https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86657
--- Comment #8 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I also see only frontend memleaks with valgrind on f951.
The issue might be gone.
Can we ping the people running ASAN instrumented compilers?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86657
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|82173 |
--- Comment #7 from Paul Thomas ---
(In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80042
--- Comment #10 from Peter Damianov ---
I implemented roughly what I talked about in my last comment, and fixed the
ICEs in a new patch set:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/20250918220346.952651-1-peter0...@disroot.org/T/#t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121995
--- Comment #1 from Sujay Kothadiya ---
Created attachment 62416
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62416&action=edit
Verbose log
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121995
Bug ID: 121995
Summary: [RISCV] [Miscompile] GCC - riscv64 target, miscompiles
with multiplication on unsigned char at -O3 as well as
-O2
Product: gcc
Version
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121985
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Somehow ranger is mucking things up.
=== BB 2
Imports: var_8
Exports: var_8
[local count: 153437704]:
var_8 = f;
pretmp_23 = a;
if (var_8 <= 5)
goto ; [85.7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121985
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |law at gcc dot gnu.org
|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Fixed a long time ago in GCC 6.2.
Plus concepts in C++ look so much different from back then to what made it into
C++20.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 67565 ***
||rdapp at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2025-09-17
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Robin Dapp ---
Heh, we're extracting element 1 when we should extract (6 - f).
This seems to only happens with LMUL8 and zv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121623
--- Comment #21 from Frank Scheiner ---
Also reproduces the problem:
```
root@esprimo-e420:/usr/src# ia64-t2-linux-gnu-g++ -fcompare-debug -std=c++17
-fpermissive -nostdinc++ -fno-PIE -c -DUSE_LIBUNWIND_EXCEPTIONS -g -O2
-fchecking=1 -DIN_GCC
ngs -Wcast-qual -Wmissing-format-attribute
-Wconditionally-supported -Woverloaded-virtual -pedantic -Wno-long-long
-Wno-variadic-macros -Wno-overlength-strings -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -fno-PIE -o
trans-mem.ii.o -MT -MMD -MP -MF trans-mem.ii.o trans-mem.ii
../../gcc/trans-mem.cc: In function 'bool is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121985
--- Comment #2 from Sujay Kothadiya ---
Created attachment 62409
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62409&action=edit
Verbose log
-linux-gnu-gcc
-march=rv64gcv_zvl512b -mrvv-vector-bits=zvl -mrvv-max-lmul=dynamic -O3 red.c
-o user-config.out -fsigned-char -fno-strict-aliasing -fwrapv
-Wno-unknown-warning-option -Werror -Wfatal-errors -Wall -Wformat
-Wno-int-in-bool-context -Wno-dangling-pointer
-Wno-compare-distinct-pointer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121985
Bug ID: 121985
Summary: [RISCV] [Miscompile] GCC - riscv64 target, miscompiles
at -O3 as well as -O2 on valid code
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115954
--- Comment #13 from Wilco ---
Proposed _Atomic and atomic_always_lock_free ABI:
https://github.com/ARM-software/abi-aa/pull/353
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55135
--- Comment #34 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 62397
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62397&action=edit
testcase compressed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55135
--- Comment #35 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #33)
> Still as comment#31 says.
>
> ipa inlining heuristics: 813.42 ( 67%)
> integration: 228.18 ( 19%)
> TOTAL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117815
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #59732|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66462
--- Comment #22 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Wilco Dijkstra :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5b531aa5cc216b5ec4d740940b43ca7a7728cc90
commit r16-3909-g5b531aa5cc216b5ec4d740940b43ca7a7728cc90
Author: Wilco Dijkstra
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121623
--- Comment #19 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Frank Scheiner from comment #17)
> So just got back into this. Unfortunately the preprocessed source won't
> compile successfully with the used cross-compiler:
> ```
> root@esprimo-e420:/usr/src# i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121623
--- Comment #18 from Frank Scheiner ---
Original command to create the preprocessed source file was:
```
root@rx2800-i2:/srv/ssd/gcc-15.1.0-RC-20250423/gcc.build.lnx/stage3-gcc#
/srv/ssd/gcc-15.1.0-RC-20250423/gcc.build.lnx/stage2-gcc/xg
ormat-attribute
-Wconditionally-supported -Woverloaded-virtual -pedantic -Wno-long-long
-Wno-variadic-macros -Wno-overlength-strings -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -fno-PIE -o
trans-mem.ii.o -MT -MMD -MP -MF trans-mem.ii.o trans-mem.ii
In file included from
/srv/ssd/gcc-15.1.0-RC-20250423/gcc.build.lnx/stage2-ia64-t2-linu
|--- |FIXED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |nshead at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Nathaniel Shead ---
Fixed on trunk, thanks for the report (and sorry for the breakage!).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121893
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:85409b9d6a29392d33f3fbac40c641eeda22062a
commit r16-3822-g85409b9d6a29392d33f3fbac40c641eeda22062a
Author: Nathaniel Shead
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121924
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121924
Bug ID: 121924
Summary: exit destruction occurs with GCC for constructor that
did not complete
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong
