https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101418
Bug ID: 101418
Summary: [Gcov] there is the executed line code in dead code
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101417
Bug ID: 101417
Summary: [Gcov] an unexecuted if statement leads to incorrect
coverage of a return statement
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101416
Bug ID: 101416
Summary: [Gcov] wrong coverage for an if statement
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: gcov-p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101414
Bug ID: 101414
Summary: [Gcov] a label statement has incorrect coverage due to
an if statement
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101413
Bug ID: 101413
Summary: [Gcov] wrong coverage for a return statement
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: gco
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101412
Bug ID: 101412
Summary: [Gcov] an if statement leads to incorrect coverage of
the case statement
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101410
Bug ID: 101410
Summary: [Gcov] wrong coverage for a "default" statement
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101409
Bug ID: 101409
Summary: [Gcov] the incorrect coverage of the "default”
statement in the "if" statement
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101408
Bug ID: 101408
Summary: [gcov] "__FLT_EVAL_METHOD__ " leads to incorrect
coverage of case statement
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101360
Bug ID: 101360
Summary: [Gcov] the assignment statement is marked as executed
twice while the similar statement has executed one
time
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101359
Bug ID: 101359
Summary: wrong coverage for a compound statement
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: gcov-pro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101357
Bug ID: 101357
Summary: the coverage of a return statement goes wrong
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101342
--- Comment #2 from Xiaoyuan Xie ---
I clicked the wrong button on my page and the same content was submitted twice,
please ignore the content in the description and directly read the comments 1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101342
Xiaoyuan Xie changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[Gcov] Wrong coverage with |[Gcov] wrong coverage for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101342
Bug ID: 101342
Summary: [Gcov] Wrong coverage with "for(;;a++)" loop
statement
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101341
Bug ID: 101341
Summary: [Gcov] Wrong coverage with "for(;;a++)" loop
statement
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
16 matches
Mail list logo