http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60830
Denis Excoffier changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60855
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60858
Bug ID: 60858
Summary: 64-bit multi-character constants
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60856
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60854
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60858
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Doing A('a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'f', 'g', 'h'); is not that bloated and works
independent of the endian.
Also patches go to gcc-patches@ and should include a testcase or two.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60849
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60841
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54107
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60656
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60656
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Should be fixed already with r209363.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60851
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60817
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Orth ---
Author: ro
Date: Wed Apr 16 09:09:42 2014
New Revision: 209440
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209440&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Correctly detect native TLS support with 64-bit gas on Solaris/x86 (PR
target/608
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60850
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60817
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60839
Sebastian Huber changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60844
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 16 09:25:52 2014
New Revision: 209442
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209442&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/60844
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (reassoc_remove_stmt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Further reduced:
struct D
{
template D (T);
};
int operator~(const D &);
template T &make ();
template struct H
{
static const int value = sizeof ~make();
};
enum class E;
int main () { return H:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60844
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.10.0
Summary|[4.9/4.10 Regre
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Both clang and G++ reject:
static const int value = sizeof ~make();
Whereas clang accepts (and G++ rejects) the same expression using a dependent
type:
template struct H
{
static const int value = si
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60850
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRME
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60256
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|paolo.carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60256
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60859
Bug ID: 60859
Summary: Value-initialization of scalar in aggregate yields
"braces around scalar initializer"
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I don't know if it's valid, but the discrepancy noted in comment 7 is probably
relevant, one way or another
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60830
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
--- Comment #12 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
The guys on stackoverflow think it's invalid:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/23108590/is-this-valid-c11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60851
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60841
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 32615
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32615&action=edit
patch
Patch limiting the SLP tree size (to the number of stmts in the loop/bb, not
allowing the exponential gro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
Nicolas Silvagni changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||galopin at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60849
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 32616
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32616&action=edit
patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60860
Bug ID: 60860
Summary: Friend function declaration incorrectly hides function
in outer namespace
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60836
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 32617
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32617&action=edit
patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60860
--- Comment #1 from David Rodriguez Ibeas ---
Created this as a new bug as I cannot say for sure whether this is the same
issue as 53012, but they maybe related.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53012
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60851
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson ---
Oh poo. This is essentially the same as PR60704.
There I chose to fix it in the backend, in a very hacky sort of way,
because I thought these insns were passing constrain_operands and it
was just the use
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60810
--- Comment #13 from Orion Poplawski ---
Jakub - Could we get this into Fedora Rawhide? Need it to fix a broken dep in
plplot. Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60861
Bug ID: 60861
Summary: out of bounds access of global var in .rodata/.bss
not detected
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58114
Teodor Petrov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fuscated at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60862
Bug ID: 60862
Summary: bad location in invalid conversion error
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60825
--- Comment #2 from Yufeng Zhang ---
Apart from the parameter passing and C++ name mangling issues, there is also an
issue w.r.t. the implicit conversion between the scalar types and their
vector-type peers. For intrinsics code to be portable, co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47642
--- Comment #25 from Anton Shterenlikht ---
yes, seems to work ok on amd64 FreeBSD gcc47, 48, 49
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60050
Steve Ellcey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sje at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60050
--- Comment #3 from Kai Tietz ---
we took care that gcc's abort-redefinition doesn't break the platform-internal
use.
For further information take a look to mingw-w64's headers. This is the wrong
place to discuss that.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60864
Bug ID: 60864
Summary: Compilation Library GNATColl: gnatcoll-scripts.adb
under Debian armhf
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58114
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43452
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tilman.vogel at web dot de
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58114
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59295
--- Comment #3 from ppluzhnikov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppluzhnikov
Date: Wed Apr 16 17:39:45 2014
New Revision: 209444
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209444&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-04-16 Paul Pluzhnikov
PR c++/59295
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59295
Paul Pluzhnikov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60256
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
We call c_fully_fold on strcpy (s, s);, and because this CALL_EXPR is
tcc_vl_exp, we call fold () on it. fold () then via fold_call_expr -> ...
calls fold_builtin_strcpy and that hits
/* If SRC and DEST ar
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60823
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60861
--- Comment #1 from Kostya Serebryany ---
Will adding "-fno-common" help?
Or building the test as C++?
