https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118033
--- Comment #3 from Dmytro Ovdiienko ---
I believe in 99% cases whatever is passed to the assert() is a legal expression
that returns bool. And there is an opportunity to optimize the output assembly
in case we if want to reuse that expression f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118033
--- Comment #1 from Dmytro Ovdiienko ---
I'm not sure about how to handle the side effects caused by the expression. The
code in the expression must not be executed but used by the compiler only for
the optimization.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118033
Bug ID: 118033
Summary: [Missing optimization] Keep __builtin_unreachable for
asserts in the release build
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109127
Bug ID: 109127
Summary: More advanced constexpr value compile time evaluation
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98840
--- Comment #4 from Dmitriy Ovdienko ---
What if introduce new ABI version and encode into function name (function name
mangling).
And then have two options:
* Either compile code and store both versions into lib file (ABI v1 and v2).
Applies
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98840
--- Comment #3 from Dmitriy Ovdienko ---
> This is not a GCC bug.
No it is not. But can we improve that?
That approach increases the binary size. In case if `baz` is called from many
places, that is going to increase the binary size.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98840
Bug ID: 98840
Summary: Why does baz call the delete operator for moved
unique_ptr
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97641
--- Comment #7 from Dmitriy Ovdienko ---
If I change the body of the loop like this, it also works
```
while ('\x01' != *ptr)
{
result = result * 10 - '0' + *ptr++;
}
```
Looks like integer overflow happens on last iteration and compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97641
--- Comment #6 from Dmitriy Ovdienko ---
This code does not work
```
#include
int Parse1(char const* ptr) noexcept
{
int result = 0;
while ('\x01' != *ptr)
{
result = result * 10 + *ptr++ - '0';
}
return result;
}
i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97641
Dmitriy Ovdienko changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97641
--- Comment #4 from Dmitriy Ovdienko ---
It happens to 2147483646, 2147483647 and std::numeric_limits::min().
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97641
--- Comment #1 from Dmitriy Ovdienko ---
OS: Windows 10
Distribution: MSys2 (https://www.msys2.org/)
Version: (Rev4, Built by MSYS2 project) 10.2.0
I tried to reproduce this issue on https://gcc.godbolt.org/. gcc (trunk) is
also unable to compil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97641
Bug ID: 97641
Summary: Wrong codegen if optimizer is enabled
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
13 matches
Mail list logo