||rejects-valid
Last reconfirmed||2025-09-11
Summary|GCC rejects |[13/14/15/16 Regression]
|variable/function template |GCC rejects
|declarations of fully |variable/function template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121916
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121916
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
It is rejected with -std=c++20 but accepted with -std=c++17. Maybe there is a
rule change.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121916
--- Comment #1 from Vincent X ---
When using -std=c++17 (or -std=c++14), GCC accepts the test code shown above
(https://godbolt.org/z/Yn9vhK1je).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121916
Bug ID: 121916
Summary: GCC rejects variable/function template declarations of
fully qualified-ids with parentheses
Product: gcc
Version: 15.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66462
--- Comment #21 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Wilco Dijkstra :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b996d4509f1724d92a08dae70d8354fbb5561fb7
commit r16-3803-gb996d4509f1724d92a08dae70d8354fbb5561fb7
Author: Wilco Dijkstra
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121689
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
(objdump + cvise, comparing with and without -fno-gcse will be good enough to
start.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121893
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121689
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
Could you try get a smaller standalone testcase? The first thing you want is
just the function that is miscompiled (and shows the difference in assembly) in
a file by "itself" (minimal set of typedefs, variables
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121891
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
. |ICE when using modules +
|regression in gcc 16.0 |ranges. regression in gcc
||16.0
CC||nshead at gcc dot gnu.org,
||ppalka at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121891
Bug ID: 121891
Summary: [14/15/16 Regression] ICE:
cp_emit_debug_info_for_using(tree_node*, tree_node*)
gcc/cp/name-lookup.cc:9240
Product: gcc
Version: 14.3.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121891
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121893
--- Comment #1 from shyeyian ---
Seems like a regression. Hope it to be fixed, thank you :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121893
Bug ID: 121893
Summary: [Modules] ICE when using modules + ranges. regression
in gcc 16.0
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121859
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121859
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7fc9265ee5b20c4191b8fcad47234148c72f7b03
commit r16-3744-g7fc9265ee5b20c4191b8fcad47234148c72f7b03
Author: Nathaniel Shead
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98339
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #2 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121882
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE when building GCC 13|[13/14/15/16 regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121882
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-09-10
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121882
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I am trying to understand is the ice in gcc 13 compiler or 16?
Can you provide more of the end of the log?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121882
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
r13-9284-g7392e9e480afe3143e72a99f7b5ac99b2f49c284
Yes there is no reg check before checking general registers.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121882
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |nshead at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #9 from Nathaniel Shead ---
Confirmed. Reduction:
template
struct S {
template
static constexpr bool foo = sizeof(T) == sizeof(U);
};
template void bar(U x) requires S::foo {}
int main() {
bar(double
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121882
Bug ID: 121882
Summary: ICE when building GCC 13 with checking and
-mtune=znver5
Product: gcc
Version: 13.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91692
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121859
--- Comment #8 from David Malcolm ---
For reference, trunk with my work-in-progress patch for PR diagnostics/121876
shows the backtrace of the crash within the C++ frontend as:
0x3d5f044 internal_error(char const*, ...)
../../src/gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121859
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nshead at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
] ICE: in |[16 Regression] ICE:
|set_diagnostic_buffer, at |read-through null in
|buffering.cc:49 |maybe_diagnose_standard_tra
||it at
||gcc/cp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121866
--- Comment #3 from Siarhei Volkau ---
For getting the same effect on 64-bit targets `i` and `len` must be of type
long.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121866
--- Comment #2 from Siarhei Volkau ---
It looks like only 32-bit targets are affected, might be related to pointer
size.
https://godbolt.org/z/z1WdPrWc1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121866
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|GCC unable to eliminate |GCC unable to eliminate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121866
Bug ID: 121866
Summary: GCC unable to eliminate loop guard in some cases
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121836
--- Comment #4 from Benjamin Schulz ---
I want to add that i am not using any of the typical things which might cause
an optimizer to remove some boundary or something and then enter an endless
loop. instead, all the loops here go at maximum fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121743
--- Comment #2 from Gilles Gouaillardet
---
FWIW, the inline patch below does the trick.
I honestly have no idea whether this is a correct fix or not.