See https://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/wiki/Flags
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60865
Bug ID: 60865
Summary: ICE: verify_cgraph_node failed: comdat-local function
called by outside its comdat
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60866
Bug ID: 60866
Summary: [4.7/4.8/4.9/4.10 Regression] ICE: in
get_seqno_for_a_jump, at sel-sched-ir.c:4068 with
-fselective-scheduling -fno-if-conversion
Product: gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60256
--- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #5)
> We call c_fully_fold on strcpy (s, s);, and because this CALL_EXPR is
> tcc_vl_exp, we call fold () on it. fold () then via fold_call_expr -> ...
> calls f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60867
Bug ID: 60867
Summary: std::atomic> should fail to compile
since unique_ptr is not trivial to copy
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44054
--- Comment #5 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
Created attachment 32622
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32622&action=edit
proof of concept
The attached patch is a proof of concept. It gives the following output:
/home/manuel/tes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
--- Comment #15 from Marc Glisse ---
Did someone file a corresponding PR for clang? It is useful for them, but also
for gcc because it gives them a chance to give a different interpretation of
the standard.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60862
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
--- Comment #16 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #15)
> Did someone file a corresponding PR for clang? It is useful for them, but
> also for gcc because it gives them a chance to give a different
> interpretation
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60764
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Apr 16 20:17:46 2014
New Revision: 209447
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209447&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-04-16 Patrick Palka
PR c++/60765
* decl2.c (cplu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60765
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Apr 16 20:17:46 2014
New Revision: 209447
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209447&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-04-16 Patrick Palka
PR c++/60765
* decl2.c (cplu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60764
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Version|4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60765
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53552
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53934
Bug 53934 depends on bug 53552, which changed state.
Bug 53552 Summary: Add support for !GCC$ warning directive (cf. #pragma warning)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53552
What|Removed |Added
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58189
Bug 58189 depends on bug 53552, which changed state.
Bug 53552 Summary: Add support for !GCC$ warning directive (cf. #pragma warning)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53552
What|Removed |Added
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44054
--- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
*** Bug 53552 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58189
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44054
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53934
--- Comment #2 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
How is Fortran using CPP? Does it preprocess the whole file externally and then
passes it to the Fortran FE? If so, this is not going to work since the
locations generated by macro expansion are only gen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57950
--- Comment #12 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #11)
> See the example in the original description.
For the original example, GCC just has to generate this:
# 3 "pr57950.c" 1
foo
# 3 "pr57950.c" 1
fo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60854
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
--- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #16)
> Unfortunately filing bugs for clang is like posting to /dev/null
> most of the time.
That's not my experience - if it hasn't been filed yet I'll do so.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60854
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
OK, the problem is that we see the reference to alias and decide to keep the
alias for future inlining. But when processing the refernce from alias to
function itself, we throw it away. We need to keep the body,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely ---
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19452
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60861
--- Comment #2 from Jan Smets ---
Using -fno-common (while compiling as C), or compiling as C++ works for the
unitialized bss example:
int testGlobalOutOfBoundsRODATAVar[5]; /* bss : works with -fno-common
(compiled as C) or when compiled as C+
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59925
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
without-cloog --without-ppl
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.10.0 20140416 (experimental) (GCC)
Tested revisions:
r209445 - ICE
4.9 r209346 - ICE
4.8 r209342 - OK
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60869
Bug ID: 60869
Summary: ICE on throw after invalid definition of __cxa_throw
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60868
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu ---
This works:
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
index 536f50f..7a68623 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
@@ -24392,7 +24392,8 @@ ix86_expand_set_or_movmem (rt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60869
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60854
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Apr 17 02:22:57 2014
New Revision: 209459
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209459&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/60854
* ipa.c (symtab_remove_unreachable_nodes): Mark target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60820
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Apr 17 02:32:26 2014
New Revision: 209460
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209460&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR lto/60820
* gcc.dg/lto/pr60820_0.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60846
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60846
--- Comment #3 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #2)
> (The implied reply from the description is yes
Sorry, I meant "the implied reply from the description is 'all targets'"...
Bah.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60861
Yury Gribov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||y.gribov at samsung dot com
--- Comment #3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60861
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #3)
> I can reproduce this in trunk. Looks like Asan pass works correctly but gcc
> reduces test() to 'return 1;' very early for some reason. I'll debug further.
Most lik
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60870
Bug ID: 60870
Summary: go interface methods broken on ppc64le (bug296.go)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60852
--- Comment #19 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #17)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #16)
> > Unfortunately filing bugs for clang is like posting to /dev/null
> > most of the time.
>
> That'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60861
--- Comment #5 from Yury Gribov ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> (In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #3)
> > I can reproduce this in trunk. Looks like Asan pass works correctly but gcc
> > reduces test() to 'return 1;' very earl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47642
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
98 matches
Mail list logo
