https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71448
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71448
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71448
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71448
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jun 14 14:43:42 2016
New Revision: 237447
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237447&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2016-06-08 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71448
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||erich.keane at intel dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71448
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> That said, I wonder if it is ok that we don't reject clear out of bound
> POINTER_PLUS_EXPR in constexprs, like:
> static constexpr const char foo[] = "foo";
> sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71448
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jun 8 12:57:26 2016
New Revision: 237212
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237212&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71448
* fold-const.c (fold_comparison): Handle CONS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71448
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71448
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I wrote so far
--- fold-const.c.jj12016-06-06 19:39:40.0 +0200
+++ fold-const.c2016-06-08 09:56:56.830326277 +0200
@@ -8527,9 +8527,9 @@ fold_comparison (location_t loc, enum tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71448
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
The C++ FE would need to substitute &"bar" for bar to make the simplification
valid unless we start relying on undefinedness of pointer wrapping (which we
don't seem to). Eventually fold_comparison simply m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71448
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71448
--- Comment #1 from Adam Simpkins ---
Created attachment 38657
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38657&action=edit
gcc 5.3 configuration options used during repro
12 matches
Mail list logo
