[Bug debug/87215] New: Unused debug info with -std=c++17

2018-09-04 Thread holger.hopp at sap dot com
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: holger.hopp at sap dot com Target Milestone: --- gcc-7 and gcc-8 produce much more unused (?) debug info when compiling in C++17 mode (compared to C++14 or C++11 mode). Seems that unused debug info elimination (-f[no-]eliminate-unused

[Bug other/82352] [7 Regression] comdat-local function called by void h::i() outside its comdat

2018-01-04 Thread holger.hopp at sap dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82352 --- Comment #6 from Holger Hopp --- The patch fixes my >10 original issues with gcc-7. It also fixes similar (other, fewer) issues with gcc-6 (gcc-6.2.1 was ok, gcc-6.3.1 not ok, with patch ok). So please downport this patch also to gcc-6 branch.

[Bug other/82352] New: link error 'defined in discarded section'

2017-09-28 Thread holger.hopp at sap dot com
ent: other Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: holger.hopp at sap dot com Target Milestone: --- I'm getting linker error `...' referenced in section `...' of ..: defined in discarded section `...' of ... with gcc-7 compiled code, that do

[Bug c++/80831] New: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault with -fsyntax-only

2017-05-19 Thread holger.hopp at sap dot com
Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: holger.hopp at sap dot com Target Milestone: --- Following code throws internal compiler error: Segmentation fault with g++ -c t.cpp --std=c++11 -fsyntax-only (gcc Releases 6 and 7, gcc 5

[Bug regression/65054] New: internal compiler error: in maybe_constant_value, at cp/constexpr.c:3646

2015-02-13 Thread holger.hopp at sap dot com
Priority: P3 Component: regression Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: holger.hopp at sap dot com following code throws an internal compiler error with g++-5.0 (gcc-5.0 works): typedef char * CP; const char * foo (void) { return ((const CP

[Bug tree-optimization/60871] New: internal compiler error: in possible_polymorphic_call_targets, at ipa-devirt.c:1510

2014-04-17 Thread holger.hopp at sap dot com
: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: holger.hopp at sap dot com Following code throws an internal compiler error with g++-4.9 -O2 $ g++ -O2 -c tst.c tst.c: In static member

[Bug regression/56844] New: Loop condition wrongly optimized from < to !=

2013-04-04 Thread holger.hopp at sap dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56844 Bug #: 56844 Summary: Loop condition wrongly optimized from < to != Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug regression/52973] New: visibility attribute for class is not passed to its members

2012-04-13 Thread holger.hopp at sap dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52973 Bug #: 52973 Summary: visibility attribute for class is not passed to its members Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/52755] Error on use of implicitly deleted operator=

2012-03-29 Thread holger.hopp at sap dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52755 --- Comment #3 from Holger Hopp 2012-03-29 11:50:25 UTC --- I agree that it is possible to define operator= for each struct that is using t1 (in the original code (C code, but compiled as C++ code) there is not only t2, and in all of them there a

[Bug c++/52755] New: Error on use of implicitly deleted operator=

2012-03-28 Thread holger.hopp at sap dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52755 Bug #: 52755 Summary: Error on use of implicitly deleted operator= Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.4 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug regression/48570] New: gcc-4.6: wrong subscription with -std=c++0x

2011-04-12 Thread holger.hopp at sap dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48570 Summary: gcc-4.6: wrong subscription with -std=c++0x Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: regression AssignedTo: u

[Bug regression/48249] New: gcc-4.6: __builtin___memmove_chk wrong results

2011-03-23 Thread holger.hopp at sap dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48249 Summary: gcc-4.6: __builtin___memmove_chk wrong results Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: regression AssignedTo

[Bug tree-optimization/48165] New: gcc-4.6: internal compiler error: in build2_stat

2011-03-17 Thread holger.hopp at sap dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48165 Summary: gcc-4.6: internal compiler error: in build2_stat Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization A