc1c267dfcdccd5 fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112477
--- Comment #7 from Giuseppe D'Angelo ---
Hi,
To be honest I didn't even notice it was a regression, but you're absolutely
right, I can't reproduce my problem with GCC 12, only with GCC 13 (both in
C++17 mode).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
--- Comment #10 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2024-01-09 2:56 p.m., dave.anglin at bell dot net wrote:
> I have to think issue is with get_identifier(). Will have to do another build
> to debug further.
The new code in process_pending_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
--- Comment #9 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2024-01-09 1:00 p.m., jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
>
> --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Note, normally TREE_SYMBOL_REFERENCED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110343
--- Comment #5 from Ed Smith-Rowland ---
Probably should. I'll see how to do that.
I might have to set up the lang flag and all that unless someone beats me to
it.
I was going to say that the error on the stringification is possibly correct.
Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113293
--- Comment #4 from KBDeveloper ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #3)
> (In reply to KBDeveloper from comment #2)
> >
> > Ah, that makes sense. I had assumed that taking the address of arg would
> > force gcc to store it in memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113283
Christopher Di Bella changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cjdb.ns at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113144
--- Comment #14 from Tamar Christina ---
Yeah I'll test. Richi approved the fix today and I'll commit after a final
regtest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113297
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113297
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112989
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Summary|GC ICE with C++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110343
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110343
--- Comment #3 from Ed Smith-Rowland ---
Created attachment 57018
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57018&action=edit
Get the raw string literal to compile.
I just added the new characters to lex_raw_string and got
const cha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113291
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-01-09
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110343
--- Comment #2 from Ed Smith-Rowland ---
The example in the paper:
--
/*
gcc -E charset.c > charhelp.c
gcc -o charhelp charhelp.c
*/
#include
#define STR(x) #x
int main()
{
printf("%s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113293
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112958
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
Someone motivated enough should add a specific libgnat/s-dorepr__freebsd.adb
unit where Rep64 is an array of two Interfaces.Unsigned_64 and the AND
operation on line 88 is performed on the first component.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112958
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 regression] |[12/13/14 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110603
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,
--with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r14-7023-20240109134751-gab6224dfe12-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.0 20240109 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note, normally TREE_SYMBOL_REFERENCED should be set through something like
output_addr_const (or whatever else) -> assemble_name -> assemble_name_resolve
-> mark_referenced. Why doesn't trigger that on PA?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113291
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113070
--- Comment #4 from Alex Coplan ---
So debugging the PGO/LTO failure of cactuBSSN (from SPEC CPU 2017) shows that
we can miss updating uses immediately following an stp insn in the case that we
insert a new stp insn (as opposed to updating an ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113296
Bug ID: 113296
Summary: SPEC 2006 434.zeusmp segfaults on Aarch64 when built
with -Ofast -march=native -flto
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113295
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|SPEC 2006 416.gamess|[14 Regression] SPEC 2006
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113295
Bug ID: 113295
Summary: SPEC 2006 416.gamess miscompares on Aarch64 when built
with -Ofast -march=native -flto
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113293
--- Comment #2 from KBDeveloper ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> The inline-asm is not marking as clobbering memory.
>
> In this case since you just pass the address of the variable, gcc does not
> know the inline-asm will read
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113144
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
The testcase below segfaults when compiled with master configured with
release checking. However, it is very likely affected by this bug (it
fails with checking compiler like testcases for this issue do) a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113293
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113294
Bug ID: 113294
Summary: constexpr error from accessing inactive union member
in basic_string after move assignment
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113249
--- Comment #4 from Robin Dapp ---
> One of the reasons I've been testing things with generic-ooo is because
> generic-ooo had initial vector pipelines defined. For cleaning up the
> scheduler, I copied over the generic-ooo pipelines into generi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113293
Bug ID: 113293
Summary: Incorrect code after inlining function containing
extended asm
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113225
Jose E. Marchesi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 99187, which changed state.
Bug 99187 Summary: [modules] ICE exporting thread_local static local variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99187
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99187
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org |nathanieloshead at
gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112477
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Assignment of |[13/14 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104234
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Assignee|ppalka at g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 104234, which changed state.
Bug 104234 Summary: ICE with -fmodules-ts and std::map/_Rb_tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104234
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113292
Bug ID: 113292
Summary: [modules] internal error when compiling header to
module containing static thread_local variable
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113287
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
Ok, definitely mine :)
I've miss identified that the exit doesn't leave the loop.
Quick hack fixes the issue. I'll work on a proper one tomorrow morning.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113059
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113012
--- Comment #11 from Siddhesh Poyarekar ---
Yes, I'll test and push the 13 backport by the end of the week if there are no
reported regressions on trunk.
1 - 100 of 222 matches
Mail list logo
