http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60169
Joey Ye changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43622
Paul A. Bristow changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pbristow at hetp dot u-net.com
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60386
Bug ID: 60386
Summary: [C++11] Crash on a template class containing array
initialized in-class
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60387
Nistor, Mihail-Marian changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|blocker
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60387
Bug ID: 60387
Summary: The gcc compiler for the ppc architecture is not
compatible with PPC ABI and DWARF standards.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43622
--- Comment #13 from Marc Glisse ---
It looks like emit_support_tinfos (rtti.c) should go through
registered_builtin_types (hidden in c-common.c) in addition to the hardcoded
fundamentals list.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60387
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|blocker |normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
--- Comment #1 from rob.desbois at gmail dot com ---
...having realised that this might look like I just don't grok move
construction I expanded my test - adding copy & move constructors & assignment
operators to foo and re-running the test still g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2316
--- Comment #50 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #49)
> large pieces of my patch as nonsense). Fixing this particular issue should
> not be too hard, there must be a place in the compiler that merges a number
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60371
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Дилян Палаузов from comment #3)
> Indeed, adding
>
> z (const z& x) { var = strdup (x.var); }
>
> solves the problem. However, I don't understand how that "y.clear();"
> between the y.empla
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Possibly the same issue as Bug 59713
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43622
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|no C++ typeinfo for |no C++ typeinfo for
|__fl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60236
--- Comment #8 from edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: edlinger
Date: Sun Mar 2 18:06:49 2014
New Revision: 208257
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208257&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-03-02 Bernd Edlinger
PR fortran/60236
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55181
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo ---
The first "if (...) b++;" is transformed to a bit extraction (right shift +
and), because the result is either b = 0 or b = 1.
The second "if (...) b++" uses an and + zero-compare + branch around add.
The and + ze
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60376
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60341
--- Comment #11 from Mikael Morin ---
Author: mikael
Date: Sun Mar 2 18:36:42 2014
New Revision: 208258
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208258&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
fortran/
PR fortran/60341
* frontend-passes.c (optimize_com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60388
Bug ID: 60388
Summary: Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0xb7fb62ff in __pthread_create_2_1
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60388
Sreenath U S changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60341
--- Comment #12 from Mikael Morin ---
Author: mikael
Date: Sun Mar 2 18:49:18 2014
New Revision: 208259
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208259&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
fortran/
PR fortran/60341
* frontend-passes.c (optimize_com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55181
--- Comment #10 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #9)
>
> Maybe if-convert could be taught to transform the second if (...) to a
> zero_extract as well. But probably it's better to catch this earlier.
... which would make t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60341
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60388
--- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson ---
User error. s/pthread_create(tid,/pthread_create(&tid1[i],/g fixes it, as
gcc's warnings correctly identified.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58842
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59778
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|hppa-unknown-linux-gnu |hppa*-*-*
Host|hppa-unk
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60388
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52466
--- Comment #9 from jbeniston at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: jbeniston
Date: Sun Mar 2 19:58:24 2014
New Revision: 208260
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208260&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/48230
PR bootstrap/50927
PR boo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50927
--- Comment #4 from jbeniston at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: jbeniston
Date: Sun Mar 2 19:58:24 2014
New Revision: 208260
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208260&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/48230
PR bootstrap/50927
PR boo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48230
--- Comment #1 from jbeniston at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: jbeniston
Date: Sun Mar 2 19:58:24 2014
New Revision: 208260
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208260&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/48230
PR bootstrap/50927
PR boo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46898
--- Comment #17 from jbeniston at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jbeniston
Date: Sun Mar 2 19:58:24 2014
New Revision: 208260
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208260&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/48230
PR bootstrap/50927
PR boo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60033
--- Comment #6 from Adam Butcher ---
A further reduced testcase:
// PR c++/60033
// { dg-options -std=c++1y }
template
auto f(T&&... ts)
{
return sizeof...(ts);
}
template
auto g(T&&... ts) {
return [&] (int v) {
return f(ts...);
};
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60033
--- Comment #7 from Adam Butcher ---
(In reply to Adam Butcher from comment #6)
> return [&] (int v) {
> return f(ts...);
> };
Should have been:
return [&] (auto v) {
return f(ts...);
};
The 'int' version works as expected.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55113
--- Comment #17 from pmatos at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patch submitted to gcc-patches.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60306
--- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sun Mar 2 20:51:48 2014
New Revision: 208261
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208261&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/60306
Revert:
2013-12-14 Jan Hubicka
PR mi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58477
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sun Mar 2 20:51:48 2014
New Revision: 208261
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208261&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/60306
Revert:
2013-12-14 Jan Hubicka
PR mid
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60389
Bug ID: 60389
Summary: [4.8/4,9 Regression] ICE with inheriting constructors
and wrong usage of constexpr
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keyword
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60389
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.0
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60376
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|error-recovery |ice-on-valid-code
Summary|[4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60390
Bug ID: 60390
Summary: [c++1y] ICE with declaring function with auto
parameter as friend
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60391
Bug ID: 60391
Summary: [c++1y] ICE with auto parameter for operator""
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: error-recovery, ice-on-invalid-code
Severit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48230
Sebastien Bourdeauducq changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60392
--- Comment #1 from Alexander Vogt ---
Created attachment 32243
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32243&action=edit
Sample code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60392
Bug ID: 60392
Summary: Problem with TRANSPOSE and CONTIGUOUS dummy arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50927
Sebastien Bourdeauducq changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60377
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52466
Sebastien Bourdeauducq changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60393
Bug ID: 60393
Summary: [c++1y] ICE with with invalid functions with auto
parameters
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: error-recovery, ice
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46898
Sebastien Bourdeauducq changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43807
Sebastien Bourdeauducq changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50996
Sebastien Bourdeauducq changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54176
Sebastien Bourdeauducq changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60243
--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 32244
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32244&action=edit
WIP patch
this patch cuts some redundant work on estimating size of functions that will
be too large to be inlined
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60150
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sun Mar 2 22:19:37 2014
New Revision: 208262
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208262&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/60150
* ipa.c (function_and_variable_visibility): When dissol
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58733
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60306
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60150
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60367
--- Comment #3 from rob.desbois at gmail dot com ---
Adding a destructor didn't fix it for me - though it was destroyed for the same
address as the constructed object.
constructed foo @ 0x7fffa012e5ef
default argument is at 0x7fffa012e5d0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58733
--- Comment #12 from Jan Hubicka ---
Forgot to mention, I think the ICE is solved by the following patch:
2014-02-14 Jan Hubicka
* lto-partition.c (add_symbol_to_partition_1,
undo_partition, lto_balanced_map): Aliases have no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59543
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60382
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60394
Bug ID: 60394
Summary: LTO link fails when -fno-builtin is specified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60395
Bug ID: 60395
Summary: LTO link fails when -fno-builtin is specified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60395
--- Comment #1 from Patrick Oppenlander ---
Created attachment 32245
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32245&action=edit
Test cases
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60396
Bug ID: 60396
Summary: Missing time_get<>::get() functions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60155
--- Comment #9 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
Something like this?
--
John David Anglindave.ang...@bell.net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60394
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60395
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 60394 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60395
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Related to bug 58203 (or even a dup of that bug).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60397
Bug ID: 60397
Summary: The value of char16_t u'\u' is 0xdfff instead of
0x
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Prio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59873
--- Comment #10 from Wesley J. Landaker ---
Created attachment 32248
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32248&action=edit
u.c++ -- program that shows this problem, and bug #60397's problem
I opened new bug #60397 that is a si
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60354
Jan Engelhardt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jengelh at inai dot de
--- Comment #1 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60175
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Mar 3 07:25:50 2014
New Revision: 208267
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208267&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/60175
* function.c (expand_function_end): Don't emit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59308
--- Comment #4 from Richard Earnshaw ---
It's not as simple as updating the target selector. LONSC_P depends on
BRANCH_COST, which can vary depending on the specific micro-architecture for
the target system.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59308
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So the test can then be improved for ARM by testing GCC predefined macros or
something similar, to make check_effective_target_logical_op_short_circuit
more precise. Are you sure check_effective_target_arm_co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58733
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60175
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
75 matches
Mail list logo
