https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #5)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> > Note I think this could help scalar code too:
> > ```
> > int a[1], b[1], c[1];
> >
> > void
> > test (void)
> > {
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #5 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Note I think this could help scalar code too:
> ```
> int a[1], b[1], c[1];
>
> void
> test (void)
> {
> a[0] = (b[0] == c[0]) ? -1 : a[0];
> }
>
> void
> test1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115669
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
I can reproduce on aarch64 with -O2 -march=armv8.3-a+sve -fno-vect-cost-model
-fwrapv. The reduction is
[local count: 955630224]:
# b_lsm.9_11 = PHI <_9(7), pretmp_42(6)>
_4 = *_3;
_5 = (signed i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115462
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 115462, which changed state.
Bug 115462 Summary: [15 regression] 416.gamess regressed 4-6% on x86_64 since
r15-882-g1d6199e5f8c1c0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115462
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115462
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b8153b5417bed02f47354a14ad36100785dfdc47
commit r15-1673-gb8153b5417bed02f47354a14ad36100785dfdc47
Author: liuhongt
Date: Mon Jun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36602
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener ---
No. The fallout was never resolved.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
>c = x CMP y
>r = c ? -1 : z => r = c ? c : z
>r = c ? z : 0 => r = c ? z : c
>
> this is probably best left for ISEL. I agree the transforms elim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115673
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115673
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |15.0
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115671
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |15.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115669
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115652
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115493
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115652
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c7cb0dd94589ab501bca27f93641b4074e5a2e99
commit r15-1670-gc7cb0dd94589ab501bca27f93641b4074e5a2e99
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115493
--- Comment #17 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b7ba0670a768e76e87e04cfd6a72c28c35333b54
commit r15-1669-gb7ba0670a768e76e87e04cfd6a72c28c35333b54
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115214
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to jiawei from comment #2)
> Fixed on upstream.
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/652806.html
Since you backported the fix for GCC 14.2.0
(r14-10350-g6e6f10c3ad6f96752acd9c3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115450
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115674
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
--- Comment #1 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115661
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
To the reporter: I should say, thanks for finding this so quickly - it made it
a lot easier to debug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115674
Bug ID: 115674
Summary: "Checking if number is within interval" missed
optimization when number is from a smaller int type
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115673
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |rtl-optimization
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115673
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
$ diff -u <(gcc-14
/home/sam/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/force-indirect-call-2.c
-fdiagnostics-plain-output -O2 -mforce-indirect-call -fPIC -ffat-lto-objects
-fno-ident -S -o -) <(/tmp/build/gcc/xg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115673
Bug ID: 115673
Summary: [15 regression]
gcc.target/i386/force-indirect-call-2.c test failure
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: testsu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24666
Bug 24666 depends on bug 115594, which changed state.
Bug 115594 Summary: requires expression permits arrays of voids
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115594
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 115594, which changed state.
Bug 115594 Summary: requires expression permits arrays of voids
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115594
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24664
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fchelnokov at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115594
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115643
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115671
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80528
--- Comment #8 from Collin Funk ---
Thanks for the add. My change was just adding nullptr since it can be used in C
code (per C23). I agree with most of the other comments. Probably excessive for
-Wall and -Wextra since the idiom exists in old co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115672
--- Comment #6 from Sean Murthy ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Created attachment 58528 [details]
> Reduced further
>
> The second t argument type in the template definition is the key I think.
> Changing it to just class all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115635
--- Comment #10 from Sam James ---
Yeah, just confirmed it works with
https://github.com/gentoo/gcc-patches/commit/e35c53788a928179ef26b76833bcbe297f84fe6a.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115643
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|aarch64-w64-mingw32 support |[15 regression]
|today br
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113325
HaoChen Gui changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115672
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115672
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #58527|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115635
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115672
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.5
Summary|Incorrect templ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115672
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 58527
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58527&action=edit
Remove the inline and change the static_assert to what other compilers should
do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115582
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115373
Thiago Jung Bauermann changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||thiago.bauermann at linaro dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115672
--- Comment #2 from Sean Murthy ---
Created attachment 58526
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58526&action=edit
Compiler output for the repro
Produced with GCC 14.1. static_asserts adjusted (negations where it fails
incorrec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115672
--- Comment #1 from Sean Murthy ---
Created attachment 58525
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58525&action=edit
Pre-processed file for repro source
Produced with GCC 14.1. static_asserts adjusted (negations where it fails
in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115672
Bug ID: 115672
Summary: Incorrect template type parameter deduced in
non-deduced context if class template has template
template parameter
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103100
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||13.3.1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115661
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |Evgeny.Karpov at
microsoft dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115635
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also|https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill |
|a/show_bug.cgi?id=11566
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115636
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
So looking at what LLVM does (Note it does not handle the original case here).
It only handles the simple:
`1 << (a ? b : 1000)` cases.
That is:
```
int f0(int a, int b)
{
if (a) b = 1000;
le-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 20240626 (experimental) (GCC)
[649] %
[649] % gcctk -O1 small.c; ./a.ou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115643
--- Comment #11 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Evgeny Karpov from comment #9)
> Sure, it will be included in the patch.
BTW, any plans for riscv and loongarch support for Windows GCC?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115643
--- Comment #10 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Evgeny Karpov from comment #9)
> Sure, it will be included in the patch.
What's the progression of GCC for aarch64-windows-gnu? How long would it be
done? I want to buy a surface pro 11 to use it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97687
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #5)
> scope of the auto_diagnostic_context.
