https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84476
Albi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||albrecht.guendel at web dot de
--- Comment #7
iority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: albrecht.guendel at web dot de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi,
the new -Wnrvo warning is an amazing diagnostic.
However it does not play well with the #pragma GCC diagnostic directive. Yet.
Test-Case: https://god
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114904
--- Comment #1 from Albi ---
This "bug" can be closed and deleted. I am an idiot and i am sorry.
'continue' does not jump to the start of the loop, but to the next
loop-condition-check, so in a do-while loop, it actually jumps to the bottom.
Ma
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: albrecht.guendel at web dot de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi,
from GCC 8.1 onwards using >=C++14, i get hit with
> warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type]
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: albrecht.guendel at web dot de
Target Milestone: ---
https://godbolt.org/z/YP5aWjbzM
>From version 10.1 to trunk (both arm-none-eabi, x86-64)
Compil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39170
Albi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||albrecht.guendel at web dot de
--- Comment #16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71942
--- Comment #5 from Albi ---
OK ok, i see. Its a missed optimization due to volatile-problems..
I got a workaround however:
#define IO_READ(x) ( static_cast( *const_cast< typename
std::remove_volatile::type* >(&(x)) ))
The volatile is taken
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71942
--- Comment #3 from Albi ---
Agreed, after way more google research a lot of people complain about this.
Never the less this poses a big problem since it halves the performance of
every load on a sub-32-bit datatype.
Imho the problem issnt in t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71942
--- Comment #1 from Albi ---
To give a minimum case:
int main(void)
{
volatile unsigned short foo = 0;
while(1) foo ^= 1;
}
creates:
ldrh.w r3, [sp, #6]
uxthr3, r3<< again no reason for this
eor.w r3, r3, #1
strh.w r3, [
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: albrecht.guendel at web dot de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi,
i came across the insertion of an redundant instruction while toggleing a pin
on an ARM-Microcontroller:
while(1) GPIOA->
10 matches
Mail list logo