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc
index b077cee86a3
build_function_decl, |[15/16 regression] ICE in
|at |build_function_decl, at
|gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc:2 |gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc:2
|519 |519 since
||r15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121743
--- Comment #1 from Gilles Gouaillardet
---
FWIW, gcc-14 is fine and git bisect points to:
commit 91d52f87c5bc48eacaf305d515e7cce192c2cf9c (HEAD)
Author: Andre Vehreschild
Date: Thu Oct 31 15:35:47 2024 +0100
Fortran: Remove adding
raylibrary/openmp --check-build-system
CMakeFiles/Makefile.cmake 0
Re-run cmake file: Makefile older than: CMakeLists.txt
-- Configuring for GNU compiler (gcc)
-- Configuring for GNU compiler (gcc)
-- Configuring done (0.0s)
-- Generating done (0.0s)
-- Build files have been written to: /home/benni/proj
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121836
--- Comment #2 from Benjamin Schulz ---
Created attachment 62342
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62342&action=edit
arraytestlog.txt
this is a log with GOMP_DEBUG=1 where it runs without optimization.
At the end there are t
system
CMakeFiles/Makefile.cmake 0
You have changed variables that require your cache to be deleted.
Configure will be re-run and you may have to reset some variables.
The following variables have changed:
CMAKE_CXX_COMPILER= g++
Re-run cmake file: Makefile older than: CMakeLists.txt
-- Configuring for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121836
Bug ID: 121836
Summary: gcc 15.2 Optimizer problem on target: setting -O1
makes the gpu hang, while program terminates correctly
without optimization
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121811
--- Comment #17 from Thiago Macieira ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #16)
> I think I'll file an NB comment for C++26 saying that C++ should add its own
> macro to that file (and stdbit.h) so that programs can tell whether they're
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117658
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c39dbb652fafbb06507d23dcec6627ac9a9398cf
commit r16-3612-gc39dbb652fafbb06507d23dcec6627ac9a9398cf
Author: Nathaniel Shead
Date
signed integer type.
Maybe that's OK, because if you include in C++26 you should get
the C++ library's header, which should enforce the rules properly. If the C++
lib doesn't provide it yet, then you get the GCC ginclude/stdckdint.h one and
it isn't fully c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121811
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121811
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Andrew, what's the objection to GCC just putting #ifndef __cplusplus in our
header?
Do we have to make things harder for people?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121811
--- Comment #13 from Thiago Macieira ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #12)
> >* GCC + libc++: fails, because it uses the failing C header
>
> This sounds like a bug in libc++ for not providing a C++26 header.
Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14708
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121811
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
>* GCC + libc++: fails, because it uses the failing C header
This sounds like a bug in libc++ for not providing a C++26 header.
our own headers. Users may be using newer versions of GCC that could
benefit from this. And it defeats the purpose of having a standard way of
detecting the existence of functionality.
Anyway, since we don't have a time machine, I have to block any use of
with GCC 14 anyway. So my problem is solv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121811
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
On the other hand, if I'm going to go to all the trouble of adding a new header
then I might as well just backport r15-8036-gd4c7de7dc925e7 and add the working
header to gcc-14.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121811
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121811
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WONTFIX |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121811
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
Use a configure time test instead of a compile time one.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121811
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
ml, which is
listed as met for GCC 15 in
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support/26.html.
> C++26 support in gcc is experimental so it wont be backported.
I understand it is, but the problem is that it currently fails to compile even
though I've followed procedure to verif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121811
--- Comment #5 from Thiago Macieira ---
(In reply to Thiago Macieira from comment #4)
> If you're not going to fix the C header, can you please add an empty
> libstdc++ header so that __STDC_VERSION_STDCKDINT_H__ won't get #define'd?
Or wrap th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121811
Thiago Macieira changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|WONTFI
|--- |WONTFIX
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
C++26 support in gcc is experimental so it wont be backported.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121811
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
It is a c only header ...
C++ does not define it yet.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121811
Bug ID: 121811
Summary: stdckdint.h fails to compile in C++26 mode in GCC 14
Product: gcc
Version: 14.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121799
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114795
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121769
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 121803 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121803
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121803
Bug ID: 121803
Summary: gcc missed optimze manual byte swap to bswap
instrution
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121799
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Seems better to use _Float128 instead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121799
Bug ID: 121799
Summary: GCC fails to parse `typedef _Complex __float128 T;`
(in C++ mode?)
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121793
Bug ID: 121793
Summary: Invalid -Wrestrict warning in memory overlap
situation, gcc 14.2.1, c++20, -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121793
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119590
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78713
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libstdc++ |tree-optimization
Severity|nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78713
--- Comment #7 from Avi Kivity ---
That's because std::optional was optimized. A hand-rolled version is still bad.
https://godbolt.org/z/Ma48hjE44
I think the middle-end would benefit from clobbers and some logic to eliminate
those branches.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117658
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c2e567a6edb563677107c40ce2ce67f78d294013
commit r16-3559-gc2e567a6edb563677107c40ce2ce67f78d294013
Author: Nathaniel Shead
Date
1 - 100 of 18133 matches
Mail list logo
