https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:59221dc587f369695d9b0c2f73aedf8458931f0f
commit r15-1508-g59221dc587f369695d9b0c2f73aedf8458931f0f
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=951
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #12)
> Patch posted that might help with this a little bit:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-March/648306.html
I don't know how much of that patch overl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115528
--- Comment #20 from kargls at comcast dot net ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #19)
> Created attachment 58476 [details]
> First independent reproducer
It appears to be a striding issue. The loops at formf.f:507 is
DO 206 I=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114814
--- Comment #3 from Feng Xue ---
The pattern to match the code belongs to a generic dot-product category, we
could consider mapping it to native dot-product instruction with a constant "1"
operand.
moviv29.16b, 0x1
.L4:
ldr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106870
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-06-21
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115567
--- Comment #2 from Xi Ruoyao ---
*** Bug 115569 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115569
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115573
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |rtl-optimization
--- Comment #1 from An
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115573
Bug ID: 115573
Summary: ICE: verify_flow_info failed with no_reorder attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100030
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 100031 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100031
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115572
--- Comment #1 from Anonymous ---
***
The compiler produces an internal error in lookup_template_class when compiling
the provided code with the specified options.
The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115572
Bug ID: 115572
Summary: internal compiler error: in dependent_type_p, at
cp/pt.cc:28020
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115355
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:52c112800d9f44457c4832309a48c00945811313
commit r15-1504-g52c112800d9f44457c4832309a48c00945811313
Author: Kewen Lin
Date: Thu Jun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106069
--- Comment #40 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:52c112800d9f44457c4832309a48c00945811313
commit r15-1504-g52c112800d9f44457c4832309a48c00945811313
Author: Kewen Lin
Date: Thu Jun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115571
Bug ID: 115571
Summary: `cmp * float` vs `tmp_bool * float` and better
vectorization for `cmp * float`
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115570
--- Comment #4 from Curtis J Blank ---
Thank you the information.
So I should use unsigned int now on x86_64?
Where can I read more on the rule violations and what would be the proper so do
this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115570
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note there is also an alignment requirement that you violate with the
assignment and access of the char array too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115570
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note this code also violates C/C++ aliasing rules but that is a different
issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115570
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115570
Bug ID: 115570
Summary: array subscript 'long unsigned int[0]' is partly
outside array bounds of 'unsigned char[4]'
Product: gcc
Version: 13.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115563
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note I have a fix for this which I attached to PR 68855 and will be submitting
it after the bootstrap/test finishes. Thanks again for the testcase and the
decent bug report. It definitely was useful.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 58477
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58477&action=edit
Patch which I am testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
C version of the same:
```
void foo(_Complex float *a, int n)
{
for(int i = 0; i < n; i++)
{
_Complex float t;
t = a[i];
t += 6.0;
t = __builtin_assoc_barrier(t);
a[i] = t;
}
}
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115528
--- Comment #19 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Created attachment 58476
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58476&action=edit
First independent reproducer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115408
--- Comment #13 from gagan sidhu (broly) ---
oh i see, i didn't realise that thumb was pure 16 bit.
my apologies.
so i guess i meant thumb2, which would have the same effect of the
mips16/minterlink-mips16 flags that i use to "collapse" 32 bit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115408
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to gagan sidhu (broly) from comment #11)
> dear lad(ettes),
>
> i just want to take this opportunity to contrast this scenario, had the
> equivalent occurred on the inferior, unjustifiably hyped,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115408
--- Comment #11 from gagan sidhu (broly) ---
dear lad(ettes),
i just want to take this opportunity to contrast this scenario, had the
equivalent occurred on the inferior, unjustifiably hyped, ARM architecture's
"thumb" mode, which is arguably a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115566
--- Comment #6 from Halalaluyafail3 ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> C11 still has it:
>
> 6.7.9/14:
> An array of character type may be initialized by a character string literal
> orUTF−8 string literal, optionally enclosed in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115566
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2004-July/144923.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115566
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note HP's aCC errored out on this code even. So it was not just something GCC
added to be extra pedantic either (this was mentioned in PR 11250 too).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115566
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115566
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
>. Clang accepts this, even with -std=c89 -pedantic.
Well that is definitely a clang issue. See PR 11250 which added this warning.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115533
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
Summary|[12/13/14/15 regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115568
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I wonder if the scheduler is moving the divide (by zero) incorrectly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115567
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115569
Bug ID: 115569
Summary: Internal Compiler Error: Segmentation Fault during
build
Product: gcc
Version: 12.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115564
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
p
--enable-checking=yes --prefix=/local/suz-local/software/local/gcc-trunk
--enable-sanitizers --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 15.0.0 20240620 (experimental) (GCC)
[525] %
[525] % gcctk -O2 small.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115567
Bug ID: 115567
Summary: Internal Compiler Error: Segmentation Fault during
build
Product: gcc
Version: 12.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115566
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
/* If TYPE is an array type and EXPR is a parenthesized string
constant, warn if pedantic that EXPR is being used to initialize an
object of type TYPE. */
void
maybe_warn_string_init (location_t loc,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115566
Bug ID: 115566
Summary: Arrays of character type initialized with
parenthesized string literals shouldn't be diagnosed
with -pedantic (at least in C23)
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95763
Michael Levine changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mlevine55 at bloomberg dot net
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115565
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-06-20
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115565
--- Comment #2 from Maciej W. Rozycki ---
Created attachment 58475
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58475&action=edit
Reduced reproducer and incorrect code + RTL dumps produced with commit
08a692679fb8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115565
--- Comment #1 from Maciej W. Rozycki ---
Created attachment 58474
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58474&action=edit
Reduced reproducer and correct code + RTL dumps produced with commit
4cd26879f758
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115565
Bug ID: 115565
Summary: [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8/4.9/5/6/7/8/9/10/
11/12/13/14/15 Regression] CSE: Comparison incorrectly
evaluated as constant causing optimization to pro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115559
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
NOTE to self: This code now adds the attribute unconditionally. For COMMON and
MODULE it makes sense; but for programm/subroutine/function, it needs to be
rechecked whether that variable is actually used.