^^^
auto_diagnostic_group
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97687
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97687
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 58523
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58523&action=edit
WIP patch to try to print all notes for an error with -Wfatal-errors
Am attaching an experimental patch for thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115669
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target|riscv*-*-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115669
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115643
--- Comment #9 from Evgeny Karpov ---
Sure, it will be included in the patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115670
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Simplified case too:
```
auto bar(){
struct {int i;} t;
t.i = 0;
return t;
}
```
This should be local linkage.
Another testcase:
```
namespace {
struct a {int t = 12;};
}
auto bar(){
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115643
--- Comment #8 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Evgeny Karpov from comment #7)
> Thanks for pointing that out! The fix will be included in the patch that
> fixes the regression.
While there, can you perhaps rename:
PE_COFF_EXTERN_DECL_SHOULD_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115663
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97687
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
In particular, consider e.g. the cases of SARIF and json output.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97687
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
The "in expansion of macro ‘FOO’" notes (messages 2 and 4) are coming from the
diagnostic finalizer, and so they are effectively printed as part of the first
"error" (message 1) and the "previous declaration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115643
--- Comment #7 from Evgeny Karpov ---
Thanks for pointing that out! The fix will be included in the patch that fixes
the regression.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97687
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Nicholas Fraser from comment #0)
Behavior confirmed on Compiler Explorer with trunk (for GCC 15); URLs as
follows:
>
> gcc a.c
https://godbolt.org/z/rxbz5eWMd
> gcc -Wfatal-errors a.c
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115643
--- Comment #6 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
(In reply to Sergei Trofimovich from comment #5)
> Bisected down to r15-1602-ged20feebd9ea31
> +#define PE_COFF_EXTERN_DECL_SHOULD_BE_LEGITIMIZED \
> + ix86_cmodel == CM_LARGE_PIC || ix86_cmodel == C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115643
--- Comment #5 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Bisected down to r15-1602-ged20feebd9ea31
commit ed20feebd9ea31d58861f61205bd412b0c3febd0
Author: Evgeny Karpov
Date: Mon Jun 24 12:46:54 2024 +
Adjust DLL import/export implementation for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90276
--- Comment #18 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e65b6627a36869b01bbe128a5324e4b415b28880
commit r15-1665-ge65b6627a36869b01bbe128a5324e4b415b28880
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90276
--- Comment #17 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:003ce8a6c4c28f8d285134afa9a423d0e234cf2e
commit r15-1664-g003ce8a6c4c28f8d285134afa9a423d0e234cf2e
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115658
Tom Honermann changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tom at honermann dot net
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115670
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Ever confirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115639
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
With
static_assert(0==big_calc());// (1)
we evaluate the big_calc call twice. Once, while parsing the static_assert:
#0 cxx_eval_call_expression (ctx=0x7fffc3e0, t=,
lval=vc_prvalue,
non_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115670
Bug ID: 115670
Summary: missed optimization - anonymous structures
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115656
--- Comment #6 from Sean Murthy ---
Additional info, just in case it helps. Either of the following changes to the
repro causes the reported error to disappear (not saying that either change is
universally acceptable, that is, they are not worka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115661
--- Comment #6 from Evgeny Karpov ---
Sorry for the regression.
I am working on the fix and will try to validate and submit it today.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115450
--- Comment #4 from Vineet Gupta ---
-Ofast -flto=auto -march=rv64gcv_zvl256b_zba_zbb_zbs_zicond_zfa
-ftree-vectorize -mrvv-vector-bits=zvl
For RISC-V issue only happens in a LTO build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115450
Vineet Gupta changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jeffreyalaw at gmail dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115669
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115639
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-06-26
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115669
Bug ID: 115669
Summary: [15 Regression] rv64gcv -fwrapv miscompile since
r15-1006-gd93353e6423
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115493
--- Comment #16 from Christophe Lyon ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #15)
> OK, looking the fix was only half complete. Can you try
It works with this, thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115668
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Oops, the diff above is against an incomplete fix I already had in my git
index, this is the proper fix:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/chrono_io.h
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/chrono_io.h
@@ -1696,7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115668
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36602
--- Comment #15 from Cristian Rodríguez ---
Was this issue ever fixed/addressed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115652
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #4)
> That patch seems to be causing ssa verification failures (should be visible
> with riscv64-elf cross):
>
> make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS=rvv.exp=vsetvl_bug-2.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115668
Bug ID: 115668
Summary: Cannot format chrono::duration
Product: gcc
Version: 13.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115493
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #13)
> Yes it breaks at the same point, again we are returning an uninitialized
> value.
> Adding annotate asm
OK, looking the fix was only half complete. Can yo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115493
--- Comment #14 from Christophe Lyon ---
Created attachment 58522
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58522&action=edit
Wrong code after r15-1392
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115493
--- Comment #13 from Christophe Lyon ---
Yes it breaks at the same point, again we are returning an uninitialized value.
Adding annotate asm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 113882, which changed state.
Bug 113882 Summary: V4SF->V4HI could be implemented using V4SF->V4SI and then
truncation to V4HI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113882
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113882
Pengxuan Zheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115629
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
So we now tail-merge the two b[i] loading blocks. Can you check SVE code-gen
with this? If that fixes the PR consider adding a SVE testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115629
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:629257bcb81434117f1e9c68479032563176dc0c
commit r15-1662-g629257bcb81434117f1e9c68479032563176dc0c
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115572
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79465
ak at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ak at gcc dot gnu.org
Res
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115557
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115664
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Basically `dynamic_cast(this)` becomes just this if `T == Object` here and
then we warn because this is compared with nullptr.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115664
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115664
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pins
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115664
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
1 - 100 of 177 matches
Mail list logo
