[Bug tree-optimization/118865] [12/13/14/15 regression] -Wfree-nonheap-object false positive

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118865 --- Comment #9 from scott snyder --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8) See bug 118867, thanks!

[Bug c++/118867] New: [15 regression] -Wfree-nonheap-object false positive

Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: snyder at bnl dot gov Target Milestone: --- hi - (Refiled from bug 118865 as requested.) This test case generates a false-positive -Wfree-nonheap-object warning with gcc 15 -O1 (tested as of 20250213 on a fedora 40

[Bug tree-optimization/118865] [12/13/14/15 regression] -Wfree-nonheap-object false positive

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118865 --- Comment #7 from scott snyder --- Thanks Andrew! It appears that i was too aggressive in reducing the original source, which as far as i can tell does handle empty containers properly. For the record, it can be seen here (not my code, BTW...

[Bug c++/118865] New: [15 regression] -Wfree-nonheap-object false positive

Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: snyder at bnl dot gov Target Milestone: --- hi - This test case generates a false-positive -Wfree-nonheap-object warning with gcc 15 -O1 (tested as of 20250213 on a fedora 40 x86_64 system): -- test.cc

[Bug middle-end/48661] [4.6/4.7 Regression] wrong-code regression with devirtualization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48661 --- Comment #6 from scott snyder 2011-04-18 21:58:51 UTC --- Thanks Jakob! I can confirm that that patch also fixes the problem in the original source from which i derived that test case.

[Bug middle-end/48661] New: gcc 4.6 wrong-code regression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48661 Summary: gcc 4.6 wrong-code regression Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.