[Bug c++/103057] [11/12 Regression] Internal compiler error: Error reporting routines re-entered

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103057 --- Comment #5 from Dennis Lubert --- Created attachment 51759 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51759&action=edit cvise generated compling testcase This one is pretty big but compiles with -w but ICEs without it. Differently

[Bug c++/103057] Internal compiler error: Error reporting routines re-entered

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103057 --- Comment #3 from Dennis Lubert --- Yes, the original testcase is valid code that compiles fine with -w

[Bug c++/103057] New: Internal compiler error: Error reporting routines re-entered

Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: plasmahh at gmx dot net Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 51728 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51728&action=edit cvise generated testcase Compil

[Bug c++/88761] [8/9 Regression] ICE in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:15478 when chaining lambda calls & fold-expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88761 Dennis Lubert changed: What|Removed |Added CC||plasmahh at gmx dot net --- Comment #3

[Bug target/82418] Division on a constant is suboptimal because of not using imul instruction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82418 Dennis Lubert changed: What|Removed |Added CC||plasmahh at gmx dot net --- Comment #5

[Bug c++/54011] missed optimization opportunities for bool struct/class members

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54011 Dennis Lubert changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|DUPLICATE

[Bug c++/61229] warn_unused_result fails to work with member functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61229 Dennis Lubert changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|INVALID

[Bug c++/61229] New: warn_unused_result fails to work with member functions

Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: plasmahh at gmx dot net Since gcc 4.5 (4.4 is fine) the following code will not emit any warning: struct A { __attribute__((warn_unused_result)) int callme( ) { return 42; } }; struct B { void foo

[Bug libstdc++/60421] std::this_thread::sleep_for doesn't sleep for all arguments

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60421 Dennis Lubert changed: What|Removed |Added CC||plasmahh at gmx dot net --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/59457] New: name mangling in presence of variadic templates seems wrong

Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: plasmahh at gmx dot net With the program below, the output is 1hI1AI2hhIiEEE h > > h > where the "h >" part is from my "hand-mangled" idea how it should look l

[Bug c++/57888] New: using non-type template parameter in constexpr function for non static data member intializer segfaults

Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: plasmahh at gmx dot net While trying to find workaronuds for Bug #57887 I tried the following code: struct B { template

[Bug c++/57887] New: nested non-type template parameters not declared in this scope

Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: plasmahh at gmx dot net Hi, when trying to compile the following: struct B { template struct A { int X = N; }; }; I get the error: g.cxx:6

[Bug c++/57526] New: use of X before deduction of auto error for seemingly good code

Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: plasmahh at gmx dot net Hi, for the following code template struct A { void bar( ) { } void foo( ) { auto* this_ptr = this; auto lc

[Bug libstdc++/54296] New: using the object in the map to erase element from the map crashes

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54296 Bug #: 54296 Summary: using the object in the map to erase element from the map crashes Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libstdc++/54075] [4.7.1] unordered_map insert 3x slower than 4.6.2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54075 --- Comment #22 from Dennis Lubert 2012-07-27 19:20:54 UTC --- Am on vacation so I don't have the testcase at hand, but it is the same as likan posted in the original bugreport, minus the reserve. The main difference is that without reserve I see

[Bug libstdc++/54075] [4.7.1] unordered_map 3x slower than 4.6.2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54075 --- Comment #12 from Dennis Lubert 2012-07-26 12:30:00 UTC --- I can confirm that now the reserve works as I would expect it (causing no further rehashes). However the amount of rehashes done in the testcase is still 155 (needing 4.5s), while gcc

[Bug libstdc++/54075] [4.7.1] unordered_map 3x slower than 4.6.2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54075 Dennis Lubert changed: What|Removed |Added CC||plasmahh at gmx dot net --- Comment #8

[Bug c++/54076] New: wrong/misleading warning with -Wsign-promo and enums with underlying type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54076 Bug #: 54076 Summary: wrong/misleading warning with -Wsign-promo and enums with underlying type Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCON

[Bug c++/54047] New: unused variable warning not for std::string

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54047 Bug #: 54047 Summary: unused variable warning not for std::string Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priori

[Bug c++/54046] New: wrong control reaches end of non-void function for switch case with throw and default

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54046 Bug #: 54046 Summary: wrong control reaches end of non-void function for switch case with throw and default Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 S