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note the handling of PAREN_EXPR in tree-complex.c has been inefficient since
the tree code was added back in r0-85884-gdedd42d511b6e4 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115559
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115454
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Matthias Kretz
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a0b92a530ad61389c0cdeb8d8ece4677e019c28e
commit r11-11517-ga0b92a530ad61389c0cdeb8d8ece4677e019c28e
Author: Matthias Kret
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115454
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Matthias Kretz
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e77f314ccd422ffa05c6c06837e2cb94c25f2bba
commit r14-10331-ge77f314ccd422ffa05c6c06837e2cb94c25f2bba
Author: Matthias Kret
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115564
Bug ID: 115564
Summary: -Wanalyzer-infinite-loop false negative when there are
no source locations
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115495
Patrick O'Neill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15 Regression] ICE in |[15 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
I wonder if lower complex should do a better job in the first place:
that is from:
_9 = _8 + __complex__ (6.0e+0, 1.0e+0);
_11 = ((_9));
(*a_7(D))[_6] = _11;
instead of producing:
_9 = COMPLEX_EXPR <
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note a good testcase for this is (with `-O3 -ffast-math -fopenmp-simd`):
```
subroutine foo(a,n)
complex (kind(1d0)) :: a(*)
integer :: i,n
!$OMP SIMD
do i=1,n
a(i)=(a(i)+(6d0,1d0))
enddo
end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115563
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note the full IR:
_9 = COMPLEX_EXPR <_15, _14>;
_11 = ((_9));
_19 = REALPART_EXPR <_11>;
_20 = IMAGPART_EXPR <_11>;
REALPART_EXPR <(*a_7(D))[_6]> = _19;
IMAGPART_EXPR <(*a_7(D))[_6]> = _20;
Yes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mjr19 at cam dot ac.uk
--- Comment #4 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115563
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115563
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115563
Bug ID: 115563
Summary: Unnecessary brackets prevent fortran vectorisation
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115526
--- Comment #4 from Andreas K. Huettel ---
Here's what cvise came up with as minimal test case.
1) compile command:
alpha-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -c -fno-strict-overflow -Wsign-compare -mieee
-DNDEBUG -mieee -pipe -O2 -mcpu=ev4 -fwrapv -std=c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115559
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
For C, it is actually handled in the FE for
tree at1 = lookup_attribute ("omp declare target", DECL_ATTRIBUTES (t));
tree at2 = lookup_attribute ("omp declare target link",
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115561
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||14.1.0, 15.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85316
Bug 85316 depends on bug 11, which changed state.
Bug 11 Summary: [Ranger] deduce 'a >= 0' from 'b << a'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31178
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115562
--- Comment #1 from Christoph Müllner ---
This issue was discovered while analyzing a build issue with a patchset
to introduce optimized string processing routines for RISC-V in glibc.
See also:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/202
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115562
Bug ID: 115562
Summary: RISC-V: ICE because of reused fndecl with target-arch
attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115561
Bug ID: 115561
Summary: [14/15 Regression] ICE checking constraints when a
local class is involved
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115497
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109150
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90276
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Two patches posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-June/655274.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-June/655273.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115533
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58471
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58471&action=edit
test.c
Attached a first cut of a reduction, I still have more to do though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115533
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> I wonder if it's the badly tested interaction between IPA opts and IPA PTA,
> I assume -O2 -ftree-vectorize instead of -O3 isn't enough to reproduce?
>
It isn't,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115560
Bug ID: 115560
Summary: ICE: in type_dependent_expression_p, at cp/pt.cc:28576
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115559
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Looks as if offload_vars is empty in case of Fortran; the variables are tagged
as 'declare variant link' in the FE but varpool_node::get_create has:
if ((flag_openacc || flag_openmp)
&& lookup_attri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109753
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||malat at debian dot org
--- Comment #20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115556
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115556
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||109753
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinsk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115556
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
The trunk error message might be better:
```
In file included from
/opt/compiler-explorer/libs/highway/trunk/hwy/highway.h:588,
from
/opt/compiler-explorer/libs/highway/trunk/hwy/contrib/mat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
--- Comment #18 from Andrew Pinski ---
Related to https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2886.html also.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115559
Bug ID: 115559
Summary: [OpenMP] 'link' clause of 'declare target' causes link
errors
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openmp, rejects-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114844
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2886.html
The DR report is still have not been accepted here ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115558
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115558
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
See https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-patches/2019-09/msg00311.html .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115558
Bug ID: 115558
Summary: Trivial noexcept(false) default constructor does not
make value initialization potentially throwing
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114825
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115440
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.5
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114956
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114691
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114876
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114634
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114572
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114566
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114537
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 114537, which changed state.
Bug 114537 Summary: bit_cast does not work NSDMI of bitfields
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114537
What|Removed |Added
---
1 - 100 of 420 matches
Mail list logo
